The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-14 00:00:00

SPIRIA'ef the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
riiOllljlTHE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
GLOBE.—The County Courts' Bill stands in the
'notice-paper of the House of Commons for this even-
ing. " The further consideration of the Report" will
be entered upon, should the adjourned debate on the
Factory Bill terminate sufficiently early to allow of
its being entertained, or a further adjournment of
the debate be agreed upon, in order that this
highly important Bill—which has been, in our
view, improperly delayed may be proceeded
with. Further delay will render its passing in the
present session unlikely, if not impossible. A sus-
picion will thus be strengthened—it has already
arisen—that the Government is not sincere in its ex-
pressed wish for effecting this substantial improve-
ment in the administration of justice. It has been
said, we hope without foundation, that the introduc-
tion of the Bill was rather intended by Ministers to
relieve themselves from respondbility, than with any
intention to urge the Bill forward through its seve-
ral stages, so that it might come into early operation.
The provisions of the bill are such as to approve
themselves to the general body of the commercial
part of the community—especially to that portion of
it which most feels the inconvenience of consi-
derable outlay, associated with the hazard of reco-
vering nothing from the debtor—entailed by the
existing laws for the recovery of small debts.
A debt under forty shillings is, in general,
recoverable only by application to those ano-
malous tribunals, the Courts of Request, or, as
they are generally designated, Courts of Conscience.
" Confusion worse confounded" pervades these clumsy
expedients created by the Legislature for settling the
multifarious claims of petty shopkeepers upon their
customers for default; of servants and work-
men upon their masters and employers for wages,
payment of which is refussd or withheld; and of every
other imaginable pecuniary dispute which may arise
between such parties. The confusion of tongues was
harmony itself compared with these Babels ; while
Shakspeare's inimitable tdescription of "crowner's
liw" is the perfection of reason compared with the
discussions and decisions of the Commissioners—
chosen by the parishes assigned to the districts within
which the jurisdiction of these Courts extends—who
" settle and determine" the matters brought before
them. These reproaches upon the law, and fre-
quently outrages upon justice, will he got rid of,
"at one fell swoop,' by this Bill. The " Mayors'
Courts," which exist in some of the larger
boroughs—and by which the inhabitants may sue
and be sued for sums under 201.—are less ob-
noxious to censure, although far from approaching to
what the present state of society requires. These
will also be abolished by this Bill. They will merge
in the new and more prompt and efficient tribunals
now proposed to be established. We need hardly
state that, with the exception of the tribunals
we have named, the existing. law for the recovery
of small debts is so extensive in its operation as to
amount, in most cases, to a virtual prohibition of its
use. What man—having the most remote concep-
tion of the expense, and with a reasonable acquaint-
ance with the " glorious uncertainty" of the law,
together with the chances against obtaining his debt
an costs from the defendant—would ever think of
giving instructions to his attorney to bring an ac-
tion for the recovery of a sum of moderate amount?
It under 201., the Courts at Westminster will
transmit it for trial before the Sheriff; but
then the costs—even though there •be no mo-
tion in the superior Court to deprive the
plaintiff of his verdict—will be considerably
more than the amount of which the Sheriff can take
cognizance. The merits of the Bill for remedying
the perplexities and confusion, arising out of the delay
and expense of the existing state of the law, will be
seen by a brief outline of its provisions. It proposes
to provide "one rule and manner" for recovering debts
not exceeding 151., and for the trial of " personal ac-
tions" throughout England. For this purpose County
Courts are to be established, which, however, may be
separated into districts. A judge, who at the time
of his appointment must be a barrister of seven, or an
attorney of ten years' standing, is to preside. All
proceedings in cases assigned to their jurisdiction are
to be brought before these Courts for decision. No
writ or pleadings are requisite ; but a plaint, in
writing, must be served on the defendant; in some eases
seven, and in others ten days must elapse between
the service of the plaint and the trial. If the
amount sought to be recovered be less than 51., the
judge may decide the claim without the intervention
of a jury; if above that sum, a jury of five (of whom
a majority may decide and return the verdict) may
be obtained on the application of either party. The
parties may address the Court in person, and may be
themselves examined. Execution will be as effectually
enforced as by process from the superior Courts. The
necessity of personal service upon the defendant, by
which the creditor is at present so frequently obstructed
and the law defied, is rendered unnecessary. Thus a
prompt adjudication is secured, and when obtained,
the order of the Court is speedily enforced. Provie
sion is made by the Bill for obtaining new trials ;
but in order to guard against such applications being
made to the superior Courts for the purposes of delay,
security for costs must be given by the applicant.
As the Bill now stands, execution may be issued
against the person, as well as against the property, of
the debtor. This provision will, of course, be dependent
on the adoption of Lord Cottenham's Bill, for the
abolition of imprisonment for debt in all cases decided
by the Civil Courts. This Bill has passed the House
of Lords with singular unanimity. After such
a recognition of the principle, we scarcely see
how the clause in the County Courts Bill,
which gives the plaintiff a power to issue pro-
cess against the person of the debtor, can be re-
tained. The Bill provides for compensation to "exist-
ing interests." This is, unhappily, one of the results of
long-continued evils from which the public interests
have suffered, until the grievances have grown to an
extent so great as to render their removal indispen-
sible. Those who have fastened themselves upon the
system, and fattened upon the spoils, set up a claim to
compensation for the loss of that which they ought
never to have poesesssed. The price of the remedy
may be high ; but better to pay high for a removal of
the evil, than continue a system which preys upon •the
best interests of the community. From two or three
pamphlets which have been put forth on the sub-
ject, we perceive that the Bill has little favour
with the attorneys. It is threatened with op-
position in Parliament, from the influence which many
of these gentlemen exercise over members of the
Legislature. Attorneys may, by permission of the
judge, appear, and conduct causes brought before
the Court ; but their fees, es fixed by the Bill, are,
it is said, too low to remunerate them. They may,
however, fairly look for remuneration to the amount
of business which this Bill will throw into their hands.
If they are now allowed to charge one or two guineas
a day for attendingc, in Court upon the trial of one
cause, they may be satisfied with 10s., or in some
cases 155., when five or six causes may fall to their
share in one day.
STANDARD.—We find ourselves in a position in
which we owe to those who honour us with their
notice on explanation of the ground that we take, and
the conduct that we are pursuing. The country has,
for now nearly two years, had the benefit of what we
firmly believe to be the wisest, the most patriotic, and,
in every respect, the best Adminstration, that the
men of our generation have ever seen occupying
the councils of the Sovereign. The triumphs of its
policy abroad and at home, which it has been al-
most our daily, and assuredly not ungrateful, task to
detail the uninterrupted succession, attest the excel-
lence of the present Government. To Sir R. Peel's Ad-
ministration we have heartily and without reserve given
our humble support, until its enemies and our enemies
have not scrupled to impute our attachment to venality.
Against that charge we scorned to make any other
reply than a reference to the character of this journal
and of all connected with it—scorned more especially
to make a show of independence by captious
objections and impertinent sneers, directed against
the measures of the Government and its
members. We felt, and we still feel, that
Englishmen prove their independence by very
different means, and that in questions of
independence Englishmen will look for a different
class of proofs from those small quarrels of the
coquette, which are, indeed, but arts to preserve
an interest by exciting
al arm ; and are always
employed to win or preserve,
aresreerve, not to repel, favour.
w
Even now, when
to
placecompelled by an irre-
sistible necessity
and distinct opposition to ousr.r selves in strong
Robert Peel's
Government, our only fear is that we may be sus-
pected of such unworthy arts ;but here again we cast
our reliance upon character. The question
ch
forces us into this painful opposition to the Queen's nMinisters is, as our readers have already antici-
pated, the question of Lord Ashley's propositions.
This is a great question, and as such it is appre-
ciated by her Majesty's Ministers, or they would not
take upon it the line that they have taken—a line
which they must see, for they are wise and sagacious
men, v;ill seriously affect their just popularity in
the country, materially impair the strength of the
Conservative party that has placed them in office,
and render almost certain the heavy calamity of
a change in the Government at no distant day
Upon any question less than a vital one, a
Government such as Sir Robert Peel's would not
encounter these sacrifices; and these are, in truth,
consequences of the line taken by Ministers which
ro man who sincerely loves his country can
contemplate without pain. Be this, however, as it
may, the Ministers have resolved to confront them,
and it would be equally absurd and unjust to sup-
pose that they embark in the risk without a power-
ful motive of conscience. On the other side we,
and most of Lord Ashley'st supporters, estimate
the full magnitude of
h
our object were merely to question in issue. If
y
steal popular favour
for a measure, to underrate its importance would
be an obvious artifice to resort to; but this is not