The Sun.
London, England, 1861-07-19 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-(YESTERDAY,)

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at Rao o'clock.
THE LATE WAR IN CHINA.

The LORD CHANCELLOR read letters from Major-
General Mitchell and Admiral Hope, acknowledging the
thanks of their lordships for the services rendered by the
army and navy in the north of China.
FRI VATE BUSINESS.

The Duke of Sutherland's Estate Bill was read a second
time.

The Great Western Railway, Simpson's Hospital Estate,
and Cockermouth, Keswick, and Penrith Railway Bills
were read a third time and passed.
ASSIMILATION OF CRIMINAL TO CIVIL
PROCEDURE.

Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from Mr. Ben-
jamin Blondell, praying that accused persons in criminal
charges might be admitted as witnesses on their own be-
half. The noble lord at some length showed the peculiar
state of the law as it at present existed on the subject.

EAST INDIA (HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE)

BILL.

Earl DE GREY and RIPON moved the second reading
of this bill, the object of which was to unite the chief
courts of judicature in Calcutta, Madras, and Bom-
bay into one court, with power to deal with all
the subjects coming under the consideration of the
old tribunals. The effect of amalgamation would
be to improve the administration of justice in
India, and the scheme had received the approbation of
the most eminent men in India, and amongst them Sir
Edward Ryan and Sir T. Halliday. By the bill then under
consideration the Supreme Court and the Suddar Court
would be abolished, and instead thereof a new court to be
called the High Court of Judicature would be established
as the old Supreme Court had been, namely, by Royal
Charter, and the qualification of the judges would remain
the same as at present, namely, that they should have been
barristers of five years' standing.
Lord BROUGHAM said the bill was a most impor-
tant one, and therefore claimed their most serious consi-
deration. The sixth clause gave the power to the Indian
Government to interfere with the salaries of
the judges, and he thought such a proposition
was most objectionable. It was an entirely novel propo-
sition, and one which he most strongly objected to.
Earl DE GREY said the clause did not affect the exist-
ing judges; it only applied to those who might here-
after be appointed. He would however take care
that the objections of the noble and learned lord were well
considered.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH thought the bill had
better be referred to a select committee, as at present it
was a moat objectionable one. It would be absurd to send
the judges of the proposed high court into the Mofussel, as
they would most likely be ignorant of the language of the
natives. They had the authority of Mountstewart Elphin-
stone against the amalgamation of the two courts. He asked
what would be thought if it were proposed to amalgamate
the courts of England and Scotland ? The object of the bill
he considered to be to give patronage to the Government
by the appointment of a large number of barristers to office,
every one of whom would have £5,000 a year. There was
a principle introduced into this bill which had not been at-
tempted since Fox's bill, of throwing all the patronage in
India into the hands of the Home Government. He found
by a calculation that this bill would cost the country
£262,000 per annum.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE was very thankful to
the right hon. gentleman the Secretary of State for India
for bringing forward this bill, and he hoped that it would
pass with some slight modifications. He objected to the
clause which enacted that at least one-third of the judges of
the courts of justice of India must be members of the civil
service. He contended that such a proceeding was most
unconstitutional, because, no matter what the qualities of
persons at the disposal of the Governor-General for these
situations, he could not appoint any one unless he belonged
to that service. The bill therefore debarred in the first in-
stance all the natives of India, and in the next a largo num-
ber of the bar of England, to the great detriment of the pub-
lic service. If they left the clause as it stood, there was no
doubt whatever that men of the least judicial ability would
he appointed as judges. He also complained of the clause
which provided for the removal of the chief justice at the
pleasure of the Crown, which he contended destroyed the
independence and impartiality of the occupant of that high
office. The great complaint in India heretofore was, that
judges were so dependent on the Government that all their
decisions were in conformity with their views, and instances
occurred where, on appeal to the Privy Council in Eng- I
land, the judgments of many of them were set aside, as
not only illegal, but unjust. He quoted several instances
where the opinions of these functionaries were founded
upon the known views of the Government, and he therefore
deeply regretted that so high a functionary as the Chief
Judge should not be made independent of the Crown and of
the Government of India.
Earl DE RIPON and RIPON denied the assertion made
by the noble earl (Earl of Ellenborough) that the different
courts in India were to be concentrated into one court. It
would be done only in cases where it was not only practic-
able, but absolutely necessary. As to the number of judges,
he denied that it was done for the purpose of enabling Go-
vernment to send out 40 barristers to India, for the clause
merely said that two-thirds of the judges should be barris-
ters, and one-third connected with the civil service. There
was not the slightest intention on the part of her Majesty's
Government to provide any patronage whatever ; the num-
ber to be appointed was absolutely necessary to administer,
be it recollected, justice throughout the whole of their vast
Indian empire.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH said a few words in
explanation. He complained that the present Chief Justice
was the person to whom was given the power of distributing
all these offices, and contended that it would be found ut-
terly impracticable to unite the Sudder and Supreme Courts
in India.
The Bishop of LONDON said the bill would abolish the
Ecclesiastical Court of Appeal, and he thought that por-
tion of the bill ought to be remedied. (Hear.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR said it would be a matter
of deep regret if anything were to occur in the course of the
debate which would be an impediment in the progress of a
bill, the passing of which he thought would distinguish
this session, as discharging one of the greatest obligations
they owed to the people of India. He had since he had
had the honour of a seat in that house listened on several
occasions with the pleasure and the admiration that all
must feel to the speeches of the noble earl on his left (Earl
of Ellenborough) ; but he must confess that the speech
they had just heard from the noble earl was not charac-
terised by so much candour, and he would even, with great
respect, add with so much knowledge as he had generally
found during his short experience in the speeches of the
noble earl, The noble earl spoke of the Supreme Court of
these presidencies as if it had not now to administer native
law- Why, the Supreme Court had an area of jurisdiction,
within which area came the great towns of Calcuttii, Madras,
and Bombay; and within that area the judges of the Su-
pre Court administered, not merely the English, but
native law, when native law came into question. And yet
one of the principal topics of the noble earl's speech had been
the ignorance of tb.eEnglish barristers' and their unfitness to
ad minister native law with Batts' faction. Well,at present they
had for the administration o fjustice in India the Supreme
Court within each presidency. Beyond that there was a local
jurisdiction, which he might generally
into districts with each of them a
judge
who describew as divided
at once a
judge in civil and criminal matters, and from these
' judges
there was an appeal to the Sudder Adawlut, and with de-
ference to the noble earl, although that court might have in
theory some original jurisdiction, in practice it was confined
entirely to the appellate. The result was that with regard
to the natives beyond the limits of the towns, there was no
Supreme Court ; and with regard to the natives within the
limits of the towns, there was another Supreme Court to
administer the law. With regard to British subjects,
if
they were within the presidency towns they were amenable
to the jurisdiction, but if they were in the Mofussil they
were subject to no jurisdiction beyond that which was
created by the 53d George 111. The result was that there
was an unjust and unseemly division between the natieees
on one side and the Europeans on another. Was there any
better hold they could have on the natives of India than
by an elevated impartiality and pure administration of
justice ? And how could they, where there was one law
and one mode of administration for Europeans, and ano-
ther law and another administration for natives, prevent a
feeling of injustice and inequality ? " But, then," said
the noble earl, " how comes it that you are going to send
barristers of five years' standing, with all the depth of their
ignorance, into the Mofussil to administer the law ?" Why,
the noble earl knew as well as he did that judges in India,
and he might cite the celebrated example of Sir W. Jones,
had been distinguished for the assiduity with which they
had cultivated the knowledge of the native law, and the im-
partiality and skill with which they had administered it. In
speaking of barristers of five years' standing, the noble earl
would permit him to remind him that that was put as a mi-
nimum qualification, and not the maximum ; and he would
observe that an English barrister of five years' standing
might have had a great amount of practical experience in
his profession. He might point, for instance; to the late Mr.
Justice Patteson, who practised below the bar and laid the
foundation of his reputation and acquired a great amount
of knowledge in that capacity, so that when he was elevated
to the English bench, he was barrister but of very few years'
standing. It would be an unwise thing, therefore, to re-
quire such a number of years that a barrister must be called
to the bar
asmightpreclude their being able to select the
fittest men for the office. But then it was said,that therehow were
they to administer the law ? He understood were
a certain number of covenanted
bor of natives who could be aservants and a certain num-
which it was provided that theyra
made judges, and the mode in
ou.ld administer
.the law
was this. There would be a commission issued, and judges
would be sent to different parts of
the Mofussil, some^
times, perhaps, an European judge, sometimes a na-
tive judge, and sometimes a civil servant, according
to the exigencies of the case. The noble earl drew
an
ex-
aggerated picture of the good things intended for the bar,
but he was quite sure the noble ear's statement would
make the moulh of many a barrister in the Four Courts, in
the Court of S ,:ssion, and in Westminster-hall water, when