The Sun.
London, England, 1850-09-03 00:00:00

‘' E
N°. 18,079. LONDON, TUESDAY - 6 S
N SEPTEMBER 3, 1850.
=

DXSPUTZD /arm POLICIES.

" A trial of considerable Interest to Life Assurance Offices and the
public was concluded yesterday in the Court of Exchequer. The
Eagle Company held a policy for an assurance of 5391. in the Albion
Company as security for an advance, the payment of which policy
was now disputed by the Albion, on the ground that at the time it
was effected the fact of the assured party having been a man of in-
temperate habits was concealed from the office. The chief evidence
turne i upon the question as to the degree of intemperance that had
been exhibited, and the resu:t was, that a verdict was given against
the resisting office, not only for the amount of the policy, but also for
401. interest from the date when it became due. The circumstance
' of the action being brought by one office against another presents a
striking illustration of the uncertainty which may attach to all po-
licies under the present system, and shows that the only mode by
orb ch absolute security can be obtained by the public must lie in the
general adoption by Assurance Offices of the plan of prote sting them-
selves In every case by due inquiries before the gr.ntirn f each po-
licy, and of afterwards assuming the full responsibility of the com-
pleteness of such inquiries by holding themselves precluded from
raising any future question. In the present case two offices aro
found to be diametrically opposed in their opinions as to what can
properly invalidate a claim, and yet the public are expected to be
able to guare themselves against such contingences. Similar cases
have occurred before, and even if they were more rare, they would
seriously injure the progress of life assurance. The very principle
upon which the business is founded is the removal of uncertainty,
and whenever that principle is counteracted in the slightest degree,
the people who would be the first to resort to its advantages are the
first to be deterred."—Times, July 11, 1850.

THE LONDON INDISPUTABLE LIFE
POLICY COMPANY
No. 72, LOMBARD-S FREET, LONDON.
TRUSTEES.
1. Campbell Renton, Esq., M.P. Richard Spooner, Esq., M.P.
Richard Malins, Esq., Q.C. I James Fuller Madox, Esq.
William Wilberforce, Esq.
DIRECTORS.

William Adams, Esq.
John Atkins, Esq.
Henry Augustus Bevan, Esq.
J. Thompson Bramwell, Esq.
Jehn Dangerfleld, Esq.

Robert Henry Forman, Esq.
John Hamilton, Esq.
fames Fuller Madox, Esq.
John Matthews, Esq.
0. Octavius Parnell, Esq.
AUDITORs.
;James Turner, Esq.
'David Henry Stone, Esq.

GPorg.Cumming, Esq.
William D. Starling, Esq.

SECRETARY—David Alison, Esq.
BANKERB—Vessra. Spooner, Attwoods. and Co.
PADDINGTON LOCAL BOARD. f
24, Connaught-terrace, Edgeware•road.
Rev. James Sherbold Boone, A.3l_, Stanhope-street, Hyde-park.

Captain Creed, Norfolk-crescent, Oxford-square.
Charles Pemberton, Esq., Eastbourne-terrace, Hyde-park, and Lin•

coin's Tnn-flrlds.
Thomas Jervis Araos, Esq., York-street, Portman-square.
George Y. Robson, Esq., Eastbourne-terrace, Hyde-park, and New
square, Lincoln's Inn

Secretary, Chas. Hoghton, Esq.

The POLICIES of this Company, being-INDISPUTABLE, form
Family Provisions and Negotiable Securities, for their validity is not
dependent, as in the case of ordinary Policies, upon the import of
previous reports and other documents.
Owing to this important improvement in the practice of Life As-
qtrance, the progress of this Company has been rapid from the com-
mencement of its business, and is steadily advancing.
Copies of the Report of the last Annual Meeting will be forwarded,
on application, to Solicitors, to whom Commission is allowed.
ALEXANDER ROBERTSON, Manager.

CATHOLIC LAW AND GENERAL LIFE
ASSURANCE COMPANY,
8, NEW COVENTRY-STREET, LEICESTER-SQUARE, LONDON.
The FOURTH ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING of the Proprie-
tors of this Company took place on the 25th instant, at the Head
Office, at One o'clock precisely. The following is extracted from the
report, which is too lengthy for publication :
During the past year no claims have arisen from deaths in England,
and but two in Ireland—one for 5001. and the other for 2801.—making
together 7001., which have been paid. This is far below the expected
mortality, and is especially favourable, when It is remembered how
severely the life offices generally suffered from the epidemic of last
year.
The number of lives assured between the Ist of June, 1849, and
the 31st of May, 1850, wasinore than double the number issued in
the twelve months preceding.
Prop ,sacs were made for 138 Policies, amounting to 52,9631.25. 6d.:
of these 121, comrrising 106 lives, were accepted for 45,1251. 6s.
sixteen Policies lapsed, representing 6,0481., upon which 3201. 35.
was received by the Company in the shape of premiums.
Since the c _mmeneement of the Company to the Ist of June last,
assurances were effected to the extent of 110,9721. 12s 6d., pro-
ducing in annual premiums 3,7321. 1 Is. 6d. Of these 54 lapsed,
amounting to 23,9901. 16s. 6d., of which the annual premiums were
7411. ls., leaving the yearly income on the Ist of June last equal to
2,9911. 15e. I ld.
since last meeting loans were applied for to the extent of 17,700/.,
but 1,1831. I Is. 10d. only was advanced.
The Directors were also highly gratified to report that within the
last four months !hey had considerably extended their business on
the Continent, having appointed, as Head Agent in France, Monsieur
de l'Etang, a gentleman of high standing ill Paris, distinguished for
his integrity and ability in financial and in all assurance matters,
who. under the sanction and patronage of the Archbishop of Paris,
the Cardinal Archbishop of Lyons, and Monseigneur Par.sis, Eveque
de Langres, has already within the last three months effected a con•
siderable amount of business, not only in Life Assurances, but in An-
nuities both Immediate and Deferred.
After various resolutions, approving of the Report, and returning
thanks to the Right Reverend Chairman, Bishop Morris, the Vice-
Chairman, Actuary, Secretary, and Medical Officers of the establish-
ment, the meeting separated, highly gratified at its present results
and future prospects.

THE LIVERPOOL and LONDON FIRE and
LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that on and after the 29th day
of September next, the Chief Office of this Company In London will
be REMOVED to Nos. 20 and 21, POULTRY.
3, Charlotte-row, Mansion-house.
BENJN. HENDERSOZT,
Resident Secretary.
24th August, 1850.

THE PARLOUR LIE
The Publishers beg to si
ORKS, lately out of print, are ai
had of every Bookseller and at all
the following popular Authors ha
Library :
A, Lamartine.
G. P. It. James.

BRARY, Is. each Volume.
state that all G. P. R. JAMES'S
igain RE-PRINTED, and may be
1 the Railway Stations. Works by
awe also appeared in the Parlour

T. C. Grattan.
Madame Reybaud.

~. . ~..,....„.. _
Washington Irving. Mrs. S. C. Hall.
Miss Milford. George Sand.
Author of " Emilia Wyndham." Rodelph Toppfer.
Augustus La Fontaine. Leitch Ritchie.
Miss Austen. The O'Hara Family.
William Carleton. W. Meinhold.
Gerald Griffin. Paul de Kock.
Mary Howitt. Alex. Dumas.
Simms and Wlntyre, 13, Paternoster-row, London, of whom pro-
spectuses may be had gratis on application, or free by post.

PROFESSOR YOUNG'S MENSURATION.
Just putilished, in 12m0., price 4s. cloth,
AN INTRODUCTORY TREATISE ON
MENSURATION, intended for the Use of Schools and Pri-
vate Students

By J. R. YOUNc4,
Late Professor of Mathematics in the Royal Belfast Academical In-
stitut on, Author of " A Treatise on Algebra," " Elements of Geo-
metry," &c., &c.
Simms and M'lntyre, 13, Paternoster-row, London ; and Donegal-
street, Belfast.

APPETITE AND DIGESTION IMPROVED.
LEA and PERRINS' WORCESTERSHIRE
SAUCE imparts the most exquisite relish to Steaks; Chops,
and all Roast Meat Gravies, Fish, Game, Soup, Curries, and Salad,
and by its tonic ard invigorating properties enables the stomach to
perfectly digest the food.
The daily use of this aromatic and delicious Sauce is the best safe-
guard to health.
Sold by the proprietors, Lea and Perrins, 6, Vere-street, Oxford-
street, London, and 68, Broad-street, Worcester; also by Messrs.
Barcla and Sons, Messrs. Crosse and Blackwell, and other Oilmen
and Myerchants, London ; and generally by the principal dealers in
sauce.
N.B. To guard against imitations, see that the names of " LEA
and PER RINS" are upon the label and patent cap of the bottle.

THE GREAT REMEDY FOR
BLOOD ALL DISEASES IS TO PURIFY
TE .
pA R R'S LIFE - PILLS.
It is universally admitted that this fine Medicine will purify
the Blood better than any other, and WILL CONQUER any
Disease.
None are genuine, unless the words " PARR'S LIFE PILLS"
are in White Letters on a Red Ground on the Government Stamp,
pasted round each box ; also the lac-simile of the signature of the
Proprietors, " T. ROBERTS and Co., Crane-court, Fleet-street,
London," on the Directions.
Sold in boxes at Is. 11Ad„ 2s. 9d., and family packets at I ls.
each, by all respectable Medicine-venders.

DR. LA'MERT ON THE SECRET INFIRMITIES OF YOUTH
AND MATURITY.-WITH 40 COLOURED ENGRAVINGS ON

STEEL.
Just pulished, and ma be had in French or English, in a Sealed
Envelbope, 2s. 6d., or post-free, from the Author, for forty-two
stamps,
SELF-PRESERVATION; a
Medical Treatise on the Physiology of Marriage, and on
the Secret Infirmities and Disorders of Youth and Maturity,
usually acquired at an early period of life, which debilitate
the physical and mental powers, diminish and enfeeble the natural
feelings, and exhaust the vital energies of Manhood ; with Practical
Observations on the Treatment of Nervous Debillt,-; and Indigestion,
whether arising from these causes, close study, er the influence of
tropical climates: Local and Constitutional Weakness, Syphilis,
Stricture, and all Diseases and Derangements resulting from !mils-
?.retion. With Forty coloured Engravings, illustrating the
anatomy, Physiology, and Diseases of the Reproductive Organs,
explaining their strnctui es, uses, and functions, and the various
injuries that are produced in them by solitary habits, excesses, and
infection. BY SAMUEL LAWERT, M.D..
37. BEDFORD-SQUARE. LONDON.
Doctor of Medicine. Matriculated Member of the University of Edin-
burgh, Licentiate of Apothecaries' Hall, London, Honorary Member
of the London Hospital Medical Society, &c.
This work contains an accurate and complete account of the
Anatomy and Physiology of the Reproductive gans. It un-
fortunately happens that the unhappy victim of eOr xcessive indul-
gence and vicious habits, while suffering tom their invariable con-
sequences, unwisely entertains a fear of ap Aping to a qualified physi-
cian for relief. Shame and the dread so frequently, but erro-
neously entertained that these complaints are beyond the reach of
art, alike restrict him and prevent his seeking or assistance where
alone it can be procured. Dr. LA 'MERT has taken the highest
medical honours, as his diplomas testify, and the great extent of his
practice far many years is a guarantee for his professional experi-
ence. which has reference almost solely to the treatment of these

diseases.
Published by the Author, and may be had of Kent and Richards,
52, Paternoster-row; Hannay, 63, Oxford-street; Starie, Tichhorne-
street, Haymarket; Mann, 39, Cernhill ; Gordon, 146, Leaden-
hall-street, London ; or, tree by post for torty-two stamps. from
the Author's Residence. Be4n,e-smisre r.oroon,

THIRTY-FIRST EDITION.
Illustrated by 26 Anatomical Coloured Emgravin'rs on Steel.
ON PHYSICAL DISQUALIFICATIONS, GENERATIVE INCA-
PACITY, AND IMPEDIMENTS TO MARRIAGE.

New Edition, enlarged to 196 pages. Just pu'ilished, price 2s. 6d., or
by post, direct from the Establishment. 35 6d. in postage stamps,
THE SILENT FRIEND, a Medical Work on
the infirmities and decay of the generative system, from ex-
cessive indulgence, infection, and the inordinate use of mercury,
with remarks en Marriage, and the means of obviating certain dis-
qualifications. Illustrated by 26 Coloured Engravings. By R. and
L. PERRY and CO., Consulting Surgeons, 19, Berrers-street, Ox-
cord-street, London. Published by the Authors sold by Strange,
11, Paternoster-row ; Hannay, 63, and Sanger, 150, Oxford-street ;
Starie, 23, Titchborne-street, Haymarket; and Gordon, 146, Leaden-
hall-street.
PART I. treats of the anatomy and physiology of the re-productive
organs, and is illustrated by Six Coloured Engravings.
PART 11. treats of the co,fsequences resulting from excessive in-
dulgence, and their lamentable effects on the system, producing
mental and bodily weakness, nervous excitement, and generative
incapacity. Illustrated by Three Explanatory Engravings.
PART 111. treats of the diseases resulting from iniection, either in
the primary or secondary form, and contains explicit directions for
their treatment. This section is illustrated by Seventeen Coloured
Llngi avi figs.
PART IY. contains a Remedy for the PreventiOn of Disease by a
simple application, by which the danger of infection is obviated.
This important part of the Work should not escape the reader's
notice.
PART V. is devoted to the consideration of marriage, and its du-
ties. The causes of unproductive union are also considered, and the
whole subject critically and philosophically inquired into.
TILE CORDIAL BALM OF SVittAcUm IS exclusively employed in
treating nervous and sexual debility, impotence, &c., I Is. and 335.
per bottle. The Concentrated Detersive Essence, an anti-syphilitic
remedy, for purifying the blood in cases of infection, secondary
symptoms, eruptions, and the abuse of mercury. 1 Is. and 335. per
bottle. Perry's Purifying Specific Pills, 2s •9d., 4s. 6 and
per box, a certain remedy for gonorrhoea, gleet, stricture, and
chronic inflammation of the bladder. eultation fee, if by letter,
ii. A. minute detail of the case is required: age, habits, and posi-
tion in society. 11. Packets, with advice, to be had at the Vsta-
blishment only by which the fee, 1/., is saved. Messrs. Perry,
Barifeon.s, are in attendance djily at 19, Berners-street, Oxford-
street, London. from Eleven tar Two and Five to Eight; on Sun-
-447 ton Zama to Om

CREMORNE GARDENS,
On the Banks of the Thames at Chelsea.
Open Daily at Three o'clock.
ONE SHILLING ADMISSION.
Children, lialf-price.
Sundays at Half-past Four. No charge for admission except by
rtefresbment Card—Sixpence. Children under Six years of age free.
Director, Mr. T. B. Simpson, Albion, Great Russell-street, Co-
vent garden.

THIS DAY, September 3,
Immense Success of Deulin's new Fairy Ballet. " The Origin of
Harlequin." New Groupings from the Antique. Dancing to
Borim's Band of Fifty Instrumentalists. Madame Antonio
will make her marvellous Ascent and Descent on the Rope amid
hurric sues of Chevalier Mortram's gorgeous Fireworks. Chattaway's
celebrated Brass Band.

In active preParati;n, a Grand Chinese Fete.
On Saturd ty, for the future, the usual entertainments will be pre-
sented, instead of the Bal al Fresco, and the usual charge for adults-
slot( restored, viz., Is.

Ladies and gentlemen can here enjoy the health-promoting elegant
exercise of the graceful bow, with the advantage of proper instruc-
tm, gratis ! Shooting three dozen arrows, Is. Matches for Dinner,
Wine, and a Prize Bow are always open. Tickets, 10s. 6d. each, to
be had of Mr. Teetgen, Archery Manufactory, 164, Bishopsgate•
street.

The Magic Cave—The Shooting Gallery—Burns's Cottage,
with Groups of Figures illustrative of his Works—Summer and
Winter in the Arctic Regions—The Maze—Statuary of the finest
Classical description, &c., &c.

. ,
Be it recollected, on Sundays, admission by Refreshment Ticket,
Sixpence.

Never were these delightful grounds In such high perfection
as at the present moment. Visitors to London should not omit a
stroll 'neath the shade of the lofty trees and amongst the variegated
beds of flowers at Cremorne. Everything has been done to render
this magnificent place of amusement worthy the most extensive
patron dge.

The attention of the French in London is particularly requested to
this metropolitan ducosse.

The grand Bowling Saloon of this establishment is open free to the
Public.

N.B. The Mammoth Sycamore, the Largest Tres in the World,
in the River Esplanade.
A Table d'Hote on Sundays at Six o'clock—Half-a-Crown.
Cremorne can be reached by road or river for 3d.
A Boat leaves Battersea-bridge every Night after the Fireworks.

SIR R. PEEL ON OFFICIAL SALARIES.

The following is extracted from the evidence an-
nexed to the House of Commons' Report on Official
Salaries :
Sir Robert Peel, Baronet, a Member of the House,
examined :
You have filled a great number of most important
offices in the Government of this country, will you be
kind enough to enumerate them?--I held the office of
Under Secretary of State in the War and Colonial de-
partment from 1810 to 1812. From that office I was
removed to the office of Chief Secretary for Ireland in
August 1810, and remained Chief Secretary with three
Lord Lieutenants, from 1812 to 1818; with the Duke
of Richmond, during a portion of his lieutenancy;
with Lord Whitworth during the whole period of his
lieutenancy; and with Lord Talbot, during a por-
tion of his lieutenancy. At the commencement of 1822,
I was Secretary of State for the Home Department, and
remained in that office till the spring of 1827, when Mr.
Canning's Government was appointed. In December,
1828, I again accepted the same office, that of Secre-
tary of State for the Home Department, and retained
it until November, 1830, when on the meeting of Par-
liament the Duke of Wellington's Government re-
aigned, and Lord Grey became First Minister. In
Deci mber, 1834, I accepted the office of First Lord of
the Treasury, together with that of Chancellor of
the Exchequer, and remained in office holding those two
appointments until April, 1835, not more than four or
live months. In September, 1841, I accepted the office
of First Lord of tl,e Treasury, without the office of
Chancellor of the Exchequer, and remained in office till
July, 1846.

From the general experience you must have had in
those different public offices, the Committee are anxious
that you should afford them any assistance in your
power in coming to a right opinion as to whether
.tny, and if any, what reductions are capable of
being made, without injury to the public service, in
any of those different -departments which have been
referred to them for consideration; I could first place
in your hands a paper which has been delivered
in by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, containing a
list of the offices referred to in the first part of the
reference, namely, those held during the pleasure of
the Crown by Members of either House of Parlia-
ment voted in the annual estimates?—l will take the
reference to the Committee. The Committee is ap-
pointed "To inquire into the salaries and emolu-
ments of offices held during the pleasure of the
Crown by Members of either House of Parliament voted
in the annual estimates ; and also into the salaries and
emoluments of judicial offices in the superior courts of
law and equity in the United Kingdom, and into the re.
tiring pensions allotted to the judges, and also into
the expense of diplomatic establishments charged on the
Consolidated Fund." I will first mention those branches
of inquiry with respect to which the Committee can obtain
from other quarters more full and more recent information
than that which Jean give. With respect for instance to the
diplomatic establishments, it is scarcely necessary, on
that account, for me to give an opinion upon them. I will
however, take the liberty of referring the Committee to a
return which was presented in 1830, shewieg the charge
of his Majesty's diplomatic service abroad, from 1822 to
1829, both inclusive ; distinguishing the several heads
of charge. At that period the charge for the diplo-
matic service did not come under the annual notice
of Parliament ; it was provided from the Civil List,
not by vote of Parliament. In the year 1828-29, Lord
Aberdeen took a general review of the expenses of the
diplomatic establishments, and after that review so un-
dertaken by him, there were considerable reductions in
the amount of charge. The paper gives the expenses
from the sth of January, 1822, to the sth of January,
1830, both inclusive. It distinguishes the various mis-
sions from the Consuls and other heads of charge, and
the total charge of every kind under the heads of extra-
ordinary and iticidental expenses, commissions under the
treaties with foreign powers, missions to the new
States of America, consular establishments, pensions
to retired ministers, superannuation allowances to
consuls. It embraces, therefore, every charge of every
kind on account of diplomatic and consular service.

•
Taking the account from 1525, I find that the following
are the charges for the several years from 1825 to
1829. In 1825, the total charge was 418,637/.; in 1826,
459,5381.; in 1827, 412,8591.; in 1828, 407,1171.; and in
1829, it was reduced to 366;004/. There may have been
causes accounting in part for that reduction, as, for in-
stance, the discontinuance of some missions. I do not
bear in mind the details, but I know that Lord Aberdeen,
beiug then Secretary of State for the Foreign Depart-
ment, undertook the consideration of the whole expendi-
ture, and I consider that the saving which took place in
1829 was mainly attributable to the measures which he
took to revise the diplomatic establishment. I believe
that in subsequent years the reductions made by him
were fully adopted by the Government which succeeded,
and were carried in some instances still further. The
progress of reduction was continued. I think that is the
whole information I can give with respect to diplomatic
service of any importance. With respect to judicial
offices, I cannot give the Committee any information
upon them so good as that which they can derive from
other sources.
You were for a long time Secretary of State for the
Home Department; is it your opici .n, looking at the
general scale of allowances to the judges, that any dimi-
nution can be made in them without detriment to the
public service?—During the period when I was Secre-
tary of State, there was an increase made both to the
salaries of the judges and to their retiring allowances;
and I am sure that that increase was founded at the time
upon the difficulty of inducing men of the highest cha-
racter at the bar, possessing the qualifications most re-
quired for the judicial office, to accept it.
In what year was that?—lt was in 1825, during Lord
Liverpool's Government.
Are you of opinion that any reductions might now be
made without producing inconvenience with respect to
finding fit and adequate persons to undertake those
offices?—My attention has not been much directed to
the subject. I have a doubt whether the retiring allow-
ance of the judge does not bear an undue proportion to
the amount of his salary, and whether that allowance
might not admit of some reduction.
Have you considered the proportion which those sa-
laries bear to one another with reference to one or two
of the offices of which the salaries are the largest, for
instance, that of the Master of the Rolls?—I have not
given any particular attention to that subject.
Mr. Walter—Are you aware of any particular occa-
sion on which the difficulty to which you have alluded
was experienced, of inducing suitable men to accept the
judicial office?—l am speaking now with respect to a
period more than twenty years ago; I do not bear in
mind the nacres of any particular members of the bar
who declined judicial office; the increase of salary was
made in the year 1825, and I think the ground of the
increase was a representation from the Lord Chancellor
as to the difficulty of inducing men, of the highest qua-
lifications for judicial office, to abandon the profession.
That was the general ground; the particular cases to
which that statement may have referred I do not bear in
mind.
Mr. Deedes—Supposing that professional incomes now
were on the average less than at the time you have al-
luded to, perhaps that difficulty would not exist to the
same amount at the present time?—Of course, so far as
that was the ground of the increase;- but I have no in-
formation upon the fact, whether they do make less or
riot.
Chairman—During the time that you were First Lord
of the Treasury, from 1841 to 1846, was any difficulty
experienced in securing the greatest talent at the bar to
fill the office of judge?—l do not recollect any instance
during that period.
Mr. Ellice—Are you aware of any distinction between
the duties of' the Master of the Rolls and those of the
other judges in the Court of Chancery below the Great
Seal, which would render it necessary or expedient to
pad a larger salary to the Master of the Rolls than to
either of the Vice-Chancellors, for instance?—No; I am
not aware of any; I have not paid much attention to
that subject.
_

Mr. Bright—Will you state whether the union of ju-
dicial and political offices in the Lord Chancellor is not
the occasion of increasing the expenFes in the retiring
allowance department, inasmuch as on a change of Go-
vernment there is a change of 01- ancellors, and the Lord
Chancellor after his elevation not going hack to his pro-
fession becomes entitled to a large retiring allowance;
and is it not the fact, in consequence, that there are three
or four ex-Chancellors receiving large pensions at the
same time ?—I apprehend that the persons receiving re-
tiring allowances are, in England, Lord Brougham and

Lord Lyndhurst; in Ireland, Sir Edward Sugden and
Lord Plunkett. If I am correct in the enumeration,
there must be four at least.
Is there any ii,surrnountable objection to the separa-
tion of those offices, the judicial and political, so that the
frequent possession of a retiring allowance by an ex-
Chancellor might be avoided ?—I do not know that there
is any insuperable tbstacle. It is a matter which has
• i,f,en been taken into consideration, but I think the
general result of the c insideration has been in favour of
retaining the political and the judicial functions united.
There has been so much advantage to the Cabinet from
having the assistance of the highest equity judge, that
objections have always been made to the separation of
the two offices.
You do not imagine that the frequent change of the
highest judge in the realm, a change arising from poli-
tical considerations alone, is prejudicial to the interests
of justice on the whole?—l have not sufficient profes-
sional knowledge to answer very positively. I have no
proof before me of any actual injury sustained by it.
It is a very complicated and extensive subject, to which
it would be difficult to do justice in an answer to a
question.
Mr. Evans—Are you of opinion that even if the
judges' retiring allowance were more than it is, they
would retire any sooner than the state of their health
obliged them to retire?—l think there is great unwil-
lingness on the part of a judge to abandon his office
until he is really disabled from performing the duties of it.
Mr. Bright—Have you any information with regard to
the number and the labours of the judges in Ireland?—
No; it is very long since I held office in Ireland. My
impression is, that comparing the duties of the judges in
Ireland with those of the judges in England, the judicial
establishment in Ireland is large.
Are you aware that there have been alterations in the
system in Ireland by the establishment and extension of
Assistant Barristers' Courts, by which the labours of
the assizes have been very much diminished, and that,
in some cases, the progress of the judge is rather a pro-
gress of observation than of labour?—l have that gene-
ral opinion; but the Committee would get much better
information respecting the amount of the judicial busi-
ness in Ireland from other sources. It has not come
particularly under my review, aad any estimate that I
can form must be a very vague one. The Committee
can get information as to the amount of business done
by the Irish courts, and as to the diminution of it, if
any, more full and complete than any that I can give.
Mr. Ricardo—With regard to the retiring pensions
of the judges, do you know what the reason is of a
different principle being adopted with respect to the
Lord Chacellor, as distinguished from the other judges,
with reference to the period of service which en-
titles him to a pension?—The Lord Chancellor holds
his office by a much more precarious tenure than the

other judges. He is not independent of the pleasure of
the Crown; he is subject to the loss of office from

_
a change in the Government; and that, I apprehend, is
the reason for the power to grant to the Lord Chan-
eel'or a retiring allowance after a very limited period of
service. In the case of a judge in one of the superior
courts in Westminster-hall, you require a considerable
number of years' service before the grant of a pension.
Those judges are entirely independent of the Crown, and
hold their offices during life.
Do you consider the Lord Chancellor in the light of a
political person, or of a judicial person?—The retiring
ension is considered part of the inducement to a mau of
the highest reputation at the bar to leave the profession,
and to embark in political life, being subject to the con-
tingency of a sudden loss of power.
Do you think it impossible to estimate the retiring
pensions in the salaries of the judges and of the Lord
Chancellor?—l think you are liberty, in calculating the
t emoluments of the judge, to consider the retire-
..

went which he bas in prospect, as well as the amount of
actual salary which is paid to him during his tenure of
office; it is a fair element in considering the amount of
salary to be enjoyed by him.
Could it not all be put into the salary; could not you
give him a certain salary, and leave it to the individual
h mself to provide for the future?—You would propose
that the salary of the judge should be increased to, say
6,0001. a year, or any other given sum, instead of 5,0001.,
and that there should be no retiring allowance. That

the contingent interest in the retiring allowance should
be merged in actual salary, as the judge would of course
remain entirely independent of the will of the Crown,
and hold his office subject only to removal on an address
of either House of Parliament, I think you would find
that the judges would retain their offices a very long
period.
Your objection to the judge being left to himself to
provide for the future is that he would ret sin his office
longer than he' would be capable of exercising the func•
tions of it properly?--Thera would be a tendency to that
in the case of an office entirely independent of the
Crown, and from which the holder is removable only on
an address of either House of Parliament. If you
allotted to the office a high salary and no retiring al-
lowance, there would be a tendency in the judge to retain
the office and the high salary to the latest moment, in-
stead of retiring into privacy, there being no provision
on retirement; I think that would be the result.
That is an argument for retiring pensions generally, in
all cases, is it not?—No, not in cases where the person
holds office subject to the pleasure of the Crown; but in

the case of offices held for life, or quamdiu se bent ges-
serit, there is an advantage in holding out the prospect of
a retiring allowance after long and faithful service rather
than increasing the salary of the office.
Mr. Cobden—Might not the objection be partly met
by fixing a certain period of life beyond which the judge
should not occupy the bench?—lf you advert to the his-
tory of the judges, you will find it a very delicate and
difficult matter to limit the period of their service; you
will find several judges who have attained the greatest
eminence, have rendered the greatest ,service, and have
performed their duties most actively and usefully at very
advanced periods of life. Some cases there certainly
have been, cases which must be familiar to you all, in
which complaint has been made of a judge retaining his
office much too long; but still I think any precise limi-
tation of age would be found very difficult. A rule that
a judge should not remain in office alter 65 or 70 years
of age, might deprive the public of the advantage of the
learning and ,xperience of judges who might be perfectly
competent for public service.
Mr. Bright—ls not the inconvenience to which you
have alluded found to arise frequently with regard to
the bench of bishops; do not they often retain office
beyond the period at which they are capable of per-
forming their duties? —I do not know an instance of
resignation by a bishop.
Air. Cobden—Do not you think that public opinion
would very much tend to correct any tendency on the
part of judges to remain upon the bench after their fa-
culties were no longer equal to the duties of the office?
—lt has not done so in some remarkable cases.
Mr. Ricardo—lf a judge would remain in office be-
cause he had no retiring pension, may he not also re-
main in office in order to get the difference between his
retiring pension and actual salary?—That certainly is
possible; but the judges are influenced in retaining office
by higher motives. There is an unwillingness on their
part to retire from the discharge of active duties, and
to receive retiring pensions, while they feel themselves
able to render public service.
Chairman—lnstances of judges retiring are not very
numerous, even with the temptation now held out?—Not
very.

bar. Bright—With regard :to the office of Lord
Chancellor, when the judicial and political offices are
united us they are at present, is there not danger
that the Government, seeking for a very serviceable
man as a political character, may in some degree over-
look that which is required for the highest judge
in the realm, presiding in the Court of Chancery?
—The political advantage of a Lord Chancellor to a
Government would ba entirely relinquished if he were
not a man of the highest eminence in the profession. A
Government which adopted an inferior man as Lord
Chancellor for the purpose of receiving aid from him, in
a political capacity, distinct from professional service,
would lose immensely in the estimation of the profes-
sion. It would be their manifest interest to take a man
of the highest eminence in the profession as Lord Chan-
cellor.

Mr. Cobden—Have there not been instances within
your recollection of men being called to the office of
Lord Chancellor purely on political grounds, and who
have notoriously not been suited to the office in respect
of legal attainments?—Political considerations must ne-
cessarily influence, to a certain extent, the appointment
of the Lord Chancellor. because, as the office is a poli-
tical as well as a judicial one, it is necessary that the
person accepting the office should concur in political
sentiments generally with the administration with which
he acts. To that extent, therefore, political considera-
tions do influence the appointment. But a Government
would naturally select for the office of Lord Chancellor
the lawyer of the highest eminence generally concurring
with them in political opinion.
the list e
Chairman—We will now go on with the list before
you of offices held during the pleasure of the Crown
usually usually filled by Members of either House of Parliament.
Looking at the reductions which were made in 1830
opinionup on the
thatsalaries
oy of
i.n 1780,those
departments
as state d heiroe ,
be-
fore you, further reductions can be made without detri-
ment to the public service?—lt would be impossible far
me to prove that a salary of 5,000/. a year is exactly
ought
tte be assigned to a particular
will see that this is a matter in-
othffieoes. umTwhheicchom omu
Committee
in-
capable of demonstration. One cannot prove that
4,8001. might not be sufficient in future, when 5,000/.
has been sufficient; I can only state that my opinion, the
result of exprience, is strongly adverse, upon public
grounds, to a diminution of the emoluments at present
received by those who fill the chief offices of the State;
I have a strong impression that the scale of emolument
is not more than is Just, so far as individuals are con-
cerned; and that a reduction of it would be impolitic
with reference to the interests of the public service. I
think that, upon the whole, the comparative scale is not
an unfair one; If I recollect rightly, the chief officers of
the Government, the three Secretaries of State, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the First Lord of the
Tr,asury, receive now b,OOO/. a year; the First Lord of
the Admiralty, an office of equal importance, receives
4,5001. a year, but then be has a house attached to his
office; the President of the Board of Control, I believe,
has 3,500/. a year; the other offices are upon a lower
scale; I am not prepared to advise any allegation in the
comparative scale.
*. wafter "There are Cana in which tho offices of

Chancellor of the Exchequer and First Lord of 'the
Treasury have been held by the same person; has it
teen usual that such person should receive the emolu-
ments attached to each office?—ln 1830 it was proposed
by the C .minittee of that year that where the two
offices were united there should be a saving in the double
salary to the amount of 2,5001. a year; that is to say,
the person holding the two offices together should re-
ceive 7,5001. a year. I believe that mine has been the
only case in which a person since that period has held
the two offices together ; and in consequence of that
suggestion of the Committee I received a salary at the
rate of 7.500/. a year during the few months I held the
two offices. In former periods, I believe, when Lord
Noreh held the offices, he received the double salary,
and I think Mr. Pitt did. Ido not know whether the
double salary amounted then to Ri much as it does at
present; but I think there was no abatement from the
salary assigned to the two offices when held by one
person. . .

Is not such a combination of offices unlikely to occur
again, in consequence of the great increase in the busi-
ness?—Judging from the labour to be performed, I
think it not likely to be undertaken again; when re-
appointed to office in 1841, I determined not to under-
take the double duties, after my experience of them in
1834-5.
Chairman—With regard to the Secretaries of State,
is there anything in the nature of the duties attached to
either of those offices which you think would entitle it
to a higher salary than the others?—The Secretary of
State for Foreign Affairs is subject, perhaps, to some
expenses to which the others are not liable; but he has
the privilege of an official house, if he chooses to avail
himself of it.
There are several other offices which the Committee
have been informed have no very onerous duties attached
to them; for instance, the Lord Privy Seal, the Pay-
master-General, and the Master of the Mint; will you
favour the Committee with your opinion as to how far
it is desirable that those offices should be maintained at
their present salary?—l think it would be desirable that
the Committee should advert to the progress which has
been made of late years in reducing the emoluments re-
ceived by persons tilling high offices in the State. It is
because that progress has been made, because the
tendency has been to increase the labour and to reduce
the advantages and emoluments of office—(l speak now
of pecuniary advantages and emoluments)—that I come
to the conclusion that it would not be advantageous for
the public interests to carry the reduction further.
Mr. Bright—l presume you do not apply that spe-
cially to any particular office, but speak generally ?
Speaking generally. I will take the period when I en-
tered public life, the year 1810. I find that since that
period there has been a progressive reduction in official
advantages and emoluments, and an increase in the la-
bour imposed on public mer. The conjoint operation of
diminished emolument and increased labour leads me to

think that it would not be wise, having regard only to
the public interest, to diminish much further the induce-
ments to enter the public service. To a man who has
independent means, to a considerable extent it may not
make any material difference ; but to a person who has
not the advantage of hereditary wealth, a man of very
great abilities and of great capacity for rendering public
service, but of comparatively limited means, the amount
of salary may be a serious consideration. Those who
observe with satisfaction a departure from the rule
acted upon in former times, of confining high public
offices to the great families of the aristocracy, or to per-
sons of great wealth, who rejoice in seeing the dis-
tinction and advantage of office opened to persons of
superior attainments, but of no groat wealth or high
family connexions, ought to mint fin the policy of at-
taching liberal salaries to the highest official employ-
ments.

Air. Cobden—ls it not the fact that that exclusive
class to which you refer, do monopolise appointments to
those highest situations to which large salaries are as
signed ?—I think not.
Take the succession of Cabinet Ministers for the last

twenty years, do you not find that nine-tenths of them,
or at all events four-fifths of them belong to the aria-
tocracy?—l think Cabinet offices of late years have been
appropriated very much according to the Parliamentary
ability displayed by those who were candidates for
them; I cannot say of late years I recollect the case of
any eminently distinguished man attached to a party,
to whom (when that party came into power) a man of
mere wealth, but of inferior attainments, has been pre-
ferred.

Chairman—Will you state to the Committee what the
advantages of patronage were at the period when you
first entered office, and what they are at present?—ln
the advantages and emoluments of office I include the
opportunities of a Minister to benefit himself and the
members of his family; and I will compare the extent
of advantages and emoluments of that kind in the
year 1810 with their present extent. First, let me
take the state of sinecure offices in 1810. In that
year a Committee was appointed which had duties to
perform very similar to those which are entrust.d to this
Committee. There was a subsequent Committee on sine-
cures in 1834, which in its report said, " Ou consulting
the Report of the Select Committee on Sinecure Offices
appointed in 1840, they find that in that year, according
to the papers referred to that Committee, there were in
existence throughout his Majesty's dominions 242 offices,
which, according to the opinion of that Committee, came
under the denomination of sinecures, and of which the
total net income amounted to 297,0951. per annum. By
the return of the sinecure offices now in exist-nee, re-
tem d to your Committee, it appears that there remain
100 offices of a similsr description, the total net emolu-
ments of which amounts to 97,803/. Now those sine-
cure (Bees were offices which the Ministers of the
Crown had the power in many cases of appropriating
either to themselves or to their immediate relatives. In
1782, in the memorable speech matte by Mr. Burke upon
economical reform, he expressly refers:to some of these
sinecures. He says that the nature of those profits
which grow out of the public distress is in itself invi-
dious and grievous; and he proposes to regulate the
offices and to diminish the salaries, but still to retain
them as sinecure offices available for the reward of
public service. Those sinecure offices thus applied as
the reward of public service were among the advantages
of office. They were left untouched in 1782, being con-
sidered the legitimate means of making a provision for
the descendants of Ministers.

Are you aware how many of those sinecures which
you state to have existed in 1834 are now in existence?
—I presume there are none. There may some remain
in which the existing life interest was protected; but the
intention of Parliament was to abolish those offices alto-
gether as a means of reward; if there are any that now
exist, they would be subject to reduction on the termina-
tion of the life interest.

Looking at those offices as part of the advantages con-
nected with holding high effieee in the State in 1810, yon
are of opinion that the circumstances of their abolition
must be taken into consideration in estimating the in-
ducements to men to take part in the public business of
the country ?—I think the view of the Committee would
he an imperfect one if they did not consider those things.
I do not mean to contend that because those sinecures
have been abolished, you must necF ssarily maintain the
existing salaries at their present amount; but I think that
you ought to compare the inducements which there were
at a comparatively recent period to enter into public life,
with the inducements that exist at present. Such com-
parison is one element in the consideration, and the
review will be an imperfect one if it be omitted. I show
you that in 1810 there were sinecures to the amount of
295,0301. that have been swept away. Some of those
offices were applied to the increase of the official emolu-
ments. L .rd North when him() Minister of this
country held also the office of Lord Warden of the
Cinque Ports. Mr. Pitt when First Lord of the Trea-
sury held the office of Lord Warden. Lord Liverpool,
when First Lord of the Treasury, also held the office of
Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports. I apprehend that
there was attached to that office not only considerable
patronage and a residence by the seaside, but a salary of
4,0001. or 5,0001. a year, which salary was enjoyed by
those Ministers, in addition to the salary of the First
Lord of the Treasury. I believe that in 1780 the emo-
luments of Lord North, ae Prime Minister, derived from
all those sources, were not less than 10,4001. a year.
Here is a case, therefore, in which sinecure offices were
among the emoluments and advantages of high office.
Those emoluments and advantages have ceased; not, in-
deed, altogether, because, upon the abolition of sinecure
offices many of which had been applied to the increase
of official income, and to the reward of public service,
Parliament granted to the Crown the means of making
some provision for retired Ministers. This report to
which I have been referring alludes at the conclusion of
it to that provision, in the following terms: —" Your Com-
mittee, in presenting this statement of the amount of
caving which will ultimately accrue to the public from
the abolition of sinecure offices, have not overlooked the
circumstance, that by the Act of 1817 the Crown was
empowered to grant pensions as rewards for official ser-
vices in lieu of these sinecures which were formerly ap-
plied, to a certain extent, for such purposes. The
amount of annual charge which, according to the 57
Geo. 111. c. 65, might be incurred by the public, was
limited to 45,0001." Now, the system of retrenchment
has been here also progressive, because that amount of
45,0001. which was allotted to the Crown on the aboli-
tion of sinecures in the year 1817, was further reduced
by the Act which passed in the year 1834, from 45,000/,
to 21,6001., "of which," this report says, " according to
the last return, pensions to the amount of 16,500/.only were
actually granted and in existence." The result is that
there is now no power of attaching any sinecure office
as an increase to the emoluments of a Minister ; that
the amount which now can be appropriated by the Crown
as retiring allowances to those wbo have held the highest
offices in the State cannot exceed 21,6001., and that
practically, it is never likely to reach that amount, since
there can be only a certain number of pensions granted
for the tenure of certain offices.
Mr. Ellice—By the Act of 1834, is not there another
limitation with respect to the means of a person apply-
ing for a pension after filling a public office?—There is.
No person can now hold one of those pensions with-
out a declaration that his private means are such as to
require an addition to his income?—That is quite true;
I believe the highest amount of pension is now limited
to 2,0001. a year; and the holders of tour offices only can
receive that lare,est amount of pension; that is to say, a
pension of 2,0001. cannot bo held at the same time by
more than four persons who have filled certain specified
offices, being the highest offices of the State.
Do you know to how many persons it is now paid?—l

think there is one pension of '3,000/. a year, to which
the existing Act does not apply. Lord Bexley, I be-
lieve, receives 3,0001. a year. Ido not.know how many
other pensions there are.
Mr. Cobden—ln speaking of those sinecures: and of
the advantage they afford to Ministers of State, -do you
mean that they were advantageous as furnishing. the
opportunity of their appropriating one of those sinecures
to themselves, or as pstronage which they had to distri-
bute?—Mr, Burke, is speaking of the great offices of
the Exchequer, says, " Efficient Ministers have been
their own paymasters. It is true; but their very par-
tiality has operated as a kind of justice; it was service
that was paid. When we look over this Exchequer
list, we find it filled with the descendants of the Wal-
poles, of the Pelhame, of the Townshends." I appre-
hend he meant that long after the death of the Ministers
to whom he referred, he found their desendants oceupy•
ing some of these sinecure offices in the Exchequer. A
Minister, therefore, had, or might have had, if he were
so inclined, a double advantage from those sinecure
offices; he might, as in the case of one of the best of
these offices, the Wardenship of the Cinque Ports, ap-
propriate it to himself, and he had also the means of
providing for his relations and connexions by the grant
of other sinecure offices. In 1810, the Crown bad also
the power of granting offices in reversion; the Minister
of the Crown had the power, up to the year 1809, of
conferring the reversion of one of those great offices
upon some friend or relative of his own. That oppor-
tunity of rewarding service, which existed in 1809, exists
no longer.
Mr. Walter—With reference to the question put by
Mr. Cobden, whether as a matter of fact the highest of-
fices of the State have not generally been filled by mem-
bers of the aristocracy and persons of ample means, are
you not of opinion that the salaries attached to those offices
should be so regulated as to admit of persons taking
them whose private means would not be adequate to the
discharge of these duties in a suitable manner without
the aid of these salaries?—l think it is of the greatest
public advantage that men of ability without large here-
cl,tary fortunes should be enabled to accept office. If
you consider the men who within the last hundred years
nave exercised the chief influence upon the march of
poli.ical events, and upon legislation, you will find that
those persons exercising that influence have not been
the possessors of large hereditary fortune. In that class
will be found the two William Pitts, Mr. Fox, Mr.
Burke, Mr. Canning, and Mr. Huskisson. Of the first
William Pitt, Lord Chesterfield says, that the whole of
the fortune that ho inherited was 1001. a year. He en-
tered life as a cornet of horse, with a fortune certainly
not exceeding 4,000/. He did not accumulate money in
office, for on his death Parliament paid his debts to the
amount of 20,0001. The second William Pitt must, there-
fore, have entered public life without any independent
fortune. He held office for a long period; but the
means which it afforded to meet the expenditure to
which he was subject were so inadequate that on his
death Parliament paid his debts, to the amount, I think,
of 40,000/., there being no imputation of extravagance.
Mr. Ellice—During that time he held the offices of
First Lord of the Treasury, Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, and Chief Warden of the
,Cinque Ports?—Yes.
Then take the case of Mr. Burke. Mr. Burke was pri-
vate secretary to Mr. Hamilton, the secretary to the
Lord-Lieutenant; he was afterwards private secretary to
Lord Rockingham. Mr. Fox entered life without the
advantage of hereditary fortune. Mr. Canning had
none. Mr. Huskisson's means must probably have been
very small, when he entered public life as private secre-
tary to Lord Stafford. Whatever was the time for which
those eminent men held office, the emoluments of it in
no case enabled them to make a provision for their
families. It is surely a great public advantage that men
of those eminent qualifications for rendering public ser-
vice should have some inducement for entering into the
public service, rather than into professions. If they do
enter it, it would be most unfair to allot to them any
amount of salary which places them in an inferior posi-
tion to that of colleagues who may have, from the acci-
dent of birth, larger means of supporting the expenses
of office.

Chairman—Will you be kind enough to state whether,
independently of those sinecures to which you have re-
ferred, any other advantages attached to the office of
Prime Minister, or any of the other principal offices, in
1820, which they do not now enjoy ?—I have stated
what has been the reduction made in sinecure offices. I
will now call the attention of the Committee to the pen-
sion list of the three kingdoms, as it existed in the year
1810. I will take first the pension list on the Civil List
of Englard. In 1782 an Act passed (the 22d of Geo.
HI., c. 82) for the regulation of the Civil List and the
control of the grant of pensions. By that Act the Eng-
lish pension list was limited to 95,0001. a year, and until
reduced to that sum the power of the Crown to grant
pensions was limited to 6001. per annum. It was then
provided that no greater sum than 1,2001. should be
granted to any one person, except members of the royal
family. With respect to pensions on the Irish Civil
List, in 1793 an Act was passed, with the consent of
the Government, placing restrictions on the power of the
Crown as to the grant of pensions on the Irish Civil
List. In 1793, when the pensions on the Irish Civil
List amounted to 124,0001., an Act was passed restrain-
ing the Crown from granting pensions in any one year
exceeding altogether the sum of 1,2004 until the whole
pension list should bo reduced to 80,000/. a year.
The Irish pension list was not reduced below 80,000/.
until the year 1813. As to pensions on the Scotch
Civil List it appears that before 1810 there
was no check whatever upon the power of the Crown in
respect to the grant of Scotch pensions, except the
amount of the revenue from which those pensions were
derived. I❑ 1810 the Scotch Civil List pensions
amounted to 39,379/., and that year an Act was
passed, providing that until the total annual amount was
reduced to 25,000/., no larger pension than
3001. should be granted to any one person from the
Scotch hereditary revenues. Besides those several
pension lists, there were pensions charged on the 4i
per cent. duties. That was the state of the Pension List
in the three countries on the Ist of January, 1810.
Can you state the amount of the pensions on the 4i
per cent. duties?—l do not know that. The Committee
will find in the report which was made in the
year 1838 (Paper No. 621 of 1838), a full
account of the Scotch pensions, the Irish pen-
sions, and the English pensions. That report, speak-
ing of the pensions charged on the 41 per cent. duties,
says, " Over the 4i per cent. duties the Crown exercised
a right of full dominion. Till the year 1830 these re-
venues had not formed any part of the Civil List ar-
rangements, but had continued vested in the Crown.
No new grants have been made subsequent to the year
1826, and the original charges are in progress towards
ultimate extinction."
What is the amount of pensions at the present moment
as compared with the amount in 1810?—At a much
later period than 1810, the total amount of pensions was
not less 145,000/. In the report of the Committee of
1831, on Civil Government Charges, there is this:passage:
" The pension list, formerly charged on the Civil List
of England and Ireland and the hereditary revenues of
Scotland, and which amounted to 145,750/., is Row re-
duced to a sum of 75,000/. charged o❑ the Civil List."
But that sum of 145,750/., was the amount of the pension
list as it existed in the reign of George IV. The pen-
sion list which existed in 1810, in the reign of George
111., was of much larger amount.