The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-24 00:00:00

THE SUN,

LEIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
Tins DAY —Morning 40 min. after 1 I Evening 0 min. after 2
To-31cntaow— Morning 20 min. after 2 I Evening 39 min. after 2

TUE WEATIIER.—SuN OFFICE, JUNE 21.
THERMOMETER, IN THE SHADE.
80—highest since noon yesterday.
53—lowest this morning and during the night.
75,—this day, at noon. a a

BAROMETER, 30.32.
WLND S.E.—light breeze and fine sunshiny weather.

LONDON,

reason to suppose that the extension which has been
anxiougly looked for, will effect any change in public
opinion. Judges who could be entrusted with juris-
diction to the extent of 201. may safely bo authorised
to dispose of similar questions to the value of 50/.,
and there is no greater danger of an abuse of power
in the latter case than in the former.

But we would still desire to see a right of appeal
given in all cases, whether above or under 201.,
with certain' restrictions to prevent abuse of the privi-
lege. The absence of such a power constituted the
chief defect of the former Act. Questions of great
importance may arise where the amount in dispute
between the individual parties may be very trivial,
not exceeding a few shillings, but where the principle
may affect thousands, or even tens of thousands of
pounds. Conflicting decisions may be given on
doubtful points by different judges;; azd it must
not be forgotten that the County Courts have
not the advantages of the attendance of practising
barristers, nor of the regular reports of proceedings,
which afford such great security to the suitors of the
superior courts. The judges of these inferior tri-
bunals have no opportunity of seeing the judgments
of their judicial brethren, or ascertaining the reasons
on which they were founded. The very fact, too, of
their absolute irresponsibility, the knowledge that
there was no tribunal by which their decisions could
possibly be re7ised, might naturally lead to crude
and hasty judgments, and a degree of recklessness
that would not be ventured on under different cir-
cumstances. The country wants " cheap law," but
not " bad law," and the " right of appeal," if it
would not altogether remove the possibility .of the
latter, would, at least, render it a matter of much
less frequent occurrence, and would afford much
greater security against vexatious demands, which
might be founded, not on actual merits, but on some
supposed prejudice or bias of the " judge" for the
time being. The existence of an appellate jurisdic-
tion, which might be resorted to under any circum-
stance, would check many attempts at extortion,
which should be discouraged as far as practicable.
The privilege should. not, however, be bestowed
unless upon full security for payment of the debt and
costs decreed by the County Court Judge, if his judg-
ment should be affirmed f and also of a further reason-
able sum for the probable expenses of the appeal•
Tnis security might be given either by lodging the
sum decided in court,.with, say 61. additional for costs
of appeal,- or by entering into a recognizance, with
two sufficient sureties, to abide the event, which re-
cognizance ' should be made free from stamp
duty. No person would then avail himself
of the privilege unless he had good reason
to believe that he had a valid defence on the merits,
and if such were, the case it.would indeed be impolitic
to refuse, and to turn these tribunals, which might be
a blessing, into a curse to the country.
The only point worthy of notice in the proceedings
of Thursday was a proposition brought forward by
the Hob. and Gallant Gentleman, the Member for the
county of Westmeath, that " barristers of seven
years' standing at the Irish bar should be eligible as
judges of the county courts." This just and reason-
able suggestion was opposed by the Home Secretary,
and negatived by a majority of fifty-three ; sad yet,
strange to say, the motion was purely an act of supe-
rerogation, for Irish barristers of that standing are,
and at all times have been, eligible for the situation.
The introduction of the clause could not, therefore,

have improved their position, and its rejection cannot,
consequently, affect any privilege they already possess.
The persons qualified to act as judges are specified in
the 9th and 10th Victoria, c. 95, a. 9, which enacts
that "the Lord Chancellor shall appoint as many fit
persons as are needed to be judges of the County
Courts under this Act, each of whom shall be a bar-
rister-at-law, who shall be of seven years' standing, or
who shall have practikedi as a barrister and special
pleader fur at least seven years," &c., &c. Now the
phrase " barrister-at-law," in a statute passed in the
Parliament of the United Kingdom, applies to Irish as
well as to English barristers. There is nothing
whatever to limit the application of the phrase. The
Irish barrister is fully entitled to practise in either
House of Parliament. His status in the profession is
fully recognised by the House of Lords, as well as by
the 'House of Commons. How then can it for a mo-
ment be asserted that, if the required standing be ful-
filled, the Irish practitioner is excluded, or disqualified
from receiving the appointment? The proposition was,
therefore, as unnecessary as its rejection was insult-
ieg to a high-minded and honourable body of men
ho, for character and acquirements, need not fear a
comparison with the members of the legal profession
in any country.

The Audit of Railway Accounts Bill (No. 2),
which had come down from the House of Lords, was
on Friday night negatived without a division in the
House of Commons, on the ground that it contained
clauses imposing additional taxation on railway corn-
prmies, and was therefore at variance with the un-
questionable privileges of the popular branch of the
Legislature.- The Right Honourable Gentleman the
President of the Board of Trade, however, obtained
leave to introduce another Bill on the same subject,
and there is no doubt that the rejected measure,
which is one deeply affecting the interests of all rail-
way shareholders, will again be brought forward.

It may appear strange that a matter about which
Ministers appeared so exceedingly anxious in the
commencement of the session, and respecting
which a most unseemly haste was exhibited, should
have been permitted to lie over for so long a period—
that it is now, in the latter end of June, the fifth
month of the session, only commencing its progress,
and that it will still have to pass through all its
stages in both Houses of Parliament. A brief conside-
ration of the circumstances will, however, explain the
causes of this extraordinary delay, and will furnish
an additional illustration of the truth of the old adages
" the more haste tke worse speed." Had Ministers
permitted a reasonable time to the delegates of the
different railway companies to mature a measure that
would be satisfactory to all parties, we should
ere this have bad a Bill which, while it would
have permitted railway shareholders to have enjoyed
the privileges which are not denied to any other
body of Englishmen—the full control and manage-
ment of their own property, would have provided
ample security to the parties interested, and to the
community in general, against any unfair tampering
With the accounts, or wilfully erroneous statements as
to the condition and property of any of these impor-
tant undertakings. The Government, however, de-
sired to carry matters by a coup de main—they de-
sired to constitute a new board, with a considerable
amount of patronage at their disposal. If they waited
for the delegates this pleasing prospect would be
completely removed. The gentlemen selected by the
shareholders felt the severity of the existing
imposts to which railways were subjected and they
were not very likely to approve of, or sanction
any proposition which gave a further unlimited power
of taxation either to the Government or to any board
or body of individuals whatsoever. Neither would
they assent to the publication of the most private
affairs of the companies—not for any alleged advan-
tage to the shareholders, but for the benefit of their
competitors in trade, or with " a view to the rating of
railways"—a reason which the Commissioners gravely
put forward as sufficient to justify their inquisitorial
pryNinogtiimneto,
then, was
wosatsptroivabtee
lost affairsin oofredveerryto recsoemc
up
any;
" Government audit." Unfortunately, a promise bad
been given during the preceding session that Ministers
would take no step if the railway interests could agree
on a Bill that would appear to meet the ex-
igencies of the case. A chosen body of directors
had endeavoured to prepare such a measure, but the
attempt was a failure. They could not agree among
themselves, and, after sundry abortive efforts, they
formally withdrew from the undertaking. It then
remained for the shareholders to make a vigorous
exertion, or to consent to abandon themselves to the
tender mercies of the Board of Trade. The alterna-
tive was by no means pleasing, and consequently the
leading companies, at their ordinary half-yearly
general meetings', held in February and March last,
appointed delegates, in order to prepare a " Rail way
Audit Bill," on behalf of the shareholders. The chief
qualification sought for was an avowed hostility to
the principle of Government interference, or indeed
of any extraneous influence whatsoever in the con-
trol and management of affairs, and an unflinching de-
terinination to preserve for the parties whom they re-
presented the ordinary rights of property.
The delegates thus appointed entered eealously and
energetioallyukoh their duties. They met day after

zeiV
4.3 ff Yl'
.50,T GY,M44.
• —ATM
4 DIE-v • "°'4.'
, ,