The Sun.
London, England, 1844-03-21 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 20.
• COUNTY CORONERS' BILL.
On clause 20 being read,
Mr. PAKINGTON said it would be in the recollection
of the House that when they were last proceeding with
this Bill a good deal of discussion had taken place on
the subject of remuneration to coroners, and much differ-
ence of opinion prevailed. It had been maintained by
several Honourable Members, that when the coroner
had two or more inquests he charged mileage for them
all, and was authorised by the law to do so. From
that opinion he (Mr. Pakington) had differed, and, in
looking into the law authorities, he found his opinion to
be a correct one. The law permitted them to charge for
the several inquests only from place to place, the dis-
tance from their homes they were obliged to go. This
was the law; but he had been astonished to find how
the practice had varied from the law. To remedy
this state of things, and make law and prac-
tice march together, he proposed to add to this
clause the following words :—" Provided always, that
whenever any coroner shall take more than one inquest
on the same day, then, in respect of every inquest after
the first, the said sum of one shilling per mile shall be
computed and paid to such coroner, for every mile only
which he shall be compelled to travel in going from the
place of holding any one inquest to the place of holding
any other inquest on the same day."
Mr. B. E4COTT hoped his Hon. Friend (Mr.
Pakington) would not press the proviso.
The proviso was then agreed to, after a slight verbal
alteration.
Clause 23 was agreed to. Clause 24 was also agreed
to, with an amendment for the insertion of a paragraph
including the County Palatinate of Chester. The re-
maining clauses having been agreed to,
Mr. PAKINGTOn moved that a clause be added to
the Bill, by way of. rider, to the effect that—" Whereas
7by the Act 6 and Victoria it was enacted, that for Elie
purpose of .holding coroners' inquests every detached
part of a country, riding, or division, shall be deemed to
be within that county, riding, or division by which it is
wholly surrounded, or where it is partly surrounded by
two or more counties, ridings, or divisions, within that
one.with which it has the longest common boundary :
and whereas, as to some such detached parts of counties,
ridings, or divisions, there were, at the time of the pass-
ing of the said last-mentioned Act, coroners appointed
expressly for and having jurisdiction in such detached
parts only, and doubist have arisen whether such last-
mentioned coroners Ive.re superseded by such last-men-
tioned Act ; be it therefore enacted, that as to every
such detached part of any county, riding, or division,
for which at the time of the passing of the said last-
mentioned Act there was a coroner appointed for and
acting in such detached part, such last-mentioned
coroner shall (if now living) continue to hold and exer-
cise his former office and jurisdiction within such de-
tached part, for so long a time and in such manner as
fuch coroner would have held and exercised the said
office and jurisdiction if the said last-mentioned Act had
not passed, anything in this or any other Act to the
contrary in anywise notwithstanding."
The clause was agreed to, and the House resumed.
The Report was brought up and received, and the
Bill was ordered to be read a third time on the 27th of
March.

MASTERS AND SERVANTS' BILL.
On the reading of the Order of the Day for the
further consideration of the Report upon this Bill,
Mr. HAWES expressed his dissatisfaction with the
measure. He thought the clause which gave the power
of imprisonment particularly harsh and oppressive.
Sir J. GRAHAM said he had net been able to give to
the Bill the attention he could have .vished, but he had
been given to understand by his Hon. Friend the
Member for East Somersetshire (Mr. Miles), that the
clause was in its penalties only a re-enactment, but that
it was made to extend over work and labour done
under contract, which was not the case with the former
Act.

Mr. MILES said the only effect of this Bill was that
it repealed all old Acts, and consolidated them into one.
Clause 4, which the Hon. Member for Lambeth (Mr.
Hawes) considered too harsh, was exactly the same in
its provisions and penalties as in the repealed Acts, but
it took a wider scope by giving a power over job and
piece work ; but the penalties complained of were just
the same as those enacted by the 6th Geo. 111.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE thought that some words ought
to be introduced into the Bill, giving magistrates dis-
cretion in certain cases. Ile referred to the case of a
young woman who was imprisoned, in Worcestershire,
for leaving her master's service without notice, her de-
fence being that she was compelled to go through a
man's bed-room to her own. The magistrate, in justi-
fication of the course he pursued,' said the words of the
Act of Parliament were absolute, and therefore he had
no power to do anything else but sentence the young
woman to imprisonment, it having been sworn that she
had suddenly left her master's service. He (Mr.- Dun-
combe) therefore thought that some words ought to be
introduced into the Bill, giving magistrates discretionary
powers.
After a short discussion, the motion that the Report
be considered was withdrawn, and the Bill was ordered
to be recommitted.
The House then went into Committee on the Bill.
On clause 1 being proposed.
Mr. DAVID BARCLAY moved that the clause
(which relates to domestic servants) be struck out, and
magistrates be authorised in petty sessions to act in
cases of masters and mistresses and domestic servants,
with respect to claims for wages. He wished to give
additional facilities to domestic servants for recovering
their wages. As the law at present stood they had no
such power, and in consequence it was not an unfre-
quent circumstance to find a poor servant girl who had
been arbitrarily
discharged from her situation driven to
prostitution support herself. He hoped, therefore, that
the Right lion. Gentleman (Sir J. Uraham) would
to
agree to a clause giving magistrates in petty sessions
the power of disposing of cases respecting claims for
wages by domestic servants.
Sir J. GRAHAM thought the Hon. Gentlemen had
better allow the Bill to go through Committee, and
move the addition of the clause to which he had ad-
verted on the third reading, when he (Sir J. Graham)
would give it his best consideration.
Mr. BARCLAY said he would adopt the course re-
commended by the Right Hon. Baronet.
The Ist clause was then agreed to.
Clauses 2 and 3 were agreed to.
Mr. D'EYNCOURT, after a few words from Sir J.
GRAHAM, said, he should at a future period, move as
an amendment, that to render this clause 'operative, the
contract should be made in writing.
Mr. DARBY would oppose the amendment, because
of the extreme rarity ot such contracts ever being per,
fected in writing.
Mr. AGLIONBY thought it would be very difficult
to define the distinction between what was called in thi;
Bill domestic servants and those employed out of doors.
Sir J. GRAHAM said, they had not. yet had suffi-
cient time to consider this Bill, so as to be able to make
the definition alluded to by the Hon. Member. He-
thought it would be better if they were to report
progress, when they would have an opportunity of con.:
sidering the matter in Committee.
The -House resumed, the Chairman reported progress,
and the Bill was ordered to be recommitted on Wednes-
day next.
The other Orders of the Day-were then disposed of,
and the House adjourned at half-past Seven o'clock.