The Sun.
London, England, 1828-05-02 00:00:00

ANATOMICAL DISSECTION.

Mr. Alderman THOMPSON presented a petition from
the Surgeon• and Members of the Hunterian Society, pray-
ing for the Removal of the Impediments in procuring Sub-
jects for Anatomical Dissection.--Referred to the Select
Committee on the said Bill.
The Hon. Member then presented a petition from a
Friendly Society in Church-street, Bethnal-green„ against
the Bill pending for the Regulation of Benefit Societies.

CUSTOM AND EXCISE LAWS.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY in rising to make the motion
of which he had given a previous notice, could not avoid
expressing his extreme regret at a circumstance unknown
to him until within the last hour—he meant the intention
of Ministers to oppose the propositions which he was
about to submit to the House. He the more regretted
this determination, because he felt it incumbent upon
him to present to the House facts and details which
might warrant Honourable Members to give their sanction
to the Resolutions which he intended to move.
He should now state to the House the positions he sought
to establish, as the Attorney-General, he believed, would
make some remarks upon the resolutions he was about to

move. In the first place, he should contend that the re
sources of the country were most indiscreetly applied, o'l
that costs to an enormous amount were improperly Cl'
pended in Excise and Custom-house prosecutions. His
next proposition was, that the power invested in certain lao'
officers of Government was exercised most oppressively to'
wards unintentional offenders, and that the cause of the
evil was the absence of persons of established responsibi-
lity. 'floe effect of this absence was the profit arising frets
the arbitrary application of Lows, which, in their mildest
folio, were peculiarly repulsive to the feelings of the people;
Within the last five years, the number of informations filed
at the instance of the Attorney-General (he did not allude
to any individual, as the course of lass, required the in'
formations to be tiled in the name of that officer) Were
1,851. Nine' hundred and forty of these were for the
recovery of penalties moiler the Custom Laws, and 911
were for the recovery under those of the Excise. The
object of these 1,851 prosecutions was the recovery of 'OO
amounting to 1,038,709/. This sum of one million Joel
thirty-eight thousand seven hundred and nine pounds, ws°,
distributed in equal portions in the two departments 01
Customs and Excise. Many of those prosecutions had ter
their object the profits of particular persons ; and of Die°
hundred and eleven prosecutions filed at the instance of the
officers of Excise, six hundred and twenty-four were alone
successful ; and of nine hundred and forty information°
filed at the instance of the officers of the Customs, only
two hundred and eight had been productive of any pee's'
niary advantage to the country. He begged the House to
understand that the informations load not been defeated 1'
verdicts of Juries—it was not by any legal impediments
that they had produced no pecuniary benefit to the Crown'
Seven hundred and thirty-two of the informations filed 0
the instance of the officers of the Customs were not ea;
cessful, and two hundred and eighty-seven of those file"
at the instance of the Excise shared the same fate ; malsiog
in all, one thousand and nineteen failures out of 1851 ; or;
in other terms, more than one-half of the cases prosecuted
produced no benefit whatever to the country, though they
yielded an enormous profit to the individual officers wh°
instituted them.—(Hear, hear.) He would now beg leave(
to state to the House what load been the pecuniary result."
these informations. Of the 1,038,7091., the aggregate so°
sought to be recovered, the total sum received was only cue
hundred and thirty-seven thousand eight hundred and
twenty-six pounds, being, as would appear on calculation'
little more than one half-crown in the pound.—(Heart
hear.) So touch for the discretion of those public efficen'e
who instituted such fruitless proceedings. The cases e`
prosecution, under the Custom Laws, were just as bade'
The amount sued for was 538,709/, and the sum rece
vered was only 23,5351. Perhaps the House was OS
prepared to hear the statement he was about to make win',.
respect to the amount of the Crown prosecutions in the
Exchequer. Of these prosecutions the public had t r pay °
deficiency of 28,414/., whether the suit was gained or lust.
The costs of the Excise prosecutions. alone amounted n;
52,270/. ; sea that out of 157,8261., being the total e
the Excise and Customs prosecutions, there was a sum of
45,8971. paid to informers, a tribe of wretches wh°,
swarmed and infested all parts of the country. It was o°'
his intention to occupy the House with details which were
not capable of proof, and therefore he wished to state that
any Hon. Member who wished to inquire into the subjeet
would find the whole of the items to which he alluded se';
tooth in. the accounts. Ile would state further, that 0`
sixty-three causes, in the disposal of which a sum r,
9,577/. was incurred in costs, the cases did not exceed Pe'
nalties of 50/. each ; the total sum recovered was 317814
and that sum was recovered at the expense of 9,577/.-'
(Hear, hear.) He wished to call the attention of the
House to another point connected with this question ;
in doing so, he felt relieved from any thing like an indnq
genre in conjecture, because he should confine hinoe'
to the Returns which had been laid on the table. It s'
peered from those Returns, that in 22 causes which were
specified, the expenses in each cause amounted to 172/o"
It appeared from this, that no penalty, however email:
when prosecuted for by information, could be inflict,'
without an expence of 172/. to the country. He bad lie
fore him two or three items, to which he begged the at"
tention of 'Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite, as he was sal
they only existed because they were not known to tlooe
who were presumed to be acquainted with the general fora'
of that Court; and when they were once known, be S°
sure his Majesty's Law Officers would exert themselves is
remedying the evil. The first item in the Bill before hi °,
was one of every day occurrence—he meant the costs C`
the clerks in Court. Now in the Exchequer, there ever,
six or eight of these clerks—the offices might be said to t>e
sinecures, for one of them, who died only a few days
had not visited the office for three or four years, so that if
"07
not perfectly a sinecure, it was a duty easily discharged I
proxy. There was another singular item, which he 11
sure would surprise many lion. Members. It appeared the
for the decision of 22 causes, 307 jurors had been MOO,
making 144 jurors fur each cause to be tried. There wes
a time when an Exchequer juror received 40s. when aver.'
diet was given for the Crown, but in the event of an ad'
verse verdict, he was curtailed in the sum of 20s. He we
glad, however, to observe that this relation, though coati'
nued until lately, was at present done away with. The
Juries thus summoned and sworn were regularly rat
although no more than twelve men could be impannelled to
try each cause. The lion. and Learned Gentleman over
the way might, perhaps, be able to explain this when lie
c mine to address the House ; but, to prevent any thing
a mistake, he would refer to the Bill. In the case of the
Attorney-General against Brazer, there was an item, "
Jurymen paid 24/. 3," There were other cases in which
Ciere had been sworn and paid twenty Jurymen, another
eighteen, another fifteen, another fifteen, another eighteens
another thirteen, another sixteen, another nineteen, another
seventeen, and so on. This, he conceived was a loot
serious hardship upon the suitor, and ought to be remedied"
There was yet another point to which he begged to direct
the attention of the House—he alluded to the fees of Bar'
risters. In all Exchequer cases there was arrayed againstthe defendant an army of lawyers, who had only to look t°
their own interests, aial secure their fees. It might be that
they took these fees front a disinterested wish to discharge
their duty ; but those who knew the profession must be aware
that there was no stimulus to that eloquence,of which the Der
appeared to be the almost exclusive monopolist, equal to a
fee. In several of the cases before him, he found the fee
on the Crown side to amount to 52/. in each case. This
he conceived a most oppressive tax upon the suitors, and °tie
which called for revision. One bill which he had before hem
spewed, that the law officers of the Crown were, gone'
times, paid not so much for their services as for staying
away—that they were paid for many briefs which that
never read, and many causes which they never attended;
in a word, that they received fees where the Crown Was.
party without any labour. In all causes, however triviali
no less than four Counsel were employed on the part
the Crown. In the Bill before him they were stated a°
follows :—" The Attorney-General 10 guineas, the Soli,
eitor- General 10 guineas, Mr. Clarke 8 guineas, Mr'
Clarke 4/. 6s. Od." Before that period it was usual t°
employ five Counsel, but now four were considered suffi-
cient to persuade a Jury to give a verdict for the Crown'
The bill of costs which he had just mentioned was in a case
where the briefs of the four Counsel for the Crown eV•
tended only to eight sheets; while Mr. Jervis (a gentle'
man whose talents must be duly appreciated by all Who
knew him), who was engaged on the other side, an
whose brief amounted to 19 sheets, received only fv°
I guineas.—(Hear, hear. )--Having touched upon two on'
terial points —the Clerks' Fees, and the Fees of C 0111201."
he wished to say a word or two as to the-Expence of writ
nesses. When witnesses resided at a distance, they miry
with great propriety, be examined at the County Mei°
where the act had arisen ; but no, this would not do, the
witnesses must be brought to London, no matter at what
expence. There was one Exchequer case brought up frer°
Newcastle, where the expence of the witnesses alone
amounted to 386/. ; whereas, if the case had been tried at
house, it would have been at a much less expence.
a word or two with respect to the severity of these prcee-
cutions. He found that in five cases execution had bee'
61. was
r.sierclea;:.:bfllyuvvf
151!.,oarhttsrehhreee1
issued as follows I—ln the first case, for 106/., where orilY
where 31.
execution for
that deer,
stea,ho,lffee:eci oret
recovered
d.yt;hue
,Laa defendant'sest,ihe.
fourth,Houseweaits
case
pi ralowoprooeeklitYfaroti
where the amount receive'
1
r
was eleven guineas ; the third was thr a sum of 5251"
a moment at the effect of these proceedings. They had
upon their table a petition, in which it was stated, that 80
Exchequer process had been issued, and a man's property
sold for 12/., and thati the ;
He now came to another point—he meant the necessity °I
appointing Emeion,iitconsotraocuotioro'svberilltahmesoeunptedroctoeedlinn'
,giu4o:de
Ile was aware they would be told that no proceeding co
be filed by the Solicitor of the Exchequer, until the whol'
question load been laid before the Board of Excise or Carr
toms, and that all proceedings must he instituted under
their direction, and proceeded in under their superrisia!:
Now this proved one of two things—either that there so;
a culpable negligence on the part of the Commissioners, f°,.
else the powers vested in them were insufficient, ! °,,
would any one venture to assert that an efficient supervistei
was exercised in Exchequer prosecutions at prolee°
Would any one venture to assert that the solicitor who SVe4
unsuccessful in half the cases he undertook, had a righttsi-,
in a private case to turn upon his client, and demand Pe
expences for a case of his own instituting. He had befoc;
him a case of peculiar severity ; it was that of C. 1108,15.
Bryant, who commanded a vessel in the Surinam traa`

it the re
lied, and
perly ex
ns.
Hie
rtain law
ise of the
sponsiht-
(sing fre
it rnildet
he people•
tions filed
not allude
!d the in'
cer) were
e for the
and 911
ise. The

f 110 ry o ,
Lillian 06
unds
tments
ns had let
id of Din°
nce of the
sere alone

orination°

ors, and "e
L before bin'
were, Owe"
for staling
which they
.r attended;
.rown was
ever trivial,
the part °I
:re stated 1!5
s, the Soh.,
iineae, Mr'
'as usual to
dered atiffi'
the Crown'
ras in a Case
Crown e 4

(a-geutle'
by all wb,,`'
side, 31"
only 15"
)n two lov
eounel—'
nce of
they toiebt
arty Asoilr
not do, the
,ter at oth3",
ght up frt°
lame 31°13e
yen tried It
rice. 14°''''

It was regulated by an Act called the Navigation Act, that
a penalty of 200/. should be incurred in any case where
there appeared a variance between the manifest and the
ship's cargo ; or, in other words, between the bill of par-
, eels and the contents of the ship. It appeared that Cap-
tain Bryant, alter having taken his cargo on hoard, was ap-
plied to to take on board 45 casks of pepper, he found it was
impossible to take the casks on hoard, but consented to find
"towage for the pepper if shipped in bags. The pepper
was shipped in that form, but it had been previously en-
tered in the manifest as shipped in casks. The Captain
explained this to the proper authorities here ; and so clear
did the matter appear, that he was allowed to amend his
manifest and correct the mistake. After another voyage,
the first thing that met him on reaching England, was a
Process from the Exchequer, which was brought to trial.
A most respectable house in the City memorialised the
Customs, and represented the case as it really was ;
and after several attendances, the Memorial was reject-
ed, without any reason whatever being assigned. A
by 14r.
application was made ; and the answer made
14r. Carr, the Solicitor to the Excise, was, that
ti° offer had been made by the defendant, but that his case
would be again considered. Such were the proceedings
Of that Court, that a man once accused could not be coil-
Lhe Ideteci innocent; but before he dared venture to approach
fountain of mercy, he must concede his guilt, and even
offer a compromise before he could be treated with, or en-
tertain a hope of obtaining pardne. The law went on in
!be case to which he alluded, and the parties went on to a
fifth memorial, when the Solicitor again informed them
that they made no advances ; but as they advanced the
icise
retreated, until, at length, the case went into the
'chequer, and when the amended manifest was there
teedered in evidence, the Chief Baron refused to receive it,
n„Ptio the ground that the Commissioners of Excise had no
penal
to allow it to be amended, and a verdict for the full
t,i7,li,alty of 200/. was recorded. The Captain tendered a
,"'" of exceptions ; and after having been driven about from
'-oort to Court, it was at length agreed that he should pay
the citsts of the whole proceeding, no penalty being de-
-1'444d. He maintained, that where a penalty had been
'orarred, it ought to be levied in the most simple manner,
not imposed in the shape of costs. Proceedings might
hp inetituted for the recovery of 101., but the costs would
Itoount to 172:. In one case, for the recovery of 162/.
;9'
2d., a sum of 89/. Bs. sd. was paid to the Solicitor.
had
an alteration iteration (which certainly was not an amendment)
nad of late taken place. Instead of bringing eel tain
into the Exchequer, Magistrates were enabled to
"ear and decide upon them in the different counties,
''so that every village contained within itself a little
jun of Excheqner, in which the interposition of a
nu'Y was altogether done away with. Let the House in-
aosre for a moment how that system worked. And in
"'tering upon this part of the question he was glad to
L'e 'erne Hon. Members present who had turned their at-
Wtion peculiarly to it. He wished to call the attention
the House to the ease of an honst yeoman, to whse
character
an Hon. Member near hiem was ready to beoar
teatirtiony be meant the case of William Storks. That
P_°°' man submitted a case to the Treasury, of which no
u'itt need be ashamed, and of which most men might feel
Pro
st ud. His case had been submitted to a bench of Magis-
slteas of whom three were Clergymen, of course the
-ill'ocates and dispensers of Christian me cyand Christian
atsstr;ly. Before he went further, he would observe that
ah.'uing upon Excise Laws was not the duty of a Protest-
c't!Clergyrean—nay, he would go further, and say, that
"n such a person became perfectly competent to decide
an Exchequer case, he might with advantage be ap-
fulted to the office of Attorney-General, hut he frons
t Moment was rendered unfit to discharge the sacred
stias of his office as a Christian teacher.—(Hear, hear,
er.)--The unfortunate individual to whom he alluded
.41 R ummoned before a bench of these Clerical Barons.
th e ev. Gentleman were drasged from the retirement of
(It'''. cloisters, and the labour of their studies, to hear the
tiliaes and that too on the eve of the day when it was their
sti!Y to pour forth their eloquence in support of the holy
esiti°t —eloquence which, by the way, was of little ad-
-1,-,l'ttge, unless supported by the example of those hy
ts."`"o it was poured forth. The Reverend Gentle-
NLII Wire called forth on a Saturday, and the poor man
t -44 wits, upon the oath of an excisemen, fined
iv„
*it,'Y pounds, for not having, as was said, complied
1,4 certain Excise forms in tuneing beer. The man
the money, but so conscious was he of his innocence
.s ° convinced that the excise officer had sworn falsely,
2 he determined to seek redress. The !Ilan was sr-
tet4d and tried at the Essex -ramie's, teie's, and in spi of all
t 's 'tktray of talent, in spite of all the silk gowns opposed
eira,• such was the force of truth that he, with only one
'tiasel, succeeded in gaining a verdict against the decision
o
these clerical Barons.—( Hear, hear !) But what did the
ftleera of the Crown do upon this? They moved to have
trial set aside, not because the evidence was untrue—
ti:ilecause there had been any misdirection on the part of
es iodise not because there was any want of a material
,tts
tit'eas on the part of the Crown ; but because the plain-
tt, 'km described as a brewer (which he was), when he
ka4 in fact a licensed victualler (Hear, hear !). When the
4ttite of this case were fully made known to Ministers,
silfitas.ed they would reimburse that poor man the 300/.
issich he had expended in vindicating Isis character
stet
unfounded aspersions. If lie had clearly explained
o,t4t he meant to state, he thought he had made
is at case which called for a more efficient controul
i 44, management of these causes, and therefore a case for
Issitliq. He had avoided making any proposition—nay,
ifil'"oided nuking use of names as much as possible ; and
tstt's did mention the Solicitor of the Exchequer, it was not
the a view of casting the slightest blame on him. It was
ac system with which he found fault, and not those -who
pad under it. If the Hon. and Learned Gentleman op-
so ate should succeed in making out a case against him, lie
ts'ild have the same success that he was wont to have in
(41Court of Exchequer, with this difference, that in the
tl4 tt he spoke from his brief, and with his fee, while in
rt Rouse his opinions must be open and disinterested.—
it% llon. Member concluded by moving the following re-
trt.ti°,l:----" That it is expedient that an efficient con-
sf 41 should he appointed Over the origin and conduct
Cp,411 proceedings instituted by the Crown for the Res
'ry of Penalties under the Customs and Excise Laws."
t.',Che motion having been seconded and put from the
Ids ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in rising to answer the
sit"rnents of the Hon. Member, felt hound to state, that no
des could have brought the subject forward with more
tlit'utseas and impartiality. He would endeavour to follow
fesssgon. Member as shortly as possible through the dif-
is Lit Points upon which he had touched ; and first he oh-
e'; to to the consolidation of the Acts relating to the two
Ils:bt branches of our revenue. The Hon. Member (Mr.
thi-s'ey) went on to state, that no benefit was derived from
+ measure, inasmuch as the country was called upon to
12
Prt)tt, rOOO/. a year for a due administration of the law in
cone lag the revenue. But the Hon. Member should re-
ars tt, that the Excise and Customs of the country
lestssUtscisd to 43,000,000!., and that many legal proceedings
Coe actually necessary for its protection. When it was re_
tioZted that these prosecutions arose out of all transae-
'4lC:otnected with the imports and exports of the kingdom,
%tat all the collections of the Excise and the Customs, and
kits°,f all the provisions of all the various Acts of Parlia-
t"etuPon the subject of our trade and manufactures and
PsaLuo regulation of our commerce ; when, too, it was 7-
40ted that these prosecutions were all the protection
thts," to the collection of a revenue of upwards of forty-
tiss` Millions of money ; was it not too musth for the Hen.
.‘ti
eotk *man to complain that the Government was o • ut of
I'lo upon that protection which he characterised as the
"3 oant sum of 12,000!. 1 In this first point, there-
'6l4;4 differed in loin from the Hon. Gentleman, and
"iiituded that the result was the very reverse of that
he would have wished to maintain. The next topic
kies•
nich he would advert, was the assertion of the Hon.
Nt'artan that this system of Excise prosecutions tended
trst%Production of costs, and that it operated unfairly and
lhirvely upon the poorer class of defendants. This
'oat ~• ltvoleed others of more or less importance. The
riltllivat, the prosecutions were too numerous, and conse-
Ptsly that they were very frequently instituted very ini-
?trlti IY• In order to illustrate this assertion, the Hon.
n'ess"sn cited the number of prosecutions for the Cus-
;lle Eaod the Excise. The Customs, he said, were 940 ;
'dos aeiae 911 ; making a total of 1,851. Of these the
attl
4eritlernan said, there were 1,000 unsuccessful,
tie °a
I,
et
lY 850 successful ; and, therefore, the Hon. Gen-
brew it as an inevitable inference, that there must
if thsucen 1 ow prosecutions improperly instituted.
7%4- Crown had brought these 1,000 prosecutions
dose the Court of Exchequer and lost them, he might
bsitat this argument would have some weight ;
tatn the House heard that these prosecutions
h tot
cost been either lost or abandowed, but that, on
tty, sitrarY, the Crown had been successful in almost
Itlteste, of them, he conceived that the Hon. Gentleman
ti"tse tv"Y mistaken in his conclusion. He we uld beg the
tals ° hear what had been the amount of the prosecu- '
• 'ad 1823, and what had been their result. Under the
fiftysef
„`,"'cise the Crown obtained in that year verdicts
th se Pee "lue cases. The defendants were acquitted upon
ea
Nth. as and 173 prosecutions wese compromised by
dote s_"'" before they came to trial. Thus, in 1823,
cisl4t% "re 286 Excise prosecutions in all, and the defend- j
"re
Nth Only three.—(Hear, hear.) In 1824, the!
obt,
4na 6 ned a verdict in all the prosecutions except
tat number of compromises were 147. In 1825

there were t 50 prosecutions, of which the Crown lost
eight. In 1826, there were 127 prosecutions, of which
the Crown lost two. And in 1827 there were 160 prose-
cutions of which the Crown lost three. So that there
were in all 990 prosecutions, and only eighteen failures.—
(Heel-, hear.) This, he thought, might be taken as
an answer to the Hon. Gentleman's argument, and as
showing pretty fair per centage of success in the specula-
tions of that—according to the Hon. Gentleman—all-
powerful and invisible person, his Majesty's Attorney-Ge-
neral. He would next refer the House to the prosecutions
for infractions of the laws for regulating the Customs.
—ln 1823, there were one hundred-and-fifty informa-
tions filed against offenders ; and the failures—how
many? Ni/.—(llear.) This might be called a sort of Annus
Mirabilis for the Crown and its Officers. In 1824, there
were 219 informations, and two failures. In 1825, there
were 151 informations, and two failures; and, without
troubling the Mouse with all the details of the different
years, he might merely state, that iu the last year, 1627,
there were again no failures at all.—(Hear, hear.) He
hoped that he had said enough to prove that this invincible
and extraordinary person, the Attorney-General, was not
se odious to the people, or so cruel in the execution of the
duties of his office, as he appeared through tine angry me-
dium in which the Hon. Gentleman wished to exhibit him.
(Hear.) The next point to which the lion. Member fur
Colchester had directed his attention was, the conduct of
the Boards under which these prosecutions were com-
menced, and the amount which was recovered as penalties
by their exertions. The Hon. Member complained that,
although penalties to the amount of upwards of one million
had been sued for, the whole amount recovered was tnly
137,826/. After observing, that an information had fre-
quently counts for a penalty, because a person failed to
make the proper entries : and for other penalties, became
he bad not sent out the proper permits ; and again, per-
haps, for not preparing arid keeping, according to regula-
tion, some peculiar documen, the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman proceeded to contend that these multiplied
counts for penalties were never insisted upon by the Crown,
or by the Boards, except iu cases of peculiar and
aggravated fraud and deception; and that they were
always content with the most moderate penalty, when
they saw any thing prodfieed in mitigation of the
offence. So well satisfied -was he, indeed, with the
fallacy of the Hon. Member's arguments upon those points,
that be should not feel himself justified in occupying the
time of the House by going into the details requisite for an
answer to them, if he was not apprehensive that the state-
ments of the Hon. Member might have the effect, if left
unanswered, of exciting an unjust prejudice against these
Public Boards, and of drawing unmerited odium upon their
regulations.—(Hear.)—lle had never, during the time he
had the houour to hold his present office, been anxious to
bring any case into the Court of Exchequer, unless he
saw that a public discussion of its merits would have the
effect of preventing the commission of similar offences, and
checking the frauds upon the Revenue. When, there-
fore, he said that in 1825 there were 225 cases com-
pounded, he might be said to have given an answer already
to much of the Hon. Gentleman's observations upon this
subject. It was said, however, that the whole production
of the rnalties was only 157,0001., and that 45,0001.
were paid to informers. lie would ask, was it his fault,
or the fault of any of the Boards, that such a sum should
be paid to informers? The whole of the Acts upon which
these penalties were recoverable, recognised the existence
and reward of informers. The principle of proceeding
upon informations of this description was as old as the
times of Queen Anne, and had been recognised by
every Act passed by the Legislature since that period.—
The revenue, indeed, could not be protected without them.
Few, if any, of the frauds upon its regulations could reach
the knowledge of the Crown unless by their assistance ; and
he believed most sincerely, that if they were to come to a
determination of giving informers nil in point of reward,
they would he nil in point of information.—(Hear, and a
laugh.) The Hon. Member who brought the subject
before the House, possessed, he felt bound to admit, very
great ingenuity ; but all his ingenuity had failed him when
he attempted to point out any remedy for that which he
considered an evil. The Lion. Member had talked of
tribunals ; but he would fearlessly challenge the Hon.
Member to point out any tribunal, of any kind, so well
adapted as the Court of Exchequer to the trial of offences
of this description, or to name any kind of Court of LaW
which, in its administration of justice upon cases connected
with the revenue, could give more satisfaction to the coun-
try. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman referred' s° the com-
plaints upon the abuses from the employment of Clerks of
Court, and observed that regulations were in progress for
the purpose of remedying the defects of that part of the
system of the Court of Exchequer. The lion. Gentleman
had attacked the Officers of the Crown, as too largely
paid in the management of these prosecutions. It was
a subject of a nature too delicate for him to enlarge upon
it; but he (the Attorney-General) could say, without
fear of contradiction, that he had spent days and weeks
in the performance of his duties in the Court of Ex-
chequer, to the loss of a much more lucrative and
advantageous practice before the House of Lords. (Hear.)
To much that the Hon. Gentleman said upon the subject
of the Attorney-General, he did not feel himself bound to
make any reply, because the Hon. Gentleman had separated
the individual from the office, and treated the acts of
which he complained, as always emanating from a kind of
invisible person, who could not be brought under the no-
tice of the House. If he thought, however, that any
insinuations were levelled against him as holding that
office, he would say to the person who made them, that he
would r stoop so low—he would not be guilty of any
such mean condescension as to attempt to answer them.
He would east them away—he would fling theirs out of
the door with the contempt they so justly deserved. In
that way he would treat any such insinuations if levelled
against him. The Hon. Gentleman might say what he
liked of the office ; lie might cast upon it all the asper-
sions he liked, provided that he was not the individual
against whom he directed such offensive insinuation.. The
Hon. and Learned Gentleman then alluded to the case
of Captain Bryant, and observed, that he had been prose-
cuted few a breach of some regulations upon the subject of
his Manifest. Of the case, however, he knew nothing;
but he did know that these regulations with regard to
lanifests were of great importance, as he had known gross
frauds attempted to be practised by persons who made false
entries. In a very recent case, a very valuable picture
had been discovered between two marble slabs, although the
manifest contained no entry of any thing but a slab of
marble. Of the case of Storks he also knew little, but he
gave all credit to the statements of the Hon. Member for
Essex (Mr. Western), wino, without confounding him
with this man or that, had always performed his Parlia-
mentary duties, like an independent country gentleman.
He believed, however, that Storks was summoned before
the Clerical Magistrates, of whom the Hon. Gentleman
had said se much, for a breach of a regulation with regard
to notices—one, be it recollected, of the most important of
the precautions adopted for the security of the Revenue.
Storks was summoned before these Magistrates, and con-
victed, upon the evidence of three witnesses, of a breach of
the laws on this subject. Storks afterwards prosecuted those
witnesses at the Chehnsford Assizes, and convicted them
of perjury; but the managers of the prosecution have,
since that conviction, moved the King's Bench to set
aside the trial. But, he would ask, were the Magistrates
accountable for the perjury of the witnesses? The local
jurisdiction given to Magistrates in these cases was, he
contended, a great boon to the public, by the saving of
expence which it produced in the attendance of witnesses
from the remotest corners of the kingdom, at Westminster.
He remembered when the measure was proposed, that the
House assented without any division to the proposition—
that it was safer and better to make a trial of the local
jurisdictions ; and he knew that they had been very advan-
tageous to the people, as well as a great means of lessening
the business of the Court of Exchequer. During the last
Term there was only one Custom prosecution, and he be-
lieved that three parts out of four of the offences against
the Excise were now disposed of by the local tribunals.
The Hon. and Learned Gentleman concluded by imploring 1
the House not to allow itself to be led away by any fanciful
or ingenious statements.
Mr. WESTERN admitted that the lion. Member for
Colchester had not pointed out any remedy for the evils,
but still he did not think the local tribunals adequate to
the relief of those charged with offences against the revenue.
He adverted to the case of Mr. Storks, which was one, in
his opinion, of extreme hardship ; and in every respect in
which it could be received, at variance with
to the
htlleprigneeniperleasl
of justice. The Hon. Member gave credit
dispositions that existed on the part of the Excise to an
impartial administration, but did not think that a suffici-
ently efficient controul was exercised over the adminis-
tration of the department.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER admitted
that the case referred to by the Hon. Member' who had
just sat down, was one entitled to the serious attention of
Governmeut ; and he could assure the Hon. Member, that
it was the intention of the Lords of the Treasury to be-
stow upon this case, as they bad done upon others of a simi-
lar nature, the most minute consideration. If the case
were one entitled to relief, it would be afforded. He knew
that there was a disposition sometimes to find fault with
whatever tribunal was instituted. If it were proposed
that the trial should take place before the Court of Exche-
quer, tine expence was complained of—and if it were refer-
red to the local jurisdiction of two Magistrates—the com-
petency of the tribunal was attacked, But it should -be re-

membered, that if the decision of the Magistrates 4as im-
pugned, there was an appeal from it to the Quarter
Sessions.

Mr. BRIGHT thought that a great reform in the Ex-
cise was requisite, and that a complete consolidation of the
luw should take place.
After a few words from Mr. HERMES and Mr. War.
SMITH, the gallery was cleared for a division, and the
House divided—
For the motion 39
Against it 146
Alajority against the motion --107
PRINTING EXPENCES.

On the motion of Sir MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEY, a
Select COMlDiaee WO appointed to inquire into the ex-
pence of printing votes and papers ordered by the House to
be printed.