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

reason to suppose that the extension which has been
anxiously looked for, will effect any change in public
opinion. Judges who could be entrusted with juris-
diction to the extent of 20/. may safely be authorised
to dispose of similar questions to the value of 501.,
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.; and 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 wbich their decisions could
possibly be revised, 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, and also of a further reason-
able sum for the probable expenses of the appeal.
This security might be given either by lodging the
sum decided in court, with, say 5/. 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 Hon. 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; and 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, s. 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 practised as a barrister and special
pleader for 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 rejectiyn was insult-
ing to a high-minded and honourable body of men
who, 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 com-
panies, 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,
awl 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
cruses of this extraordinary delay, and will furnish
an additional illustration of the truth of the old adage,
" the more haste the 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 cf 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
fur 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 fur 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
prying into the most private affairs of every company.
No time, then, was to be lost in order to secure a
" 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 fur 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 " Railway
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-
termination to preserve for the parties whom they re..
presented the ordinary rights of property.
The delegates thus appointed entered zealously and
energetically upon their datie.b, They met day after

day, devoting their entire time to the performance of
the important trust confided to their charge. But
although the Railway Commissioners were well aware
of the extraordinary progress that had been made,
Earl GRANVILLE deliberately brought forward a
measure in the House of Lords, alleging that there
was " but_little probability of any Bill being brought
forward by or on behalf of the railway interest.''
His Lordship was speedily undeceived on this point
he was distinctly informed that a measure had ac-
tually been prepared, which would receive the final
sanction of the railway delegates within the week, but
still he persevered in forcing on his measure, which
was read a second time in the House of Lords in the
beginning of March.

This Bill, as it now appears, was a palpable inva •
sion on the privileges of the Commons House of Par-

liament. It provided that all railway companie s
should contribute, in proportion to the amount of
their paid-up capital, sums amounting, in the whole,
to the sum of 10,0001. per annum, and all such further
sums as the new board, which was to be appointed
pursuant to the Bill should consider to be incurred for
the common benefit of all railway companies, which
sums were t o be payable to the Board of Inland Re-
venue, and recoverable in like manner as passenger
duties. This was, therefore, a matter that could not
originate in the hereditary branch of the Legislature,
that could only proceed from the guardians of the
public purse, the representatives of the people ; but
this obvious objection was overlooked in the anxiety
to jockey the railway delegates and to outstrip them
in the legislative race.

On the 9th of March the delegates had finally ap-
proved of an Audit Bill, and had appointed an
Executive Committee to watch the progress of the
measure
Parliament, and to oppose the Go-
vernment
Bill.ug h h
This Bill was introduced by Lord
t STANLET in the Lords, and was, as well as Lord
GRANVILLE'S 8111,
nominated by referred to a Select Committee
the Government, and on which
Ministers might calculate upon a decisive majority.
Many members of the Executive Committee were
most anxious to be examined before their Lordships'
Committee, in order to give evidence in favour of their
own Bill and against that of the Government. This
privilege was, however, denied, no witness being
heard on any side—the Select Committee merely
considering the provisions of the rival measures, and,
finally, after an interval of several months, reporting
against both, and in favour of a hybrid measure com-
pounded of both, and possessing all the disadvantages
and but few of the advantages of either.
We cannot at present afford space to enter into the
details of this most objectionable, most unjust, and
most impolitic measure. A close examination of its
. .

provisions will show that while it affects to bestow

an option on shareholders to decide which system of
audit they will select, it provides such means for

taking the accounts from the hands of their own
auditors, and bringing them under the cognizance of
the Central Board, or the " auditors of railway ac-
counts," R 3 they are termed in the Bill, that the
only real choice is whether they will submit to the
board's audit alone, with all its heavy expenses, or
have their ow❑ audit in the first instance, and that of
the Central Board afterwards, with a double series of
expenses.

THE FRENCH REPUBLIC.

We have received the Paris journals of Saturday
and of yesterday.
The Dotation Bill still continues to excite great
differences among the reactionary members of the
Assembly.
Several meetings of the reactionary members have
been held on the subject, but no decision has been
arrived at.

The Patrie of Saturday says—
" The members of the majority composing the Par-
liamentary Club, held in the Rue Richelieu, assembled
last evening to come to sn understanding on the terms
of an amendment equivalent to the Bill of the Go-
vernment. The five members of the minority of the
Committee, MM. Leverrier, Lefebvre, Durufle,
Bavuux, Augustin Geraud, and Fortoul, were pre-
sent. Several representatives arriving from their de-
partments, stated to the meeting the feeling of the people
with regard to the measure. They declared that the
demand of the Government was popular in the pro-
vinces, and that the electors had expressed to their re
presentatives their desire to see the grant voted. Several
other members present made similar statements, adding
that they had left Paris after the presentation of the
Bill with a different opinion. The following amend-
ment, nearly an exact cupy of the Government Bill, was
then agreed to, ' There is opened to the Minister of
Finance on the budget of 1850 a credit of 2,1€0,000f.
fur extraordinary expenses of the Presidency in 1849 and
1850.' M. de Dampierre has given notice that he will
move this amendment in the Assembly."
The Ordre, the organ of M. ODILON BARROT, has
the following mysterious warning:—
" Whilst awaiting the infurmation or revelations which
the public discussion may lead to, and without paying
too mach attention to the rumours already more than
once put in circulation and contradicted, we believe that
the members of the Assembly who have in view on this
occasion only the public interest, will do well to ask
themselves this questiou,—lf an ensemble of resolutions in
a delay more or lets prompt, was to be submitted to us,
and if we were not disposed to go to the extreme extent,
which would be better both for success and to cover our
responsibility before the country, a refusal, more or less
disguised, opposed without delay even on a question of
money, or a resistance which could come only after a
concession made to the President of the Republic on this
question, so delicate—resistance, which for that very
reason could be much more energetic? Perhaps we
have not arrived there, but it is well that it be thought
of. Nothing would be more pitiable, it must be allowed,
for a Sovereign Assembly, after the trials already
passed through by France, than to have to say one day,
and long, we have been surprised!"
The remains inflexible ; he will have
orallh e perhaps
PRESIDENT
nothing ; before
he declares, that should the Bill be
rejected or mutilated he knows what to do.
The Pouvoir, the organ of the Elyset,, has the
following on the report of the committee :
" There are obligations which custom imposes on
power. To deprive power of the means of responding
to such obligations is to depopularise it. Such is the
truth. The reporter, acknowledging that the President
has been obliged to have recourse to his private fortune
fur matters of public utility, offers to defray the cost of
installation under the ridiculous name of 'national
compensation.' Keep your compensation—no one has
asked it. A credit is demanded for the office, and not
fur the man."

The following account of a meeting of the represen-
tative Members of the Club of the Council of State
held on Thursday night appears in the Patrie:—

" The meeting was never more numerous; about 300
representatives were present, and the discussion lasted
till midnight. M. de Montalembert, who was one of the
first speakers, declared himself in favour of the Bill;
and, having just returned from a visit to the country,
he added that it would be a mistake to suppose the pro-
vinces unfavourable to demand. He further said that
the rejection of the measure would make the majority
unpopular. M. de lierdrel then spoke. He is, it is
known, the author of the amendment for according
2,160,000 F. for the extraordinary expenses; and there is
every reason to believe that it will be on this amend-
ment that the compromise unanimously desired by the
party of order, out of the Assembly, will be effected
between the Government and the Assembly. M. de
with respect to his
gstmiuiodeacenj onersti.s:::•.B i
speech,
party, and the
asuipgpuoifiretead-
Kerdrel belongs to tho Legitimatist traction of the
regards the Pre.
silent.
Thiers,aPmer edi cimotlennetxt e establishedspoke,
e d his position
it is said, obtained very groat
the Bill. He showed that it neither engagel the clues.
tion of Government for the future, nor the personal
affections of Hon. Members. It is said that, in order to
overcome the resistance which was founded oa these
motives, he said, I am neither Republican, nor Bona-
partist, and yet I shall vote for the Bill.' M. Berryer
followed. The eloquent orator first blamed the faults
committed in the presentation of the Government Bill;
he declared that he considered it inopportune, and the
manner in which it had been defeeded offensive- to the
dignity of the Assembly. He nevertheless concluded by
dwelling on the necessity of a compromise, and pro-
posed the sum of 2,000,000 f. M. Jules de Lasteyrie
spoke to the same effect, and adopted the same amoun..
M. do Broglie and M. Molt insisted, like M. Thiers, on
the importance of the majority remaining in union with
the President, and on the danger of putting an end to
that union on a question of money. The sitting was
brought to a close amidst very great agitation. The
Legitimatises are to meet this evening; it is said that a
numerous fraction of their party will separate from M.
Berryer on this question."
According to the Evenernent a very violent scene
took place at this meeting:between M. Ds LAROCHE..
JACQUELIN and two Members of the Legitimatise
party,
which nearly terminated in a duel.
The Ordre of Sunday has the following allusion to
a contemplated coup d' eat :
"The Bulletin de Paris and the Evenement speak this
evening of a rumour which bad prevailed during the
day relative to the appointment of a new Minister of
War iu place of General d'ilautpool. These rumours,
which are of old date, are not altogether without foun-
dation. We believe, however, that the appointment al-
luded to depends upon much more grave events than that
of a simple Ministerial modification."
The Patrie publishes a laboureddefence ofßaronGnos
against the accusation of duplicity brought against
him by Mr. Wvses letter. As a specimen of the
meanness and equivocations to which General DE
we give
recourse, we
of
the
the ufloTlTlClEVViiangcoemxptrealicetd frtoomhatvhee
article in the Patrie
This leads u 5 to ail explanation with Marti to a