The Sun.
London, England, 1844-04-04 00:00:00

SPIRIT of the P-IYVAC OtJ RNALS:
IPR6X THE DAILY PAPERS OP YESTERDAY.
GLQBE.—The Ecclesiastical Couits Bill has passed
from the Upper to, the Lower 4ouse, with a few parting
worth of portentous import to, its reception and success
in the latter assembly. The tord Chancellor, who stood-.
sponsor for the Bill on its intrOdnetiOU to the Lords, and
kindly took charge of it on its passagejlitFOitgli the several
stages of its progress, admitted
.that...it was a weakly
bantling, of little protnise. His. rem-irks implied that
its parents were ashamed of ,it, and felt, little. affection
for its form, and had but
:feint hopes or its life. The
obvious answer to these apologies for the infirmities and
defects of the Dill, was that if not able lo produce some-
thing more. creditable: lo; themselves and, beneficial to
the public interests, the. Ministry had better not have
attempted to 'legislate in the matter: The Bill per-
petuates the diocesan courts— a positive., nuisance—
on the one hand ; and even increases the mis-
chiefs which the present perplexing, and. frequently
injurious, law of• bona notabilia inflicts on the public.
The measure belongs' to the series of law reforms
which were to constitute s large amount of the' superior
claims of the Peel Gceiernment to the confidence of the.
cOteßtry. These vaunted measures have actually had the
effect of damaging its reputation, and making it a pro-
verb of alternate ridicule and reproach. There is not one
of these " reforms" that does not brand its authors
with ignorance, or lay them open to suspicion of
sinister designs; instead of obtaining for them •cre-
dit for being actuated by a sincere intention of
improving the jurisprudence of the country. The
falsely-called improvements in the Court of Chan-
cery ; the alterations in the Bankruptcy Court ;, and
last, not least., their Ecclesiastical• Courts Bill•of lastses-
sion—abandoned, because found too bad to mend ; and
brought forward in the present session, with the best
part left out. These specimens of tinkering in legisla-
tion confer on Lord Lyndhurst, and the other law offi-
cers of the Peel Administration, a reputation as law re-
formers by no means calculated to disarm the hostility
of opponents, or to strengthen the attachment of friends.
The recess will afford an opportunity to the Mem-
bers of the House of Commons, before whom this
notable specimen of Ministerial wisdom will be brought,
to examine its,details. . We trust that such, an exami.-
nation will induce them to determine either to improve
its provisions, or to consign it to the receptacle of re-
jected measures. Let us see how the case stands. A
reference to the former Bill, and to that now in em-
bryo, will illustrate and expose the utter destitu-
tion of all claim to approval by which this new
Ecclesiastical Courts Bill is distinguished. The Bill
purports to be founded on the report of the Eccle-
siastical Courts. Commissioners—a report for the ob-
taining of which, and its publication, the country
(as every one must readily admit) has paid dearly.
That report recommends the total abolition of all dio-
cesan courts, as well as peculiars. The. present Bill
not only does not abolish the diocesan courts, but actually
gives them more power, and a more extensive jurisdic-
tion than they ever, at any time whatever since their
foundation, possessed ; for, by abolishing the peculiars,
it follows, as a matter of eolirse, that th law respect-
ing bona notabilia (by means of which all the probates
and administrations of persons dying possessed of pro-
perty, both in a peculiar and in a diocese, were of
right heretofore granted by the superior court in Lon-
don) is virtually, so far as regards such probates and
administrations, abolished. The business heretofore so
transacted by the superior court in London, is in future
to be done by the diocesan 'courts. Respecting this new
regulation the Administration have spoken out, indeed,
most strongly; insisting upon it in opposition to all
reason; and refusing to give to the head court in London,
even so mach as a concurrent jurisdiction in regard to
those matters over which it had hitherto exercised a sole
jurisdiction. And what excuse (for reason is not a word
that can be applied in such a case) do the Administration
give for this their conduct? All of them, who have yet
spoken on the subject. repeat, as it were mechanically—
possibly on the principle that few " words are best"—" NVo
admit that *hat we are about to do is not right—we ad-
mit our measure will perpetuate a nuisance. We admit it
will do more—it will even increase that nuisance. But,
we are afraid, if we attack these diocesan courts, the
parties ineerested in their retention will be too strong
for us. More than this: we, in order to escape a de-
feat by them, are not only obliged—though a very
strong Ministry—to allow all their present privileges and
luivantages to remain untouched; but—as a sop with
which to stop their moutht—as a bribe by which to
purchase their favour and neutrality, we are com-
pelled to grant to them additional privileges and advan-
tageB, in spite of our own and every body else's con-
viction that we are •by so Ming acting wrongfully—in
spite of the report of the Ecclesiastical Couets.Com-
missioners—and in spite of our own repeated declara-
tions last year, that we never would act as we are now
acting."" These plain and simple facts are admitted by
the Administration—the "strong Administration." They
are not equal to cope with the country practitioners !
This is the excuse, put forward by one and all of
them who have spoken on the subject. Their organ,
the Lord Chancellor himself, . tenderly, courting and
coaxing the country practitioners—kneeling, like ;lover
to his mistress ; afraid of a misunderstanding ; frightened
and timid ; requesting peace and quietness ; pr, like the
lovely goddess as she is described in Virgil :
" At regina, nova pugnai conterrite sorto
Rabat, et ardentem generum moritura tenebat;
Tunic, per has ego te lachrymas, per si quis Amatai
Tanga ones animum; spes to none una senectm,
Tu requies misers ; decus imperiumque Latini
• Te penes; in te Omnis Domus inclinata recumbit."
Te country practitioners, though thus wooed, may,
however, not be won so easily. Like girls whose suitors
are elderly gentlemen, he may want more settled still.
Thus, between demands on one Side and unnecessary and
improper concession on the other, the time occupied by
such a courtship will be vainly frittered away, and the
whole affair at last explode—as all such affairs invariably
do—in the elderly gentleman doing nothing ; the girl
being satisfied with nothing ; and eventually the real
friends and supporters of the venerable lover being
'obliged to interface and put a stop to the absurd
exposure.
STANDARD.—The Houses of Parliament adjourned
last night for- the Easter recess. The House of Lords
to Tuesday, the 16th; the House of Commons to Monday,
the 15th. In the House of Lords, Lord Campbell intro-
duced a Bill to place writs of error in criminal cases upon
a footing similar to that in which appeals to the House
of Lords in civil cases now stand. In the present state of
the law a writ of error in a criminal case does not suspend
the judgment; and the party convicted is subject to re-
ceive sentence, and to be consigned to punishment, just
as if no such appeal Was made ;* in civil cases
every appeal operates 'as a direot suspension of the
judgment of the court appealed from. Lord Campbell's
'Bill would remove this seeming inconsistency, by sus-
pending the judgment of the court in every ease,
whether civil or criminal. There is some speciousness
in the proposition, hut it would be found impossible
adopt it without a total' change in the whole sys-
tem of administering the criminal law—without, in
fact, resorting to the principle of a Frenct Court
'of Cessation. 'At present writs of error are, in
criminal cases, the exception, and a very rare
exception too ; but' let Lord Campbell's Bill become
law, and they will constitute the rule ; every convic-
tion for misdemeanor will be appealed from, and
if the House of Lords is to retain the final
,j'urisdiction it 'will have little time for any other
business, and Must abandon altogether its legislative
luncticms. And then what is to be done with con-
victions' for 'felony ? -Writs of error, in the case of
.suoli .convietiens, cannot now be entered without the
actual bona fide, not perfunctory, consent of the
Attorney--General, and, in fact, seemly one such
writ" is entered in a century. There is, however,
nee 'Fteof of' iffeensistency in the law in the rarity
• of such appals, for while the judgment in all
CageB ' erect imn*:tll.4tely—non obstante " a
writ of • ettrtit"---the convii:t felon has little in-
terest 'in prosoCuting an appeal, the result of which
is not CO ISe known until after he is hanged
Or transported;•er has Suffered his sentence of imprison-
-tnent 6er/hipping. 'But would the country permit, that.
while the person. exposed. to. a a comparatively trifling
offence should, as a matter almost of course; avail him-
self of -the 'entices-of a second -trial, the unhappy
wretclir6orned to'th& ghllows or to exile'should have no
• eneh advaUtage? This, we are persuaded, -is what
the country would not bear. The AttorncyLGeneral
would be compelled to oonst.nt to, writs of error_
in cases of felensy *aim ti is- oveebnipiitleir Conieiit to
sack writs in cases of misdemeanour; and the 'Whole
adeninistrati(m of -the crithinst law would *mime a new
face. Whether this would be, or-would not be, an im-
proaement we, do; not at present say farther than
this, that hawing n- somethrig
the French Court of "Ca) t' of the working of
ought
to
be
any
appeal,.
suspending
evee'rt;hink it. werks
veil. The question iS :oat "51111 * whether there
. criminal cases, but whether iee the judgment in
as. wetliere 'be any, it ought
net to extend to felonies ato ! misdemeanours ;
would whether It ouhl he possible the House of
Lords to discharge the duties of the commonr court of
appeal in addition to its present duties t The e ffe t
of Lord Campbell's Bill r°
would be to th w upon
- the Ifouse, sooner or later; the whole of this 1-eel,
- unless some other court of appeal should he es°ta‘ b-
• fished. Lord Camppell explained that as his kill
is not _to take effect until the Ist of August, it
cannot operate *on the proceeding% against Mr.
O'Connell and his accomplices—we do not see the
necessity of the inference. The' Irish' convicts are to
• be brought up for judgment, we believe,' on the 15th,
and even suppose them committed in execution
upon that day, they may easily enough perhaps
fight off the decision of their writ of error until
the lit of August, when, under the terms of Lord
- Campbell's Bill, they would be let loose for the summer
agitation with little more than three months' imprison-
meab—the old penalty of an innocent insolvent. There
:is, however, little danger that the Bill will pass, though
we hope' that the Consideration of extending the oppor-
'Unity of fairly appealing.from all conviction in crinii-
":ls&l eases may continue to engage the minds of the Le-
gislature. • - -• -•

STATE OF TRADE.' ~ k
(From the Manchester Guardian of Saturday.)
The severe depression in the yarn market, to which
we adverted last week, still continues, and the low-rates
at which a few sales wore then made, have now become
the current market prices. This decline appears tot have
;'the
a little more confidence to <buyers, and although
,tihe amount of actual business.done- has not been very
largei thiwe is more itisposition .to give orders than for
some time post- The goods market is rather firmer-than
-last week, au&s.,tolerable amostnt of business has been
i done at the.prleas of last week. .
Roctiiiiats. FLANNEL MAARET, MONI),LT, APRIL' I.
We,have had ocm,siderably•less inquiry for goods to-day
!than. onthe: tw't preceding. Mondays; and a- rather li-
lift-el quarititytts o d, at copper-prices. At this time of
tht....1454.2v! 'the 0341}PiPpineis generally. begins
to ue- ziN4l* Vstie9gilinues so till after Mtdsiggllaer.,
0
Wood ism the same, both in pricy sal demand, as it'
has been fa some weeks past.