The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-03 00:00:00

LABOURING POOR (IRELAND).

Sir D. NORREYS moved for a return (in continua-
tion of Parliamentary Paper, No. 30, of session 1849)
of the several cases in which the the Lords of the Trea-
sury had sanction, under the Act of 11 and 12 Vic., c.
51, the conversion of annuities created by the Act 10
and 11 Vic., c. 87, and the terms on which such con-
versions had been made; showing in each case of con-
version, since the 3d day of November, 1848. the total
compound sum charged against each barony, &c., at the
time of conversion, and the amount of each converted
instalment.—Agreed to.
EVICTIONS IN GALWAY.

Mr. O'FL A lIERTY asked the Right lion. Secretary for
Ireland whether any provision hal bent made by the
Poor•law Commissioners v. ith respect to the enormous
pressure that would arise on the poor rates from the
displacement of 618 families in the union of Galway?
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said he would make inquiries
on the subject, and give the Hon. Member au answer on
a future day.
ATTORNEYS' CER FIFICATES.—ADJOURNED

DEBATE.

Lord ROBERT GROSVENOR presented a petition
from the solicitors of Carlisle, praying for a remission
of the attorneys' certificate duty.
S'r F. THESIGER felt the greatest pleasure in ex-
pressing his acknowledgments to the Noble Lord
(Lord R. Grosvenor), by whom this Bill had
been introduced for the great end disinterested
exertions he had long made to relieve the
solicitors from a tax which pressed so heavily upon
them. He (Sir F. Theiiger) knew, with regard to him-
self., that he was open to the imputation of different mo-
tives; but he was quite prepared to bear that imputation,
and he should not have come forward to second
the motion of the Noble Lord if he had not
thought that justice imperatively demanded that
the House should pass the Bill now before it.
He had sought to find what the reason for the imposition
of this tax could be, and he thought he was entitled to
say that the onus of establishing this tax rested upon
those who either imposed it or who were instrumental in
keeping it on. It appeared that it was first imposed in
1785, when the Minister was extremely anxious to obtain
money to cover the expenses of a long and calamitous war.
and finding that all the objects of taxation were occupied
or exhausted, he proposed to lay a tax upon all the shops
of the kingdom. That tax was considered by many
Members of the House as objectionable, bur, instead of
opposing it in a straightforward manner, they took
the incautious step of proposing another tax in
its place. The Chancellor of the Exchequer of that day
being thus placed in a difficulty between the two, cut
the Gordian knot by imposing both the taxes, and in
the same year the tax on shopkeepers and the tax on
attorneys were imposed. But mark the difference. Mr.
Fox never ceased to agitate for the abolition of the
shop-tax, as being unjust and partial, and in three
sessions succeeded in getting rid of it ; but
the case of attorneys was quite different. Since
then from time to time the duty had been in-
creased. Like the criminal of old, who was pressed
heavily with weights till he cried out guilty, the attorney
had been taxed till he could bear the pressure no longer,
and now he was compelled to cry out against it. At
one period their was considerable prejudice against
attorneys, but happily that prejudice was rapidly disap-
pearing, and now that the House and the country had
set its face against class taxation they called upon Par-
liament to give them some relief, if the duty
was not altogether abolished. There was no such
tax imposed upon barristers or medical men,
though he ought to be cautious of reminding a Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer. No class of the community was
so heavily taxed as attorneys. In the first place, the
attorney, before he could practice, had to pay 1201. stamp
duty on his articles, and 2il. for the fees of his admis-
sion; while the stamp duty imposed upon him after he
was permitted to practice amountNl to more than 4 per
cent, on his annual profits. The tax was therefore
moat excessive and unjust, and the conditions of its
imposition were equally oppressive. The law required
that the duty should be paid before the Ist of Septem-
ber every year, and in 1849 no less than
595 were unable to pay the duty within the time pre•
scribed, while 190 had failed to pey it altogether. Well,
it might be said, so much the better, since the coup ry had
the fewer attorneys, but was that a fair argument to use
on this eccasion? Certainly not; anti he hoped no
Honoerable Member would be unfeeling enough to
make use of it.—(Cries of " Hear, hear," and a laugh.)
He had now gone through the grounds on which he
thought this tax ought to be repealed, and he considered
there was no valid reason why it should be continued.
The acquiescence of attorneys in this tax for a consider-
able time was no reason flr asserting that it should be
continued, because if the burden had been unjustly and
improperly imposed upon them, they were entitled
to its repeal. He should give the Noble Lord his sup-
'port on the present occasion, and hoped he would per-
severe with his motion for the repeal of the tax.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUERopnosed
the motion. He would not enter into the arguMents of
the Hon. and and Learned Gentleman, and it was suffi-
cient to state, on the present occasion, that the tax, was

an existing one, and that ha was not prepared to aban-
don it. The question was not whether this duty
pressed heavily on attorneys, but whether the whole
burden of tsxetion was unjustly imposed. The
same injustice might be attributed to many other tixes,
such as that on horses, &c., but if he wore to adopt
reductions in particular cases he would be called upon to
remit as many taxes as would amount to a million a 3 ear.
He did not wish to prejudice the impartial consideration
of this question in some future year, but, considering
the reductions which had lately be>n made iu taxation,
and the impossibility of remitting this particular duty—
under such circumstances felt it his duty to call noon
the House to reject the motion of the Noble Lerd.
He did not think the class of men whom the Learned
Gentleman (Sir F. Thesiger) advocated on this oceasien
were at present suffering from any peculiar burdens.
For those reasons he felt if his duty to oppose the
' motion.
The O'GORMAN MAHON congratulated the Noble
Lord (Lord Robert Grosvenor) upon having elicited
from the Chancellor of the Exchequer a statement
evincing a desire to reconsider this question at a
future period. He thought the parties who were
immeditvely aff-cted by this tax were not to be re-
garded in a similar light with the class of individuals
referred to by the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer. They were obliged to spend a large
sum of money in being trained for their pro-
fession, and they generally had received the
education of gentlemen; they sprung, too, loan a class
quite distinct from those to which the Right Hon. Baro-
net referred. Ho (tho O'Gorman Mahon) was, rh.-re-
fire, sorry to hear the Right Honourable Gentleman
contrast the respectable portion of the 'attorneys with
horsedealere. It might be a compliment, but he
(The O'Gorma❑ Mahon) could not view it as such. The
attorneys were intrusted with important duties, and
there was scarcely a man in the country who was not
indebted to them. He would cheerfully support the
motion.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ex-
plained that he had only said that horse dealers paid a
licence, and that might be a hardship to that crass as
much as the certificate duty was to attorneys.
After a few words from Colonel CHATTERTON,
which were inaudible,
Colonel SIB I'IIORP said he wished to compel the
Chancellor of the Exchequer to return to those Un-
important commercial duties which, in his (Colonel Sib-
thorpe's) opinion, were very industriously and incau-
tiously taken off. It was only by such a
Bill as this that the House could bring Chancellors of the
Exchequer properly to discharge their duties. He thought
the Noble Lord opposite (Lord R. Grosvenor) was folly
justified in seeking to relieve attorneys from this tax.
The gallery was then cleared, and the House divided,
when there appeared,—
For the motion ... 155
Against it ... 136
Majority i❑ favour of it ... ----19
The motion was then agreed to, and the Bill ordered
to be brought in.

Trip, STAMP DUTIES.
In reply to Mr. DISRAELI,
Lord J. RUSSELL said that it was not the intention
of the Government to bring forward to-merrow any
measure with reference to the stamp duties. It might
be convenient that he should state that he proposed t
proceed to-morrow with the Thetressed Unions (Ireland)
Bill, and the Parliamentary Franchise (Irelated)
and that the Australian Culouios Bill would be taken as
the first order ott Mocdsy.
COUN IT COURTe; EXTENSION BILL.
On the motion far going into Committee ore this Bill,
Mr. KEOGH rose to move that it be an instruction
to the Committee to extend its operation to Ireland. It
might, he said, be urged against this motion that it was
not competent for him to move it, that ho
ought to introduce a separate Bill for the
purpose he had in view, but he apprehend( d
there would be no difficulty in accomplishing his object
in the manner he proeote i, if the object iteed. met with
the approv.ll of the House. The reasons which pre-
vailed for the extension of county courts
in England were twice as stro..g in
Ireland, end he hoped when he told the House the vast
benefits the measure would confer upon the sister king-
dom it would have no hesitation in adopting his motion.
Finding that none of the objections that had been raised
to the extension of the County Courts Bill in England
existed in Ireland, he could not see what objection
there could be to make it an instruction to the
Committee to extend the operation of the Bill to Ireland,
by giving the assistant barristers' courts in that
country jurisdiction to the extent of tifty pounds.
He could Rot see why an assistant hae-ri,ter
in Ireland should he only paid 4001. a year, while the
judge of a county court in this country was allowed
upwards of 1000/.
Sir G. GREY did not tee how the provisions of this
Bill could be extend, e 1 to Ireland. His Right Hon.
Friend the Secretary for Ireland would shortly intro-
niece a Bill on the suti ct relative to Ireland, and in
the discussion of that measure the suggestions of the
Honourable Member might be repeated. It it was the
general wish of the House, on the part of the Guyer.-
meet, he would say that no further opposition would
be offered to the extension of the jurisdiction of the
county courts from 20/. to 50/.
Alter some further discussion the motion was with-
drawn, and the !louse went into Committee on toe Bit!.
On clause 1. extending the jurisdiction to demands
not exceeding 501.,
Mr. MITCHELL proposed to add words taking away
the power of the Court to order payments by iosttf-
ments, or at any future time, in cam=s where the de,end-
ant, or any one of the defendants, was a person subject
to the bankrupt laws. tie had not had an opportunity
of placing up na the votes this proviso, which he pro-
posed at the suggestion of the City committee, presided
over by Mr. W. Hawes. If it was desired that there
should be time to consider, it could be moved on the re-
port, instead of being now pressed. While the juris-
diction was under 20/. commercial cases were hardly
touched, but the commercial houses in London had an
enormous number of accounts between 201. and 50/, with
the retail traders; one house had accounts upon their
books amounting to 65,000!., and seven-eighths of them
were for sums under 501.; another had 605 accounts,
and 466 were under 50/. Now, if the judge of the
County Court was to have power, in the case of persons
engaged in trade, to give the defendant time, or order
the debt to be paid by monthly iustalments, no one
could be sure of his commercial bills between 20/. and
50/. being paid.
Sir G. GREY would be glad to bear what the Hon.
Member who had charge of the Bill thought of this pro-
posal. For himself, he thought than, intlependetrly of
the difficulty thrown upon a judge in calling upon him
to decide at the moment whether a man came within
this description, it would he hard upon the particular
defendants who owed between 20!. and 501. that they
must pay instanter or else execution must issue; in the
superior courts the defendant had till the next term
before judgment was obtained.
Mr. FITZROY, having only known of the amendment
since he came down to the House, would give no opi-
nion at the moment, abd would rather the consideration
of it should be deferred till the report.
Some conversation took place as to the languaee
the amendment, it being suggested by Mr. MILLINGS
that there would have to be a collateral inquiry whether
the defendant owed enough to make him subject to the
bankrupt laws, and Mr. COCKBURN oiaserved that it
would be better to introduce some such words 'as "a
person subject by his trade or occupation to the bank-
rupt laws." The Hon. and Learned Gentleman added
that perhaps a middle course might be taken by limiting
the power to give time t..) two or three months.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought, if the power
to give time was to be limited to two months, the timi-
tetion ()light to apply to all debts, whether under or
over 20/.

Mr. W. BROWN considered that though there might
be some ground for giving the judge a discretionary
power to grant time in the case of a book debt, it was
otherwise where a bill had been given. The creditor
might be depending upon its payment in order to meet
his engagements.
The amendment was then witherawn for the present,
and the clause was agreed to, with some verbal amend
ments introduced by Air. FITZROY.

On clause 2, providing that fees be taken according to
a schedule at the end of the Bill,
The AT TORNEY-GENERAL moved to amend the
clause by providing that the fees now payable upon
plaints above 101. shall be the fees to be taken under this
Act iu plaints above 201. If that was agreed to, the
proposed new schedule, with its graduated scale or fees,
according as the sum sued for was between 201. and 301.,
30/. and 401., or 401. and 501., would be struck out. There
had been great complaints about the fees.
Mr. FITZROY thought that the proposal was ex-
ceedingly unfair, and that there was an attempt tL) mis-
lead the House. If the principle was worth anything in
actions below 201., it must be worth something in those
above it. A man who recovered 191 would be much
dissatisfied if he had to pay the same fees as a man who
recovered 491. He was sure the House would never
sanction the principle of throwing additional duty (LI
any man without giving him remuneration. The fees
were not imperatively fixed by the Bill, for the conclud-
ing words of the clause gave power to the Secretary of
State, with the consent of the Treasury, to "regulate,
vary, lessen, or increase them in such manner as shall
seem to him fit." He had no objection to take one uni-
form scale of fees—the first in the schedule, for instance
—and was content to leave the amount of remuneration
in the hands of the House; but he would certainly take
the sense of the House if the Hon. and Learned Gentle.
man pressed his motion.

Sir G. GREY reminded the Hon. Member that the
argument of the Attorney-General was, that the, judges
would have to decide on a higher class of cases, but no
part of the lees would go iuto their pockets, as they
were paid by a fixed salary. Surely the Hon. Member
did not think greater acumen would. be required in a
high bailiff to serve a summons than iu a judge to de-
cide on a case? If an absolute uniformity of.: fees was
established, they might he obliged to make the amp unt
so high that it would not be worth while in many cases
to go into court at all. The argument of tee Lion.
Gentle-luau, that if there was to bo no difference in
fees between 201. and 501., there should be no' differ-
ence between 10/. and 20/., was of no force, b. cause
the officers of the court would have increased duties and
fees in proportion.—(llear.)
Alderman THOMPSON believed the schedule of fer to
in the cld Bill much too high. lie ktew a case where a
poor man when arrested for some (loin of 53. or 10s. had
been forced to pay 14t. to the bailiff, as the latter claimed
his fee cf is. a mile, just as if the debt r lisdaetually
been taken that di,tatfce in custody. He invited the
Atornev-General would not allow bailiffs to take tees
for services which were not performed, and wished that
the Legislature had been more alive to the true nature
of this mischievous Bill. If it passed, the House would
.
soon be overwhelmed with petitions ior repeal or
modification,

Mr. ROEBUCK said, it ‘ppettred to him that they
ought to give a fair sum to every pawn employed,

jAge, clerk, or bailiff, for which they could claim a--
11big
time tied do away with fees altogether. He knew ev.e..
the iefleeni.ie that had bi4en used out of doors about tn!'s
Lill.--(Herr, hear.) Why, he bad been attacked on 1314
way down to the House, and had had his coat
eulied off, by certain persons eho wished to influence
hited—(Hear, hear.) Yes, and he knew that other 1106;
Members had been served in the hams way.
them have no such influence in that place. The
wanted to have justice—cheap, efficient, and of slic'el",,
sort that the world would believe it to be justice. Ph4
;
denctieced the people who had treated him and 1;
House of Commons in such a manner. He had he'll.
--and he was determined to mention it—Hon. Ge°tii`e;
men say that their livelihood as barristers depended te
the vote they should give tha", night. What bed ty,
House to do with the statement of bartisters-orkttrilh'i;
who were looking out for business and for office (3.11;„-s-
-way way?—(Here, bear.) It was disgraceful to the '",;;;Ite
of Commons and to the country to be assailed in air,",
a ttaiiner. Let them try the experiment af extelani
the Bill to 501. Why could not justice be got without
any graduat-d sca'e of fees?—(Hear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY said it should be known, in justice to
the judges, that they had not the remotest interest lilt
the que,tion belore the House. When the Act was 6r„'t
introeuced they had been paid by fees, as the e 14"„
ma-
ount f duty was not ascertained, but eventually al
were
fees were commuted fur salaries, and the i
udge3
given to understand that their whole time should be de"
voted to the court. The Parliament fixed their salaries
at a maximum of 1,200/.. but the Government bad Pe:
thone ht. fit to go to the full extent, and gave them but"
1.000/. a year, so that if any necessity arose for it.
iticrea.e of 2001 per annum could still ee made to
salaries. Tne clerks were also pnid by fixed salarireia!
fir as practicable; bet a difficulty had arisen in ser'
cases in fixing the exact amount on which their fee:
should be commuted, which wuuld, however, be hoped'
be dot over.
Mr. ROEBUCK—But I want to know, if you buY tbe
whole time of the judge, why do you net hey the who
time of the baill ?
Sir G. GREY—So far as practicable, that had been
dune alio; but it would require a long statement toel7i
plain ell the difficulties in the way. Some bailiffs IT
hecet appointed for districts, some for portions of d'!:
trict; in some cases two had been appointed, so. that 1'
was ireposAble at once to commute their fees for 813 Y
fixed salary, es had been the case with the judges.
When the commutation took place, the clerks would be
expected to place all their time at the disposal of the
court.

After a few wore s from Mr. ROEBUCK and the Al'
TORNEY-GENERAL,
Lord DUNCAN said that nothing had ever caused
him greater regr,r, since ho had a seat in that fl"ag
than the course which the Right Hon. Gentleman (sir ri;
Grey) had taken respecting this Bill. Ile believed the we'
bailiffs would be entitled to some higher r muneration.;
because they Wer3 responsible for the prouerty in theit
charge, and were liable to actions if it was lost. Wh,,
had fallen from his Hon. Giiieague (Mr. Roebuck) to
the payment of clerks by fixed salaries was well worth
the attention if the House.
Mr. AG LION BY gave his cordial support to the Pri
cipie of the Bill, which he took to be the relief of toa
ll
debtors fn:m toe courts of common law and Chanel-1'
Ile adinived that tne Hon. Gehtleman had in the nOl
.n
e
folloa.ed the principle of the fti trier Bill, and it Was to
be Loped that the Government would adopt the 059 „
e
pa3i,ig those who laboured, and none other. On tt''
tvi,,Ae, he thought that the Howie and the country were
deeplii indebted to the Horn Gentleman who bad intro:
ducat the present Bill. If it passed into a law it wool°
protic,i many beneficial results, and he did not apPreti
bend ihat any of the predictions which they had hesrg,
from the Hoe. Alderman would be fulfilled. It was di'
ficint to suppose thst any one could deny the fairness
and expediency of enabling the poorer classes of society
to obtain justice without loss of time or waste of money'
It was also very clear thut if they imposed additions)
etudes upon the judges or the officers of those courts Biel
ought not to refuse those gentlemen additional reatitic';
ration. One of the oldest aid b,mt economists in that
liotise—he meant his Hon. Friend the Member Or
Montr6se—h4d often said that though he would Fs)" no
wan for doing nothing, yet he would not expect any man
to labour without adequate reward.
Mr. COCKBURN hoped that the Hon Member 0131:i
polite would not persist in the scale of fees that he ha
proposed. According to that scale, suitors would hale
to pay larger sums in the county courts than in the 'lli
perior courts of common law. He thought the object eE
the House should be not only to secure for the re"
man speedy justice, but also cheap justice ; it wag;
,herefote, much to be complained of that the Chancellor
cf. ihe Exert' quer should pocket out of tile cotinti
coult4 as much as 30,000/. a year. That, or any -Ott
tax on the administration of justice, was surely not ""
be borne.

Mr. FITZROY, being loth to proceed contrary t°
the declared opinion of the House, rose to accede t 4
the proposition made by the Attorney-General ;
wished, however, to observe that if they Pe
u
the clerks upon fixed salaries, and if they took the
prevent average of fees, nothing would be more unfair
than to lease those sairries witlauu; increase in the event
of increased labour being imposed upon those functions;
ries; for example, addiug the insolvency cases in fire
country, and the charitable trusts, besides the 501. exten'
aion. Undtr present circumstances very
judges practised at ail, and scarcely any within of t
ini'llelli:
own districts. Then there was a further injustice as t,'",
the fees. The salaries of the judges were generally
1,0001. a year, the average of their fees was 1,4001.; sill
was the surplus seized on by authorities who bad no
right to appropriate it? The travelling expenses of the
judges jedges were very considerable, often absorbing babe"
year's salary at a time, which imposed on some of t,t`9
judges the unseemly practice of running up long hi"°'
and leaving them for a considerable time unpaid. Vln
.
the sums granted for travelling expenses were too smell,
15F. a day was by no means sufficient. An attorney 1°
the most severely taxed bill of costs was allowed i 1 a
day. With such an allowance it could not be said sltt
those judges were able to travel on as good a footing 11:
ordinary commercial travellers. There was another
point which he wished to notice, namely, the sum Pe!
before a suitor could proceed; at present it was Is. I
the 1/. Now, he thought it ought to be lowered to 2.,
per cent. Having said so much he should withdraw bl°
opposition to the amendment.
ad
Sir G GREY add that • he., the maximum was la-,
at 1,2004 it was not intended that in wiry case that 00';
W,t3 to re, pa u. vs mei toe thaws 01 die judges elitr,
to be increased it would be time enough to consi"
what further sums they should receive. Hitherto there
had not been the least difficulty iu obtaining the serviee,
of able men et the present salaries. If it should turfl..
out, under the present Bill, that the fees were greatel
than was sufficient, the Government would be bound ty_
give the suitors the benefit, and not unnecessarily L;
augment the fees. The allowance to the county Cella `
judges for personal expenses when travelling was 159• re
day and their railway fares, or le. 6d. mileage wilt°
there were no railways. This was the allowance ptii°,o
officers of the army, and it amply covered every exPen-
to which those gentlemen could he subjected.
Mr. CARDWELL said that the Right Hon. 004.1 e;
man (Sir G. Grey) would have the power of incretteles;
the saleries of these judges, and Parliament ought
.134
to interfere with his discretion and compel the itig"o
Hon. Gentleman to increase these salaries, whether e
thought it expedient or not. Such a course would t. 6
qually unpreesdented and improper.—(Hear.)
Mr. ROEBUCK said 1.000/ a year to many of theme
gentlemen would be a great godsend—(Laughter).a.
and with teat sum they would be exceedingly well pats'
If in any case a larger Bum should be necessary, the
Right Hon. Gentleman opposite had the power in his
ono hand of making an addition. Let the Committee'
look at the cave of the assistant barristers in Ireland-
They
;,
exercised civil and criminal jurisdiction, and their
labours were much more heavy than those were likely !°
be under this Bill. And what was the amount of thef
salaries? 400/., besides which they received 1001. as
vising barristers. He would suppose their fee' to
amount to 5001. more. If a salary of 1,0001. was
cient for the discharge of their duties, he did not se°
why a larger sum should be paid here. Let the Sas°
not listen to any appeal to sentimentality. The 111,1
Member fog Lewes talked of travelling expenses amoe°o
ing to 500/. a year. Why a person could travel fro
Louden to Carlisle for less than 31. The statement We
perfectly outrageous.—(Hear.)
Mr. HUME said he understood the Hon. Gentlenisli
agreed to abandon the schedule, and. that the origie°
scale of fee. would stand. He trusted that the Cle
mitt • Would at once preceed with the other parts of the
Bill.
The amendment of the Attorney-General was they
agreed to.
Mr. HUME understood that the principle of the 11
was, that the fees would be so varied and redeeeer;
that no portion of them would go into the Consolidated
Fund.
Lord D. STUART did not see any disposition towsrcit• il
economy, ou the partof her Majesty's Government, Wlto
respect to county courts. He thought the treastirtehl'e
might safely be dispensed with, and did not see why
00e
duty should not be performed by the clerks, who, inn:tog
cases, had ample time for that purpose. But the
was, that as the treasurers were paid out of the Coooo,',
dated Fend, a large amount of patronage was there_elic
placed in the heads of the Government. Believing tube
the Bill would be beneficial to the country at large,
was most anxious that it should pass almost upon a"▪ '
terms, with as little delay as possible.
Sir G. GREY said that he had already stated that
th
clerks and bailiffs would he paid not by f. es, "tome
salaries, which would be fixed as soon as sufficient
could be obtained. or
Mr. COOKBURN did not think a salary of 50' of
100/, a year sufficient remuneration fur such a Class
0.
per,ons as that from which the clerks ciught to be teb:ist
Besides, as the sums paid to them were frequently P se
by instalments, it would be necessary fur tbete,,,ooo
keep an offise fir the transaction of business. 1, tho
with respect to the judges. At present they 101
note
opportunity of practising professionally to a "-tee
derab e extent; but it these courts should assurne„.lo
ch..ractkr which he hoped they would assume, their -bet
would he filly C eipteci, and twould savour sOune-,,.
of injustice te limit the salary to the amount oriel ~ of
ally fixed. The mat er ought to be left in the haiAlt,'est
the Government, wee he trusted, would select the nit,-
officers they could get at the tenttLest amount of rem
aeration consistent with the discharge of their dutP the
s'r. HUME thought it would be better fur a-
Government not to act hastily with regard to 03'000
crtare of salaries. It was much easier to increase les
to educe them. The Noble Lord seemed to iol og.
that, tie Government had exercised a greet deal 6°o feet
tronage in the appontinent of t easurers, but too'
wee that ahough they might have nominated a ,g.
rer for ealh of the 60 courts, only nine bad been
pointed.—(ll,ar, hear.) t, o
Mr. AGLIONBY understood the Hotise"-ec retan, ing
sav that the Goverment had Mantentioii of In°eas
eeeee
the salaries of the county courts' judges in conss%oo,
of the increased duties proposed to be cast
.0200

11 gorestlia,rtri htio:ni etuthhrdei"st',
Nfr. T i„,,
•, . 4,,x_ir
cre, ' 111)&1
k,.. e ,
44,. I• Bawl
1,4 ~,a had 1
o„ereqa, to
, , the ,-,
a ari sof t
pel'4%e 2 "
-1/tu,, ,' 3
er,, , . v ;
th - clause 4
"i4tr • -
Th ic, la
!ttio: AT r(
104 , whethe
, . CRO"
NUtlstr ,
debts 'us th
I to 4,„r, in Yor
0, rFcar in
,e for
, the
tt"ITZ i
bivol au •A-
thisfs,il After
rlppltT,))l.
pant
f„dilltiff °ugh
II:ork.
leabit' ROES
tle
tr,the SUE(
was
Th nmi
t*ti I,
,1111111141311;1 it( 1
arlitell' ‘iel2ll:tds' th°L.):lteu4butsalToi
Ought
,('' , I
If i afe
tr. A r,
11 'ihtti
)::6°11:!,83. 4r) t,
t ):: Y.:4.
defendslte:'3htidaneie; vi laldill
ace
14,
the
theref 'l'm
Lis i fore
ott, -Ilit in 1
f 41Ef b
ro% ual
Ita,e a grt
4,udble ttikbe m
j ' --(me'
ha 6e of th
et, de4
weraent tc
feat that th
~ttida'at in
ilq the dist
eitg r
ti,eich.subra

isim ail big
knew well
about this
COa~alcacst
:o influence
other Hoc.
ButieS
Y• The ja ,-T,,vuse
of such 1'
,stand 10
had bora
Gentle'
cppnded on
had tb°
attirrtilr'
lice this
the g6us
ed in such
extending
:ot with°ll6

justico to
interest in
et vras first
the eviet
ually these
ge3
were
,u id be C!e'
• iota
ea 03
nt had not
e then bet
ie for it. an
,de to OW
salaries, 0
en in some
their fees
be hoped,

,ou buy the
the whole

had been
..nt to ev;
iliffa bau
3ns of di%
so. that 11
es for all
be judges'
s would be
,osal of the

d the AT'

rer caused
hat FIOII,
Lan (Sir LP
ti the nigh-
lur.eratiolh
ty in their,.
who.
sr.
luck) 39 tel,
well wort,'

o the prifi/l
.f of ato
Cliancyry•
the math
it was t°
of
e pin
On the
otry were
,ad intro'
t '4
w i 0
• ula
not appre;
had bete
It was chi'
le fairness
of society
of money'
additional
ourts they
I realunc
ts in th2t
ember for
Id pay' no
;t auy ro'•

?tuber or,
ist he ha"
)uld bale
in the sa;
► object o 01
the poor
• it "'SS'
AfineellOr
to county
any -other
ely nut to

intrary to
accede to
e rat ;
they put
too.
, the
fair
)re up
the event
I unetiunit"
sex in the

exte
iw of the
thin their
sae() ai to
generally
1004; wh.l,
)o had 131°
ises of the
ng. half 0
me of "
long bigot
id. Then
too strew;
,torney
wed 11
said ttott
footing 06
i another
sum pain
was ls.
red to 2i
!Army bill

was fixed
that bume
ges ca
consul':
..rto there
e service°
.ould tura
r, greater
bound t
to
wird), °
aty eours
as 159* le
where
'De paid to
y expense

i. Geni
neretpiv
lught no:
he ItifYlP
hether'he
culd b°

of these
103 ter).
well Paid'
sary,
-, the
er in bl 5
ommittes'
Ireland-
and their
likely te
of their
101. as re.
fee, to
was SUI
not se°
te Sous°
he1:1011'
aino
rel irons
vent vise

entlerosl
origi°l/1
~ Coto'
!to of the

was then'

the Bill
red uce,.l
solids:sty-

tOWSIIIS
at, Willi
'why /he
whY /het
in 00.
?tbo fait
Coo9°li•
tberebi
tbsV
irge•
poEl 11°'

that the
hut hi
ant data

tttrY. t„°.
the'.

tit() t owei'bel to call the attention of the Attorney-General
tikes (13Puunt that thedges appointed persons—some-
the wltita,Proper Persons-to collect the fees throughout
sem ')'a of a district, paying them the snialest possible
The
their trouble.
a or ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he had prepared
girt to remedy the grievance.
ing n' d' EVANS said that he believed the understand-
""l9 to at the time the salaries of the county courts'
eotgeer,,sive, fixed. was, that they would,be at liberty, whets
in ta`:.'Ployei in the business of their courts, to practise
cre Profession. I: would be most unjust, therefore,
theeuse their duties to sack an extent as to leave
c
E.,a. ne time for such practice.
G
kw, REY had never stated that under no circunih-
Jo :a Would an increase be made in the salaries of t o
zje • What he had stated was, that from the infer-
as`m Government possessed he did not think there
tia,erY Probability of the salaries being at present
prw, When the clause which prohibited the judges.
Itt "Wag was Struck out in the other House, the belief
tialiethat their courts would occupy the whole of their
Rt. n
„.`"'EBUCH: asked if he was to understand the
Iveba,t".,,,ou• Gentleman as having said . that. the judges
'rho! told When they accepted tneir situations, that the
ton 7 of their time would be occupied, and that it addi-
ela4( business was given them they would have the
44'°1 for additional salary? If that was so, there was an
VI the matter.
I.°r G• a.' GREY said he had certainly understood the
Chancellor that he had intimated to the gentlemen
(147reted for judges that their whole time would be re-
thted' if Mcstry, for their judicial duties. At first
1,(407ere Paid by tees, which in some cases exceeded
did a year, and in others fell short of that sum. lie
the!iu,t think there was any distinct intimation given
.to
tx,,jdulles when the change was made, and their salaries,
tours..,4rit 1,000/, that there should be no increase. o.t,
. elovernment had the
ee'itar power of increasing them it
37.
blrttazci! AGLIONBY had been informed that the under-
staterr Lg Come to was quite different from what had been
the Might Ilon. Baronet. He wisned to know
th 6orne of the judges were not led to believe that
ttr:o'n"ultl be paid by fees? Ia some instances the fees
the ,lted to 1,400/. and 1,5001. It was scarcely fair,,
S9r re, to fix the salaries of these parties at I,ouo/.
tat `-l• GREY said the judges had all been appointed
kttfqe first instance without the Government having
ama'ot information to guide theta in fixing the proper
Jude;,nYNo distinct intimation had been made to the
Feri,-,4" but it was well known that at the earliest
aad;,' Possible the payment by fees would be abolished,
Ist;a4l salaries substituted.
ti '
sy th'aJt. CLAY had understood the Home Secretary to
adz ,a,": competent persons were anxious to obtain thee:
heat pa. If their duties were increased, would eomatth,
Persons t he sat the resent sal!ry ?
5 bUsi `•
neiSacce was n
inctreasedituations and the salapries remained
Ptii.,j74., the judges would bo over-worked aad under-

404; EGER roN corroborated the statement of the
that t-h"';eretsry. He believed the understanding was,
the"lgidges should give their whole time to the public.
ttsaao l*Z was willing to leave the question of
g the salariss to the discre•ion of the Govt-mitnef,t.
114 , BiIOTHEREON was of a similar opinion. It
ttise "`" had listened to the debate, he thought they must
one fi,e(ll9 to the conclusion that instead of the Bill being
Warr the public benefit, it was one for increasing the
01 "°F county coutt udee.—.
'use
eau 2, as amended,j wasg then egreed(Laughter to.)
e, 3 e tie etruck out.
the fa e,lause 4, which related to issuing the summons in
1,11""r;e; in which the plaintiff resided,
!ttloa2snAtsT fORNEY-GENERA.L expressed a desire to
it.trollatehtihse(rl2,tut.lion. Gentleman opposite meant to
'IIOVVDER thought nothing could be more
debt, Otis than thet a person iu Cornwall having a
to to York, should have the power to summon him
lete'fctr in a court in Cornwall. He should, therefore,
"r the expunging of the clause.
tr• Evrz ROY was inclined to abide by the clause.
Vleoat MITCHELL thought that the convenience of the
s
tad " uoght to be regarded as well as that of the de.
X. 4" ett It might be a hardship to summon a debtor in
heahittl? aPPear Cornwall, but it would be equally a
to yoliip to the creditor in Cornwall to follow hie debtor
kr ROEBUCKlettle'tu suggested that the rule should be to
tract
was
summons in the district within which the con-
-1,11 s made.
the siee ATTORNEY- GENERAL said that thn rule in
disti.;" Act was to issue the summons in the plaintiff's
that The The object of the Bill was cheap justice, hut
elite would not be obtained if the plaintiff had to take
elk:B'es to a great dirt wee. His opinion was that the
to ti. ought to be struck out, and the old Act adopted
Ipant.
nter a few words from Ur. ROEBUCK,
th • AGLIONBY said that the old rule was to follow
tip defendant. lie was in favour of making exeep
a tiOesand. leaving it to the judge to decide on applies,-
feh4Yit.the plaintiff whether ho ahould fellow the de-
Ala ea
`ekt lesst eKBURN suggested a middle course. The
The 10h was on which side the inconvenience lay.
by h.PLaintiff had to establish his case by witnesses or
books, and therefore prima facie the inconve-
telss'e Would be with him if he was compelled to
the them .to a distance. Some latitude ought
hiB ;.°,Te to be given to tee plaintiff to bring
otas-plitts in the district in which he lived. On the
Alai; . nand, it would often be inconvenient if the
srotlitsfs had the power of bringing the defendant
les a great distance. It had been suggested to
eve
able the matter to the judge. That seemed Feasen-
jeca:stheugh there was some objection to allowing the
littes'" of the district in which the plaintiff resided to
Ittat- 'he decision, tor he would only have an ex parte
Gettlent to guide him. He should, therefore, sug-
fetal- that the plaintiff should be entitled to sue the de-
of ttaat in the district in which he lived, if the judge
lai:ue district in which the defendant lived, on a case
tOR submitted to him by the plaintiff, should so
%clue.
esAfte-
els few words from the ATTORNEY-GENERAL and
jit‘,ARDWELL.
to t MITCHELL said he thought the judge who was
4,7 the merits of the case ought to be entrusted with
tri4nscretion of fixing the locality in which it was to be
thel4r,' CROWDER said the whole of the argument in
'llecussion had rested on the assumption that the
Platat eiti every case was clearly right, and the defen-
b, Iss clearly wrong. There were cases in which a
sta4-11u Might be anxious to annoy a defendant; for in-
VtasZsih suits which might depend upon a contract on
pki Thoth parties had disagreed, and the Bill gave the
saateti,ll an undue power in that respect. lie, these
Itt-ted to the two clauses to which he alluded.
I'uggs
r•st lIATCHELL (Solicitor-General for Ireland)
of s
th ,as it was contemplated to extend the principle
toe Act to rot)lrel that it would he a great hardship
per "hie a creditor bring a debtor from Cork or Tip-
h"trY to ,a court within a few miles of Dublin.
eleo:' AIULLINGS was understood to support the
Th
ter ti " ATTORNEY- GENER said it bad been con-
tift: e that a great incenvenie.ice resulted to the plain-
tee fr°l4 the tact of the defendant running away.
tst,. er the present Act, an action might be brought in
of shP,l4°B where the defendant resided within six months
action
After° Period, and also in the place where the cause of
se.
After a few words from Mr. AGLIONBY,
th r* I'. WOOD suggested that, as they were making
the ange from 201 to 501. in the principle of the Bill,
to stiff should be allowed to make his application
4,? Court where the claim exceeded 201.
litx:er a few words from Mr. J. EVANS,
6snsor' 9110 WDER intimated his intention of taking the
110 Committee upon his proposition.
siticittitlygatollooir,iepslaweee.re then cleared, but no division subse •
theta the re-admission of strangers it was understood
t 4 clauses were to be replaced by a new clause to
broughtl:b up on a future stare of the Bill.
(00,4,,e,. ATTORNEY-GENERAL was addressing the
'that ".4lttee in opposition to the sth clause. He contended.
mot it would violate a principle which bad been found
tNi„sat4factory in its practical working in the. County
thitt-,"4 Act. He thought it was of great importance
oarriaters should be allowed to practice in those
oitpl.„ts• The tendency of the clause would be to increase
opiti-itio" in those courts, and such a result ought, in his
~12.aas af much as possible to be avoided.
bias -hITZROY supported the clause. It appeared to
of itithat as they were about to extend the jurisdiction
able allow;;;10 Courts, it was but reasonahle that they should
tisst4l.ntheomf
them.
8i extension of the fees of those who prac-
% ROEBUCK defended the clause.
tine G• GREY thought it would be better to have the
11;.,..”"a of those courts fixed as they had hitherto been.
w at" • MILES and Mr. J. EVANS supported the clause.
thenei COCKBURN proposed that they should amend.
the clause by expressly limiting the power of increasing
Mr'
to cases above 201.
eht, LAW said he did not wish to cast on the Lord
eUcellor the regulation of the fees; but he thought at
of ooltute time that it was desirable that the attendance
Pitsatuuael in cases above 201. should be secured by the
went of a higher fee than one guinea.
" Str„ ‘I,43CKEURN suggested that the recital sheald
Dow,r-eK out, and that the Lord Chancellor should have
eases 'and be required to settle and regulate fees in all
Mh"here the debt or demand shall exceed 201.
1:e. recital was struck out.
Which MITCHELL said this was the very principle
, Government objected to in a former clause.
'3hieetis' GREY said he considered the proposition mot
The Committee
and would vote against it.
ommittee then divided, when there appeare-l—
-'lsr the clause as amended ... 66
Against it... . 162
•• ••• ••• •.• ••• •.
Clu Majority ---96
e 6 was struck out.
cDs„
Plaiati.,,,"‘,WDEß proposed, upon clause 7, to give to
to it 4-0 411 option in all cases between 201. and 50/. to
skilste_ the district court, or the superior courts at West-
Posed ru_ By this clause, as it stood, a penalty was itn-
tih°4ll 17n plaintiffs recovering sums under 501., and
t"1, ted to olovering his debt the plaintiff might be sub-
_am the 1 the costs of the action. He proposed, then,
aeotio he, be expunged; the consequence of which
the he, that in all cases above 201. and as far as 50/.,
a Plaintiff •
ater ~ might go either into the courts at Westmin-
-I,he. re inferior courts.
dreg
ATTORNEY-GENERAL did not rise to ad-
s himself
Learne_, to the question just raised by his Hon. and
with Friend. He merely wished to observe that,
• tarru'wei Pact to cases of tort, the Committee should look
Ration jYtt as to whether it was advisable to facilitate liti-
ssFoina„. actions of tort for assault. He should vote
F/jea.tne amendment of his Honourable and Learned
r. Iv,
wot `"Ellt CR
fit to wanted to know, if country courts
ueoide on cases of debt amounting to 50/.,