The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-28 00:00:00

THE POLES IN PRUSSIA.

Mr. VILLIERS STUART said, the House was
aware that the King of Prussia bad allowed fugitive
Poles to take up their residence in the Duchy of Posen,
and had conceded to many of them the rights of
Prussian subjects. It had been lately announced, that
his Prussian Majesty had given directions to withdraw
the protection from these-Poles. He wished to ask the
Right Hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel), if he, could give
the House any information upon the subject.
Sir R. PEEL said that he was not prepared at present
to give an answer in a definite manner to-the question
put by the Hon. Gentleman.
SCOTTISH. LAW COURTS.

Mr. WALLACE rose to bring forward his motion
upon the above subject. He said that the legal tribunals
in Scotland had been an immense expense to the nation.
Instead of those Courts being called the. Courts of
Session, the more proper name to use would be the
Courts of Vacation, for they were idle for nearly seven
months in the year,
.and during those, seven months
the judges sat only for five days in the week.
He held returns in his hands which .would prove
beyond doubt that the law authorities in those Courts
had allowed au enormous amount of arrears to accumu-
late from the year 1.781 up to the present time. The
number of cases which were in arrear in the year 1838
was 477, and he thought this was sufficient to require inves-
gation, The vacations of the Courts in general exceeded in
length of time the sessions. There was another matter
that called for remedY, namely; the choice of Courts,
and he must say that he thought the delay and ex-
pense incurred in the Courts in Scotland were attri-
butable to the listlessness 'of the judges. He
firmly believed that until a Court of Review
(as we understood) was established, there would be
no satisfaction in the courts of law in Scotland. There
was no court more dreaded, with 'the exception
of the Court of Chancery, than the Court of Session.
He would next advert .to' the expenses. .In the first
place he would state what these judges cost theeountry.
The first division of judges •cost the country 14,375/. a
yew'. Owing to the short time . during which they sat,
the amount of their salaries and that of their secretaries
was 127/. per- day. The number of cases decided in the
year 1839 by. this division of the judges was 157, and
therefore the judicial charge for each case—without any
reference to the charges of counsel—the j udicial charge for
each case was 911. 1 Is.. while the cost in the courts pre •
sided over by the other judges was 251. 14s. for each ease.
All this waste was at the cost of both countries. He
Would now read to the House a statement of the yearly
cost of this establishment, and he believed all
the Honourable Gentleinen who - were friends of
economy would .be surprised to hear. it. 'They
had thirteen :Judges of the Supreme Court, to a
population of two millions and a halt. They might
know by the number of the English judges, whether
this was a justifiable mode of applying the money of the
people. The cost of the judges was 42,7001.; that of
clerks of the court 17,000/. There, were also thirty
sheriffs, who cost 16,5001.,, or, on an average,
5511 each per year. He had no hesitation in
saying that the most vicious part of their
vicious system was the having three times the
number of judges required. When the Noble
Lord the Member for .London introduced his County
Courts Bill, the number of judges he proposed for all
England was twenty-five chief judges, and four
others in the'.. event of illness of the chiefs. The
whole amount of the cost of the judicial establish-
ment in Edinburgh was not less than 150,0001.
You might travel from one end of Scotland to the other,
and. you would not find one man who was not dis-
satisfied and disgusted . with the whole system
of the administration of the law in that . 'coun
try. In 1834, an Act was introduced by ih'e- late
Government t© raise the. salaries of the judg,es, by
which it was held that it should g!ive great
facilities to the . means of obiaining justice—the
rules of Court were to be altered, and the time of session
was to be extended so as to do away with
the arrears of which so much complaint had
been made, and so justly. The salaries of the
judges were at that time raised to 1,000/ a year
each. The Court of Sessions and the Crown had
the power of extending the sessions for one month.
Now, by this . act, which the Noble Lord (Lord John
.Russell) carried with the assistance of those who now
:sat on the opposite side of the House—for it was re-
'marked in Scotland, that whenever anything,was to be
done to raise salaries, both sides of that House joined.—
(Hear, hear, and •laughter)—the causes in the Court
had diminished since one-half, and this year they would
diminish still more, in' consequence of the general dis-
satisfaction with the Court.—(The Hon. Member then
read an extract from the Act of Parliament, that gave
the power
,to the judges and the Crown to extend the
sessions by two months.) There was a place in Scotland
where the Parliament used to meet, and there the Court
of Session was held. . God forbid he should ever see a
Parliament held there again._ But the judges were le-
gislators as well as judges, and they made laws which
ought to be made only by the Imperial Parliament. • They
had full power to make rules for expediting the public busi-
ness, but they had 'not-availed themselves of that power.
The Committee which had sat in 1834, and had re-
commended an 'increase of the judges' salaries, had
evidently contemplated an increase in the labours of the
judges. As a proof of this, he would refer to the
evidence given before that Committee by Lord Elgin,
Lord Brougham, Dr. Lushington, and Mr. O'Connell.
From their evidence it was clear that it had been con-
templated to make a considerable addition to the la-
hours of the judges. • Then, with regard to the passing
of the Acts of Sederunt, one of the most distinguished
lawyers in Scotland, Sir Alan. Campbell had
brought in a Bill, in 1785, to reduce the number of judges,
and at the conclusion of the Act there was a clause
enacting that the judges should occupy themselves with
revising and consolidating:the Acts of Sederunt. That
duty they lad neglected to perform ; and at the present
moment the Acts of Sederunt were an unconsolidated
mass, which had not been revised for 300 years. The
complaint they made was this, that they.had 13' judges;
and who did their duty ? Why the Lord Chancellor of
England. What proof had he of this ? Why that
nearly three-fourths of all the appeals coming to the
House of Lords, `came from • Scotland. . Why was this ?
Why because the Scotch judges, although per-
fectly competent to do so, did not .do their
duty. At. the present moment there were
forty-five appeals from Scotland in the House of Lords,
twenty-seven from England and Wales, and twenty from
Ireland, which was a most unusual number. Then with
respect to the superannuations, they amounted to
15,000/ a-year. Two of the judges receiving part of that
superannuation had received upwards of 70,0001., one
having retired nineteen years, and another fourteen.
Thp other day another judge was allowed to retire,
though at a period of life that did not entitle him to
claim retirement. It might ..be stated .that his health
was such as to compel him to do so, but if such
was the case, pit was not known to be no in Scotland.
A very expensive Commission had been issued by the
late Government to examine into the state of the Scotch
Courts, with a view. to improvement, and certain minor
recommendations of that -Commission were adopted ;
but all- the mateitil points were entirely neglected. Since
the present Government had come into office, three judges
had been appointed—Mr. Hope, Mr. Robertion, and Mr.
Wood. He had no hesitation in expressing his belief that
the Government werejustified in these appointments, but
he thought they had •made a most injudicious choice of
a person to be put over the heads of all the other
judges. Every one admitted the propriety of the ap-
pointment of the Lord President, one of the. most hard-
working and judicious. judges on the bench. It was
stated that the judges in the two inner chambers
of the Court of Session did not afford sufficient
time for the counsel to perform their duties.
When Mr. Hope presided he occupied the time of' -the
court and the, public, not with attending to the argu-
ments of counsel, but in displaying his own eloquence.
The consequence was, that the business in his court
was rapidly on the decrease. His (Mr. Wallace's)
countrymen were a shrewd and reflecting body of men,
and they knew well enough when a man was doing his
duty • and when he was shammine, it.—(A laugh.)
With regard to the appointment of Robertson, it
was a judicious one, and that of Mr. Wood was first-
rate. - In the Report of the Committee which' sat in
1840 there was a great deal to show that they. had a
right to expect a decided amelioration in the judicial
system. In that short Report of nine pages, it was
stated nine or ten times how great was the just
dissatisfaction with the Court of Session. In
the original Report the dissatisfaction was ex-
pressed no less than thirteen times, (Hear.)
He called the; attention of the Noble Lord most particu-
larly to this matter. Such allegations-were made before,
and they would be made again if there were no improve-
ment. °The present system:was perfectly unwarrantable,
and required instant amendment. Six courts were. sit-
ting at the same time, and two counsel being obliged to
attend in each ease„ great embarrassment ensued. He
thanked the House for having so patiently listened to
him, and as he understood that part of his motion was
irregular, he would only move the latter:part of it. He
then moved that. .« an humble. address be presented to
her Majesty, praying her Majesty .will be graciously
pleased to exercise the powers which are reserved to her