The Sun.
London, England, 1850-07-09 00:00:00

THE COUNTY COURTS EXTENSION BILL.

Lord BEAUMONT, in moving the second reading of
this Bill, said that Parliament had already adopted the
principle that it ought to make justice cheap and ac-
cessible to the people. The Bill establishing County
Courts had, since its passing in the month of April,
1847, been eminently successful. It had been success-
ful in two ways; first, with respect to the number of
debts recovered in_ consequence of the intervention of
those courts; and secondly, _it had produced the most
beneficial results by inducing many persons to pay debts
who would never have paid them if they had not
been aware that justice could easily be ob-
tained in those courts. He found that during
the year 1847 there bad been issued under
the Act 429,215 summonses, and that 267,445
cases had ben tried. In the year 1848, the
number of summonses had been 427,611, and the num-
ber of cases tried had amounted to 259,118. He believed
that the sum recovered in those courts during the two
years might be fairly estimated at 2,730,0001. But under
the present Act no sum above 201. could be recovered in
those courts; and one consequence of that provision had
been that many persons to whom sums of 30/., or 401., or
43/ had been due, had actually abandoned a portion of
their claims, so that they might be able to bring them
before tribunals so cheap and so accessible. Now it was
manifest that such a system offered an inducement to
fraudulent debtors to cheat their creditors. Another
great advantage of those courts was that the parties
themselves were allowed to give evidence before them;
and it had been ascertained that the arrangement had
led to an immediate settlement of a great number of
cases. Some complaints had been made as to the amount
of the fees in those courts, but he could not think that
that amount was extravagant. Such were the general
principles pf the Bill which he proposed for a second
reading. He was prepared to go into a discussion with
respect to the objections made to the details of some of
the clauses, but he believed-it would be better to delay
those discussions until they went into Committes. When
they did he would be ready to meet them. He concluded
by asking their Lordships to agree to the second reading
of the Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM considered the present Bill was
of great importance, and complimented his Noble Friend
on the clear and lucid manner in which he had performed
his task of moving the second reading of it. With re-
spect to the number of verdicts which had been returned
for small auras, so far as he could ascertain from an ac-
count he had received with respect to one spring assizes,
they had amounted to 188, and were for sums not ex-
ceeding 151. or 161. On that question, as on all others,
be should be open to conviction; for he believed tbat the
Act had worked well. In 1833 he had brought in a
measure of a somewhat similar character to that now
proposed; but though he had the benefit of the valuable
suggestions of his Noble and Learned Friend Lord
Lyndhurst, after a reference to a Special Committee
to amend its details, the Bill had been lost in their
Lordships' House. Ho would reserve himself for the
Committee, to move certain amendments in detail, which
he thought would be necessary to make the measure more
perfect.
Lord CAMPBELL said, considering the office he had
the honour to hold, he thought it would not be out of
the way if ho should make some few observations on a
Bill which was so important to the administration of
justice. He had been in favour of the County Courts
Bill. He thought it might be very beneficial to extend its
powers ; but at the same time he confessed he should
have been better satisfied to see how that Bill worked,
and where it might be extended.—(Hear, hear.) But
as the opinion of the country appeared strong in favour
of the present measure, he felt no wish to oppose the mo-
tion for the second reading. He thought it might be
extended beneficially so far as the amount of debt re-
coverable. But so far as actions of tort were concerned,
he would warn their Lordships against any rash ex-
tension of a summary jurisdiction to the County
Courts. There were actions of seduction, of
slander, of assault and battery, and other cases
in which the suit could not be reasonably
carried on without a written declaration on the part
of the plaintiff. It was common to speak of the un-
certainty of legal proceedings, and of the dilatori-
ness of the law. But he could tell their Lordships
that nine-tenths of the time of the judges was spent in
trying to put a construction upon ill-made Acts of Par-
liament.—(Hear and laughter.) With respect to ques-
tions of common law there was no such time lost. He
had no objection to extend the jurisdiction of the Act
with respect to debts, but he cautioned their Lordships
against extending it in actions of tort. He did not
think he should be able to be present at the discussion
of any future stages of the Bill, but he felt confident
their Lordships would give it all the attention which it
demanded at their hands.
Lord BEAUMONT, in reply, said that it was parti-
cularly in actions of tort that the benefit of the exten,
sion of the Bill would be mainly found.
The Bill was then read a second time.
_ BENEFICES IN PLURALITY BILL.

Lord LYTTELTON moved that the House should go
into Committee on the above Bill.
Their Lordships accordingly resolved themselves into
Committee, the Earl of SHATTESIBUBY presiding.
A clause was proposed by the Archbishop of Canter-
bury, and also by the Bishop of Oxford. Amendments
were proposed by Lord Lyttelton, Earl Powis, Lord
Redesdale, and other Noble Lords and Right Rev. Pre-
lates, and after a long and desultory discussion, the Bill
passed through Committee, and was ordered to be re-
ported, with amendments, to-morrow (this day).
UPTON-CUM-CHALVEY MARRIAGES VALI-