The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-13 00:00:00

fees so fixed would, with a moderate scale of salary,
command adequate assistance. He believed that the
measure, if permitted by the House to become law,
would have a salutary effect on the administra-
tion of justice throughout the country.—
(Hear, hear.) He thought it would not be
attended with any great expense ; and though the
county-rate might be a little increased—which, how-
ever, he did not anticipate—yet the inhabitants of
the districts who now paid the fees would be re-
lieved. Whatever might be the effect on the Govern-
meat, when an individual were placed in the painful
and agonising position of being put on his tr'al,
though innocent, and if he should be acquitted, he
was bound to say that to exact fees from him did
appear to him a monstrous proceeding. Wherever
the charge might fall, it ought not to fall on the in-
nocent party who had just obtained an acquittal. What-
ever might be the differences of opinion in the House on
other points, with respect to salaries or fees he ex-
pected entire concurrence on this. subject. There
might be points which he had omitted, but, he had
enuleavtured to notice all the most prominent ones
that had been brought forward. Some of the
objections made by Honourable Members applied
rather to details which were open to consideration in
Committee; but the great point now to be considered
was the principle oF the measure, one which he be.
lieved was incontestible, that justice would be better
administered by servants receiving a salary, than by
servants receiving fees.
After a few words from General JOHNSTONE and
Mr. TURNER,
Captain PECHETT. saw nothing in the Bill v. ith
which he could cordially agree. But he thought the
Right lion. Baronet might have added a provision to
restrain magistrates' clerks from acting as political
agents ; in a small town it was very objectionable
that they should be entrusted with this power. He
thought, too, that petty sessions should always be
held in a public building. At present, in many
places, the sessions were held in a public-house,
where prisoners and witnesses were detained for
many hours to the profit of the landlord, who
charged nothing for the room in which the magis-
trates met ; it was plain, therefore, that he derived
some advantage from it.
Mr. ESCOTT thought most of the remarks that
had been made applied rather to the details than the
principle of the Bill. At the same-time he had heard
enough to be perfectly convinced that his Hon.
Friends themselves who had made the objections were
not at all aware of the evils this measure would re-

move. Those evils were not equally diffused over the
country; there were counties in which the vigilance
of the magistrates and the better feelings of the officers
of the courts of justice, had, of themselves, put an end
to the most illegal and unjust part of the system, and
he believed Oxfordshire was one of those places. This
Bill established a system of payment of clerks
of the peace by salaries instead of fees. That
might be an excellent principle, but the Bill was not
the one he had asked the Right Hon. Baronet for, last
year. The measure for which he asked him was a
short declaratory Act, which should put an end to the
existing system of unjust and illegal fees. One clause
would have done this; by the concurrence of all who
bad spoken on both sides of the House, there could
have been no objection to such a Bill. But he was
far from sayingthe Right Hon. Baronet was not right ,
in going farther than this ; it was enough for him to
know that the Bill, as it was introduced, would
abolish these unjust and illegal fees. He was sure
many Hon. Gentleman were not precisely aware of
what the system really was. 'Three officers were '
affected by this Bill, clerks of the peace, clerks of assize,
and clerks of the magistrates. Each of these '
officers in different counties, to different amounts
took these unjust fees on different pretences. The
clerk of assize took them under the sanction of the
most extraordinary Act of Parliament which ever
was passed, or had ever disgraced the statute-book of ,
the country, and which he did not hesitate to declare '
was a fraud on Parliament and the country. 'This
was the 55th of Geo. 111., chap. 50. By this sec-
tion acquittal fees were abolished in the case of pri-
soners,but, by a subsequent section,a compensation was
given from the county-rates for `` all such fees," and
under these fees that compensation was unjustly re-
ceived. But strange to say, the clerk of the peace did not
take fees,' or was not entitled to them, under this Act.
The fees were granted under different Acts. The
duty of the justices was to make out a table of the
fees that ought to be paid, which was to he submitted
to the judges for their sanction, and if they should
approve of it, then they were paid. But under the
present system was it not too bad that fees should he
taken from defendants while there was no authority
whatever in the Act for doing so ?—(Hear.) Yet it
was a well-known fact that there were certain sums
put down in the list as fees to be paid by defendants,
and that had gone on for years without being
exposed. He did not seek to attach blame to any
body for permitting this practice to continue, because
what was everybody's business was nobody's, except
-that he did think the parties ought' ohave looked after
these matters before. Besides this,the clerks of the j ustices
also took fees from defendants, and that,too, there was
no Act of Parliament to authorise. But it was
done in this way : A bill of costs was made out, in
which was included certain sums alleged to be the
t fees to be paid by defendants, and they had to pay
them. Surely this should not be allowed to con-
tinue, for if there was no authority f r it by Act of
Parliament, what authority was there ? Was there
any man who, standing in the capacity of a defen-
dant, should be asked to pay fees ? Hehad had an op-
portunity of pleading " Not guilty," and taking his
trial ? (Hear, hear.) He knew he was now speak-
ing in the hearing of many Hon. Members learned in
the law, and they well knew that there was no law
to sanction such a course as that of taking fees from
a defendant by a Queen's officer, ever since the time
of the laws of Edward the First. He had heard of
instances where the fees taken from defendants
as 31. and 41., before a man
in theamountedp
to such a
ofthing
a defendant was afforded
'an opportunity of pleading " Not guilty," even
upon a charge of a trifling assault.—(Hear.)
Was it not too bad that such a practice should be
permitted, and yet it was no uncommon occurrence
that such a thing was_.. done to one party by another
from mere spite ; and the defendant often happened to
be a poor man, who had to beg a loan of Si. before he
could be in a position to defend himself from such a
truckling charge.(Hear, hear.) He would not
trouble the House further on this subject, but he
trusted that the Bill now before the House would
have the effect of remedying and removing these il-
legal abuses.
Mr. MILES concurred in the principle of the Bill,
but he differed from the provisions of many of the
clauses, and hoped the abuses complained of would
not be permitted any longer to exist.
Mr. HAWES approved of the Bill, and hoped it
would be passed, as nothing could be a greater abuse
than to have the fees exacted in the manner stated by
the Hon. Member opposite.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL was afraid the
answer which he had to give to his Hon. Friend the
Member for Somersetshire would not be very satis-
factory to his Hon. Friend. If the fees were settled
by Act of Parliament, most unquestionably it would
be perfectly legal to take those fees. His Hon.
Friend had, however, imposed a much more difficult
task upon him, as his Hon. Friend had called upon
him to state the law and the facts of the case. Now,
if his Hon. Friend had stated what were the facts, he
(the Solicitor-General) would, to the best of, his
ability, have stated what the law was. There was a
wide difference of opinion between his Hon. Friend
the Member for Winchester, and his lion. Friend the
Member for Someraetshire, as to the facts of this case.
This matter was now pending in the Courts. He
would have in another place to argue this question.
The facts would be there ascertained, and judgment
would be given. He must, therefore, decline to give
an opinion on the law of this case, and leave the facts
doubtful for the present.—(Laughter.)
Mr. WA KLEY sincerely hoped the fee system
would be pursued to the highest Courts. He did not
think the Hon. Solicitor-General had answered the
Winchester,
whether question of the Hon. Member for
whether parties who had taken illegal fees, and which
illegal fees were afterwards abolished, were entitled to
compensation in respect of those fees.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that it did
not require a lawyer to answer that question. There
could be no doubt that such persons were not entitled
to compensation.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered
to be committed on the 14th of April.
BASTARDY BILL.

The Howe then 4N ent into Committee on this Bill.
Sir J. GRAHAM said the object of the Bill was
merely to correct matters of form.
Mr. COLLETT thought the words " putative
father," were very indistinct, and he therefore moved
that they be left out.—(Laughter.)
After a few words from the SOLICITOR-
GENERAL, the clause was passed without a
division.

The remaining clauses of the Bill were then gone
through as also the schedule without any opposition.
Sir J. GRAHAM then moved the following ad-
ditional clauses :
" And be it Enacted, that when an order made under
the provision of the said Act shall, prior to the passing
of this Act, have been quashed for any defect therein,
and not upon the merits, it shall be lawful for the mo-
ther of the bastard child, in whose favour such order
shall have been made, to take Proceedings for the ob-
taining of another order, according to the provisions of
the said Act, at- any time within the space of three
calendar months after the passing of this Act, although
the period limited for her application to the justice under
the said Act shall have expired.
" And whereas power is given by the said Act to the
putative father to appeal against an order made upon
him by the justices in Petty Session assembled, giving
notice of appeal as therein specified, and also sufficient
security, by recognizance or otherwise, for the payment
of costs, to the satisfaction of some one justice of the
peace, Be it enacted, That the condition of any such re.