The Sun.
London, England, 1845-08-05 00:00:00

LUNATIC ASYLUMS BILL.

The Commons' amendments to this Bill were then
agreed to.
SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY BILL.

Lord REDESDALE brought up the report of the
Select Committee on this Bill.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE presented a pe-
tion against the Bill, from a gentleman named
Maurillian. He stated that there wero eleven
names on the subscription-deed of persons, each
of whom was a shareholder in the Kentish rail-
ways to the amount of 570,0001. He thought
that as opportunity should be given to the petitioner to
have his statement investigated, and he would, therefore,
move that the Bill be re-committed.
Lord REDESDALE begged to assure their Lordships
that the same petition now under consideration bad been
referred to the Committee on Standing Orders, and all
the statements had been there entered into, and that
Committee did not think that the petitioners had
made out any case whatever against the Bill. As a
proof of the frivolous nature of the objections made, one
gentleman was Oleg, d to be wrongly described, because
" esquire" was affixed to his name instead of
" banker." The line which the Committee
had selected presented no engineering difficulties of any
consequ, nee ; while the other competing line embraced
works of great magnitude, and was by no means so good
a line. Under these circumstances he contended that
the Committee were perfectly right in the course they
adopted.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said it was mon-
strous to say that this man had only a small piece of
property which would be affected. That was a prima
facie reason why he should be heard, as every poor
man ought to be protected—in fact he had a greater
clam to the protection of the House than a rich man.
He should persist in his motion that the Bill be re-com-
mitted.

Lord REJ)ESDALE said the Committee took the
course they did for the purpose of preventing a vexatious
opposition to the Bill.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE then withdrew his
original motion, and moved that the evidence taken before
the Committee on the Bill be printed.
The Earl of WICKLOW protested against the course
proposed, and cited the case of the Dublin and Galway
line, to show that such a step ought only to be taken in
extreme cases.

Their Lordships then divided, when there appeared,
For the motion 37
For the amendment
Majority —36
The report was consequently received.
TAXING MASTER'S COURT OF CHANCERY

(IRELAND) BILL.
Lord STANLEY moved the third reading of this Bill.
The Earl of WICKLOW saii he had an amendment
to propose to the Bill. He did not think the nature of a
barrister's education capacitated him to perform the
duties of a taxing master, and as the bill at present
stood it cast a slur on the whole body of attorneys
and solicitors in Ireland. He moved as an amendment
that all persons to be appointed under the Bill should be
solicitors of the Court of Chancery in Ireland, who
should have been in practice for the space of ten years
or upwards.

The LORD CHANCELLOR opposed the amend-
ment, and reminded the House that the majority of the
taxing masters in the Courts of Common Law in Eng-
land were barristers.

Lord COTTENHAM said, as the Bill stood, a butler
or a coachman might be appointed to the office. It was
a mere matter of patronage, and the patron might ap-
point whatever competent person to the office, with-
out regard to his previous profession or occupa-
tion. Barristers knew little or nothing about taxing costs.
Taxing costs was entirely out of the barrister's occupa-
tion, while, on the other hand, attorneys were brought
up in that course of business. Why was it that such a
struggle had been created between barristers and attor-
neys by this Bill ? Was it because his Noble Friend had
discovered that the barristers had a greater knowledge
about costs than attorneys. He (Lord Cottenham) did
not see why barristers should be named in one part of
the Bill and attorneys in another. He thought also that
if the opinion was that what was good for England was
good for Ireland, and if justice was to be done to Ire-
land, they should adopt a course of assimilating the laws
of both countries.

The LORD CHANCELLOR here remarked that the
amendment was that they ought to have solicitors exclu-
sively.
Lord CAMPBELL suspected that there was a job at
the bottom of the Bill, and, if there were not, the matter
would not be so fiercely contested. His Noble Friend
made a fine speech, such as he could make on any
occasion, and on any case, but he did answer the
arguments used by the Noble Earl opposite. The dis-
cussion now was respecting the officer who was to per-
form the same function which the taxing-master in this
country had to perform. From what he knew of Dublin,
the solicitors there were men of as high honour, credit,
and intelligence as could be found in Westminster. Did
his Noble Friend know the amount of terms, fees, and
of other legal expenses ? It was true, he would know
the difference between "To dining with you and advi-
sing you with respect to cause,&c.,l6s. Bd." and making
the dinner a set-off to the advice given. Such knowledge
was only obtained by long study. He hoped the Noble
Earl would persist in his amendment.
Lord STANLEY said the question was whether they
would leave the appointment of taxing-masters to the
Lord Chancellor of Ireland for the time being, or to the
solicitors. He was willing to leave such appointments
to that high officer, whose high office gave a sufficient
guarantee that only proper persons would be appointed
to the office.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said this Bill was
another illustration of the total disregard in which the
feelings of the people of Ireland were held by this coun-
try, and which had the effect of materially contributing
towards its present distressed condition. The Noble
Lord had drawn a gratuitous and most odious distinction
between the solicitors of the two countries, and justified
it by calling the profession of Ireland a small and ex-
clusive coterie. He should assure him that a more re-
spectable class of men than the solicitors of Dublin
never existed, and they would resent, and that most
keenly, the uncalled for and unmerited insult contained
in the present proposition.
The LORD CHANCELLOR explained that he did
not mean to cast any slight upon the solicitors of Ireland,
than whom he believed a more honourable or respectable
class of men did not exist, but he contended that the
barristers of that country were equally competent and
ought to have the preference.
Lord LANGDALE supported the amendment of the
Noble Lord opposite (Earl of Wicklow), because he
considered solicitors were fully competent and the proper
persons to discharge the duties now proposed to be taken
from them and transferred to others. With reference
to the Bill of 1838, to which allusion had been made by
his Learned Friend on the woolsack, surely the Noble
Lord must remember that that gave the office solely to
solicitors, and though at first entertaining a preference
in favour of the barristers, his Learned I, mend (the Lord
Chancellor) had, after mature deliberation and consulta-
tion, agreed to the Bill as carried.
The LORI) CHANCELLOR assured the House that
t to the abilities
Learned Lord near
him (Lord Langdale), that he yielded in the details of a
andit wasth
the
not
peculiarfmro cooffinevei c
held yu t
trhe
es pe e
Bill of which his Noble Friend had been the framer.
The Earl of ST. G ERMA NS denied that there was any
parallel between the cases of the solicitors of this
country and Ireland ; for, for every attorney that was
practising in Dublin there were twenty in this metropolis.
The Marquis of CLANRICARI)E reminded the
Noble Lord (the Earl of St. Germans) that, if in England
practising in
Ithreelraenwd,erseixtwwenetr)e•
solicitors
toas taxing officers
beapfr every
pooinze one
d
under the present Bill in this country, for every one in
the sister country.
The Earl of WICKLOW, in
reply, said that, con-
sidering the present state of discontent and disaffection
in Ireland, it would be perfect madness to draw the in-
vidious distinction he complained of, and he therefore
was determined to take the sense of the House upon the
question.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
C0ntent5....................................... 19
Non-Contents ................................. 13
Majority in favour of the amendment —6
A message from the Commons announced that the
London and York Railway Bill had passed there, and
praying their Lordships' approval.
PAUPER LUNATICS.

Earl FORTESCUE called attention to a petition re-
specting the treatment of pauper lunatics, in Ireland.