The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-09 00:00:00

MARKET INTELLIGENCE.

(From the London Mercantile Journal of March 8.)
SUGAR.—The West India market remained quiet to-day,
the sales being only about 150 hhds and tres, but the merchants
continue firm, and the prices of Friday last were fully maintained.
MAURITIUS.—The demand was steady to-day; and at
public sale 4,607 bags sold at full rates, indeed, in some cues,
a small advance was obtained : -middling to fine yellow fetched
62s to 66s 6d.

EAST INDIA.—At auction 2,sls:bags 297 chests Bengal
sold at full rates; low to good white at 62s to 675, brown at
50a 6d to 528 per cwt.
FOhEIGN.—We have to report a firm market for Foreign
Sugar. At public sale to-day 1,800 boxes white and 1,310
boxes yellow Havannah, were all sold at full rates, middling to
good yellow at 19s to 215,6 d, middling to good White at 25s to
27s 6d, low ditto at 24s to 24s 6d per cwt.
REFINED.—The demand from the home trade is quiet, but
prices are steady ; standard Lumps 79s to 79s 6d per cwt.
Few sales were made for export, but the price ,of Double
Crushed is steady at 28s 9d to 29s per cwt.
WEST INDIA MOLASSES.—The transactions of the week are
about 200 puns middling St. Kitts at 255, good Demerara at
245, and common quality from less esteemed Islands, at 22s 6d
to 23s per cwt.
COFFEE.—The demand was pretty good to-day for Coffee
for home use. Ceylon sold at 71s to 73s 6d for good ord, and
superior 78s 6d per cwt ; 68 casks West India brought full
naafi ; Demerara low middling and middling 92s 6d to 102 s 6d
pe • Cwt.
COCOA.—At public sale 320 casks, &c. West India all
sold ; Trinidad low to good red at 39s to 44s 6d, and St.:Lucia,
at 34s eld to 36s per cwt.
TEA.—The large public sales were brought to a close on
Thursday, with a spirit amongst the buyers, and firmness
am,mpt the merchants, fully supporting the prices of the last
sales.

VwThe
advices received to-day from China, produced kit little
stir in the Tea market, a fair business, however, was donp, and
/d per lb. advance on former transactions was paid. Company's
Co:igou is Is 11 id cash and 2s to 2s Old prompts.
N UTMEGS. —There is little variation in the value of this
article.— 0 casks Amboyna offered at public sale Acre bought
in, good fair bold first quality little limited at 3s 7d to 3s 8d
per lb. -
Gr NG Ea.—Very little progress can yet be made in sales of
East India Ginger, notwithstanding the very low prices at
which the article still rules, and in the absence of public sales
no transactions worthy of notice have transpired.
PIMENTO is held rather more firmly, and in the absence of
a public sale stiff prices have been paid for small parcels.:
PEPPER.— There is no alteration in the value of
this article, but- the demand is only partial, and the
business is almost confined to the public sales of 1,083 bags
Malabar, which sold at aid to 33d for g.Aal fair and good light,
at 3/3 for fair light, and at 3d for a fesv lots of grey, and 63Q
bags ordinary to good Sumatra at 23d to 3d per lb.
Cassia.—At auction 10 chests all sold at 86s rid to 90a for
middling and good, being full rates.
FRUIT.—A cargo of Dcnia Raisins, now landing, has been
t iken by the trade at 303. With this exception prices remain
much the same as before quoted.
Snail's.— the Rum market remains very firm. Fine Ja-
maica, 5s 7d to 5s 10d, and good 5s 3d to 5s sil; proof Lee-
:vat ds 2s 2d to 2s 3d. Bengal 11 um, subject
'o the high duty, at Is 3/d to Is 4d, and a small
lot at Is sd; admissible for home consumption at the'lowest.
.Ite of duty,. at Is 0d to 2s per gallon; Mauritius,. one per
cent. under prof at Is 7d per gallon. Brandy at full Prieer.
Geneva unaltered.

her men to work us home. lam a serious loser by the mis-
hap. The money lam out of pocket by being taken by the
Lily amounted to 2,0404
The LORD Mayoa—But if you apply at the Colonial-office
you certainly will obtain redress, upon inquiry into your case,
especially as you were 'dismissed by the authorities of the Cape
without even the ceremony of a trial.
Captain Porter said that the process through which he
must go before he could obtain restitution, would necessarily
be extremely dilatory.
The Loan MAYOR told Mrs. Langford that the Captain's
statement was a straightforward one, of the correctness of which
there could be no doubt. The supply of good seamen on board
her Majesty's ships was indispensable, and it was no unusual
thing to strip vessels at sea of their best men to sustain the
naval character. His Lordship then assured the applicant
that he would write to the Board of Admiralty on the subject
of the destination of her son, and gain for her every possible
intelligence about him ; and he requested Captain Porter to
send to him the son's distinct accounts as to his pay, fur the
atisfaction of the mother.

Captain Porter most willingly acquiesced, and the poor
woman went away much comforted by his Lordship's kind and
soothing interference.
WORSHIP-STREET.

Miss Mary Cave, a dress-maker, living in Beauvoir-place,
Kingsland-road, was brought before Mr. Bingham upon a
warrant charged with having violently assaulted Susan Sells, a
housemaid, in the service of the. Rev. John Simpson Surgrove,
of Dalston-terrace, whereby one of her ribs was fractured.
Mr. Wadson, a solicitor appeared for the defence.
The complainant stated that the defendant had been em-
ployed to make a dress for her master's daughter, her charge
for which became the subject of dispute, her master declining
to pay more than Iss. for the dress, while the defendant de-
manded U. 2s. On the 10th ult. the defendant called at the
house and requested to see Mr. Surgrove, who came to her in
the hall, when she urged her demand, and on his refusing to
give her more than he had previously offered, she became very
abusive, and called him by several opprobious epithets. He
requested her to-withdraw, and on her refusing to do so he re-
tired into the drawing-room. Witness remained in the hall
with the defendant, and as the latter positively refused to leave
the house, and continued abusing her master, she opened the
street door for the purpose of calling a policeman, when the
defendant pulled her glove off her right hand, and struck her a
violent blow on the left side. She suffered severely all day
from the effects of the blow, and as she became worse next
morning, Dr Rogers was sent for, who ascertained that one
of her ribs was broken, and she had been ever since under the
care of that gentleman, and of Mr Robinson, a surgeon.
A certificate from Dr. Rogers was handed to the Magis-
tarte, to the effect that the complainant's rib had been frac-
tured, and that she had sustained other internal injuries pro-
duced by violence.
Mr. Robinson, the surgeon, then stated that he had attended
the complainant since the 16th ult., who had not yet recovered,
and was likely to continue ill for some time longer.
In answer to the charge, the defendant denied most positively
having assaulted her intentionally, and felt the utmost regret
for the unfortunate result.

The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that he had given
notice the other day of his intention to move for the
appointment of a Committee to take into consideration
the law in Ireland, with regard to the Marriages of
Dissenters, with a view to remedy any defects,
if it should be found expedient to do so. He thought
it would be mere convenient and important that no
delay should take place in the appointment of the Com-
mittee, cud he would, therefore, propose immediately the
appointment of such Committee.
Lord BROUGHAM entirely agreed with the opinion
expressed by his Noble and Learned Friend as
to the necessity of moving immediately the
appointment of the Committee.—(hear.) Perhaps
the best course would be for his Noble and
Learned Friend to move now that the Bill, which stands
for a second reading, be referred to that Committee.
Lord SHAFTESBLTRY—He must name the Com-
mittee first.
The Marquis of LANSI)OWNE, in the absence
of his Noble Friend Lord Gosford, presented
a number Of petitions for an amendment of the
law of marriage . in Ireland, from Armagh, Mount-
morris, Caliir, and various other places in the counties of
Donegal, Armagh, and 'Tyrone.
THE LAW RELATING TO LUNATICS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said he had mentioned
last evening that it was his intention to lay on the table
a Bill for amending and improving the law in the case
of lunatics ; and .he thought it necessary, in the first
place, to state that it was the general scope and object
of the measure Which he proposed. In all cases of this
kind it was- necessary to consider the actual state of the
law, and the evils- resulting from it. With respect to the
actual state of the law relating to lunatics, their Lordships
were aware that there were certain standing Commission-
ers, to whom commissions Were addressed. Those gentle-
men were well qualified to discharge the duties
en trusted to them.—(Cheers.) But their jurisdiction
was confined to limits •-within twenty miles of London ;
and beyond those bounds commissions were addresed to
gentlemen of whom the Lord Chancellor knew nothing,
and who were frequently inexperienced in such delicate
and difficult inquiries, so that very great and unneces-
sary expenses were entaLed upon the estates of lu-
natics. The mode of def-:aying the expenses of the
Commissioners was by fees charged upon the estates.
This was the mode in which the Commissioners of Bank-
rupts were paid before the alterations made by the Bill
of his Noble and Learned Friend ; but it was a mode
liable in every way to very great objections, for the
charges fell very heavily on the estate of the lunatic, p ar-
ticularly when the estate was small, and frequent appli-
cations being made to the Court of Chancery for security
to the person and property of this unhappy class. Now
that he should not be supposed to state inaccu-
rately the inconveniences of the present system, he
would mention two or three instances of the
charges that had fallen on the estates of lunatics through
the mode of paying Commissioners by fees. In the case
of Lord Portsmouth, which certainly was a peculiar one,
on which six Commissioners sat, the foes to the Com-
missioners alone amounted to 1,0711. In the case of
Davis, the fees to the Commissioners amounted to
3461. 10s. The next was the case of Taylor, whose
estate was a small one, and the fees to the Commis-
sioners being 3464 10s., nearly consumed the estate
of the lunatic. In Mr. Gundry's case, which occurred
the other day, the fees were 2201. In a late
case in the country, on which one Commissioner
only sat for four days, the fees came to 75/. These
charges were very heavy, and they had the effect, in
many instances, where the estate of the lunatic was
small, of majcing those connected with the lunatic afraid
to apply to the Court of Chancery for a commission,
for they knew well that the expense of the Commission
would eat up the whole of the estate ; and, therefore,
these persons were left without adequate protection
as to person and property. But these were not all the
objections ho had to make to _the present systems.
Those public Commissioners to whom he had referred
were inadequately informed of their duties, and it often
happened, therefore, when a Commission was returned
that it was quashed for irregularity, and another Com-
mission had
.to be issued, the same expense to fall on the
estate again. His Noble and Learned Friend near him.
would remember the case of Mr. Holmes. The inqui
sition in this case was returned by country Commis
sioners, it was quashed for want of form, it wen
down a second time under a new Commission

SAGO. —Several parcels were brought forward in public 3alo,
consisting rf 1,263 IPgs boxe; Pearl, which chiefly sold 3t
i 25 to 26s fid for fair to find PLarl, being stiffdr rates for the
Le-t sorts. •

IticE.— The demand was steady to-day, and at public sale
3,697 bags Bengal were all s:)ld at Ds 6d to lls fur low to
good middling white, being full rates.
Ons.—Common Fish Oils continue dull of sale, but as the
stocks are still very light,Rm holders do not appear desirous
to realize, anti the few transactions that have taken plade sup-
port the prices of last week. Sperm also quiet, but fewtellers
can be found under late prices. Linseed Oil goes off slowly,
chiefly for export at 33s to 34s 3d per cwt, the crushers are,
however, looking for higher prices. Rape Oil very little in-
quired
for, and its value little better than nominal. Gallipoli
Oil remains dull, but Spanish continues to find buyers at im-
uroving rates, 521 to 531 paid during the last few days, and
I,:w parcels now to be had under the latter figure. :No altera- !
tion in Cocoa Nut or Palm Oils.

LLow.—ln this market we have no new feature to not be;
the transactions are still of a limited character and for imme- I
diate consumption only, but the hold,rs continue tirm, mad but
little change can be quoted in prices ' fine parcrls of fine Yet-
low Candle on the spot have changed hands at sto iSs 3d
per cwt. For delivery in the autumn 49s is the price named
by' the importers, but there does not apear to be any inclina-
tion at present to purchase thereat. in South American Tal-
low few sales have occurred ; the stork of this descripton on the
Ist instant was 397 serous and 1,i90 casks, &c. To-day
Tallow was in slow request, and 48s is now the nearest price
of P. Y. C. on the spot.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
HOUSE OF LORDS, March 8.
CLARK v. SMITH.

Their Lordships, at the conclusion of the arguments; post
polled their judgment.

CARTER V. sta. W. H. PALMER—JUDGMENT.
Lord COTTENHAM gave judgment in this case, affirming the
decision of the Court below, with costs.
THE SCOTTISH UNION INSURANCE COMPANY V. TUE MARQUIS

OF QU RENSBURV.
Lord COTTENHA also gave judgment in this appeal, affirm-
ing the decision below.

COURT OF CHANCERY, March 8.

THE CLARENCE RAILWAY V. THE HARTLEPOOL RAILWAY

COMPANY. I
The arguments had not concluded when his Lordship rose to
attend the House of Lords.

ROLLS' COURT, March 8.

Short causes came before his Lordship in the early part of
the day, after which the part-heard motion of

JOHNSON V. TODD
was resumed, and engaged the Court for the remainder of the
day. It was a motion to set aside the verdict found on the
trial of an issue, directed in this cause by this Court, and for anew
trial. The issue had been tried before Mr. Justice Wightrnan in
August last at Newcastle-upon-Tyne, an _I was to ascertain the
next of kin of Robert Marshall, who had acquired a large pro-
perty in the West Indies, and at his death in 1821) bequeathed,
with the exception of some lt-gacies, all his property to persons
who, it afterwards appeared, had died during his life-tit-9. As
the next of kin became, in consequence, the persons
entitled to the property, it became necessary to
find out who they were. The Master's report found the plain-
tiff the next of kin by the mother's side ; exceptions to that
report were taken and an issue was directed. The Jury found
that Peter Marshall was the next of kin of the testator Robert,
at the time of his death.

The arguments in the case are likely to engage to-morrow (this
day) also.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

OLD COURT

George Willes, 42, agent ; Wm. Saint, 26, weaver ; I
Clark, 32, a eaver ; James Davis, 33, harness-maker ; and
George Lloyd, 22, upholsterer, were indicted for stealing three
bills of exchange, and half a 51. bank-note, the property of
Jacob Ruffy ; and George Cunningham, 26, fringe maker, and
George Lloyd, were indicted for feloniously forging and utter-
ing an endorsement to a bill of exchange, with intent to de.
fraud Charles Munro Johnson.

Mr. Bodkin prosecuted, and Mr. Phillips defended the pri-
soners Lloyd and Cunningham ; Mr. Payne appeared for the
other prisoners. .

The case was very complicated, and possessed no features of
general interest. A robbery had been committed on the pre-
mises of the prosecutor on the 26th of December last, when
several bills of exchange were stolen. Shortly after the rob-
bery the bills were found in the possession of the prisoners,
who were attempting to negotiate them to Mr. Johnson, the
endorsements having been forged subsequently to the robbery.
Mr. Pitimars and Mr. PAYNE having addressed the Jury
for their clients,
The RECORDRIL summed up the evidence, and the Jury re-
turned a verdict of Guilty against William Saint, William
Clark, Jame s Davis, and George Lloyd, and acquitted the
other prisoners.—Sentence deferred.

Willes, Lloyd, and Cunningham were then indicted for fe-
loniously forging; and uttering an endorsement to a bill of
exchange, with intent to defraud Charles Munro Johnson.
The bill in question was the one alluded to in the above
transaction, and the forgery imputed to the prisoners was the
placing the name of Hr. Ruffey upon it, when it was taken to
Mr. Wood.

The evidence was the same as in the foregoing case, and
Mr. Ruffey proved that his name upon the bill was a forgery.
Mr. PAYNE again addressed the Jury on behalf of the pri-
soners, and
The Jury returned a. verdict of Guilty against them all.
The Raconnea then ordered the prisohers to be placed at
the bar, and after a suitable admonition sentenced them to be
transported beyond the seas for the term of 15 years.

The MAGISTRATIS recommended the parties to settle the
affair among themselves, and the defendant ultimately agreed
to pay 101. damages.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, March 8.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool-
sack at ten minutes past Five o'Clock.
PRESBYTERIAN MARRIAGES.
Lord STRAFFORD presented a petition from Tyrone,
Cavan, and Monaghan, praying for an alteration of the
law relative to Presbyterian Marriages in Ireland.
CORN-LAWS.

The Earl of ALBEMARLE presented a petition from
Norwich against the Corn-laws.
The Ear! of CLARENDON presented a petition from
Musselborough, praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws.
CHURCH EDUCATION.
The Bishop of EXETER presented a petition from
the Diocese of Down and Connor in favour of the Irish
Church Education society.
CHARITABLE PROPERTY.

Lord CAMPBELL presented a petition from the
Trustees of the Tiverton Charities, complaining of the
expenses of the conveyance of charitabN property, and
praying for an alteration in the law on that )inbject.
DISSENTERS' MARRIAGES.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.

a second inquiry took place, and the expense of the pro-
ceedings of the time of the second information (not in-
cluding the expenses of tho Masters) came to 5,0001. Their
Lordships would feel some remedy was necessary to put an
end to those evils. The remedy he (the Lord Chancellor)
proposed, was to do away with the whole of the present
system, and appoint instead two gentlemen of experience
to execute all commissions in town and country,
not to bu paid by fees, but by a fixed salary.
The result of this would be, that they would hare their
commissions well executed by experienced and compe-
tent men, and without throwing unnecessary charges on
the estates of the unhappy persons who were the subjects
of inquiry. But this was only a small part of the subject.
In all commissions of lunacy it was tho custom to summon
twenty-four Jurymen, because it was considered neces-
sary, according to the existing law, that twelve Jury-
men should concur in the verdict. These proceedings
were, in this respect, analagous to the proceeding of
Grand .Juries. Now what was the consequence of this?
Why the consequence was, that additional charges of
heavy nature were made and thrown on the estates of the
unhappy persons. Generally speaking, twenty-two
Jurymen attended, and they were paid a guinea each
per day out of the estate, and if, as was frequently the
case, they remained four or five days, the expenses were
'enormous. Now, he had already stated the chance he
intended to make, so far as related to the office of Com-
missioner. He would state to their Lordships
in a similar manner the change intended to be
made so far as related to Jurors. In the case of
the Earl of Portsmouth, the expenses of the Jury alone
were 410/. 11s. In the case of Taylor, to which he had
already referred, the expenses of the Jury amounted to
175/, and that was a small estate. In the case of Daven-
port, the expenses of the Jury amounted to 315/. In
the case of Lady Kirkwall, the expenses were .1931.-
These expenses were added to the others in the shape Of fees
to Commissioners; they would see what enormous charges
were thrown on the estates of the subjects of these in-
quiries. He was well aware that this was a delicate sub-
ject, but when he told their Lordships that a great Many
of these cases met with no opposition, he was
sure their Lordships would think that a discre-
tionary power ought to be vested in the person
holding the Great Seal to summon a smaller number
of jurlmen for the purpose of deciding a question
Ile ought not to be required to summon twenty-four
Jurymen, 'nor was it necessary that a unanimous vote of
twelve should decide as to whether the person was of un-
sound mind or not. He proposed, therefore, to place a
discretionary power
Great Seal in certain cases in which affidavits
pson holding. the
were inteoduced to regulate his judgment, to lessen
the number eF jurymen necessary
to be summona
Now, there were two
.points to which he had
itt
directed his attention forming the Bill which
he wished to lay upon
their Lordships' table.

In consequence of the application of a woman of respectable
appearance, named Langford, the LORD Mavoi sent for Mr.
John Porter, commander and owner of the ship Joshua Carroll,
to account for the absence of her son, who had gone out in that
vessel to the coast. of Africa, but never returned to this
country.
•Mrs. Langford said that her son Edward had been engagad
by the Commander to go a long voyage as second mate, and
that, upon tbeieturn of the vessel to this port, neither her son
nor any one of the crew that went ont i• the Joshua Carroll,
appeared, As she could not understand from the Commander,
to her satisfaction, for what reason so extraordinary a disappear..
nee had taken place, and as she naturally felt alarmed for the
fate of her child, she had, she said, been advised to represent
the matter to his Lordship, as he had done infinite service to
the mothers and widows of poor seamen whose fate was either
&Axill or dreaded.

Captain Porter said that he had alrea ly given the applicant
a 1 the information he could give upon the subject He had
;one to the coax' of Africa for 130 or 140 free labourers, and
tell in with the Lily 3100 p-of-war, of 18 guns, which mistook
the Joshua Carroll for a slaver, and took her into the Cape of
Good Hope. At the Cape it was soon found that ihe-Joshaa
Carroll was an honourable trader, and she was discharged with-
out being brought to trial. The Lily, however, thought proper
to keep for the Queen's service the whole of the able-bodied
crew of the Joshua Carroll, and amongst them Edward Lang.
ford, and no doubt the men were, at the present time, in ships
of war, but he could not ascertain where, or anything about
them.

The LORD MAYOR.—How did you work your way home
from the Ca ;e? Captain Porter—The Lily gave me some of

TAE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MARCH 9, 1242

He had stated that it was his intention to
propose the appointment of two Commissioners,
men of learning and distinction at the Bar. He
had found on inquiry that a year and a half
had been allowed to elapse after the reference before a
Committee was appointed to take care of the estate of
the lunatic. What he proposed, to remedy this evil, was,
that the case should be entrusted to the Lord Chancellor,
for the time being, who should have the conduct.
There was another point in this Bill to which
he begged to direct their Lordships' attention.
There was an officer called the Clerk of
Custom (as we understood), and to whom, heavy
fees were paid. One part of the Bill was for the
purpose of abolishing this office. The Noble, Lord
near him had previously attempted to abolish this
office, but he was prevented from doing so, as at was
considered unfair to take any office of a person, that office
being held by patent. His (the Lord Chancellor's) Bill
was to abolish this office at the death of the present
holder, or when ho should think proper to resign. Heavy
fees were attached to this office, and its abolition would
tend greatly to lessen the charges in these inquiries.
There was another point to which he begged leave to call
the attention of the House. His Noble Friend (Lord
Brougham) when he held the Great Seal, appointed vi-
sitors of lunacy ; that appointment was of great be-
nefit. Those appointments consisted of two : medi-
cal men and barristers ; it was their duty to visit
all persons found lunatic ; their duty was performed most
satisfactorily, and their returns were very full and com-
plete. What he proposed was this, that those gentlemen
who were to be Commissioners of Lunacy should be added
to the visitors—that they should, in fact, be ex officio
visitors, and though they were not bound to go, round
with the visitors they'were to exercise a superintendence of
great importance. That was the outline of his measure, when
it was printed and considered by their Lordships, he trusted
they would find his proposition an amendment, and it wbuld be
cheerfully acceded to by their Lordships.
Lord BROUGHAM concurred entirely with his Noble and
Learned Friend that some such measure as the one proposed
by him was absolutely required. When the measure came to
be discussed in Committee, or on the second reading, then
would be the time to enter into the subject more at large. His
Noble Friend had referred to the appointment of visitors made
by him when he held the Great Seal. It was but justice to his
Noble and Learned Friend that he should say that he
made those appointments entirely at his suggestion, and
under the authority of an Act of Parliament. Heetgreed
with his Noble Friend as to the manner in , which
those officers had performed their duty. With respect to the
abolition of the office to which his Honourable Friend referred,
that abolition took place in fact in 1832. With respect to the
jurisdiction to be given to the new Commissioners, and the
other officers, the propriety of that could best be discussed when
the details of the measure were gone into.
Lord COTTENHAM said, that there were some parts of the
measure of his Noble Friend in which he coincided, and others
which he greatly regretted. With respect to the duties at pre-
sent discharged by the Masters he would refrain from saying
more at present, than that no duty could be more im-
portant, or more delicate, than the management of the
estates of lunatics. It often happened that there were
parties concerned who only wished to get as much as they
could out of the estate of the lunatic ; and he should be very
apprehensive that, in future the management under the new ad-
ministration would not be so efficient for the protection, of the
estates as under the Masters. Another part of the proposi-
tion was to pay the persons who were to fi!l the offices out of
the suitors' fund. Against that he entirely and unqualifiedly
protested. He did not know that the fee fund could bear
much more burthens, but he could not understand, in any
case, on what principle the funds of one class of causes were to
defray the expenses of another.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said he understood his Noble
Friend to disapprove of taking these matters from the
superintendence of the Masters. But the proposition was
not to take lunatics out of the protection of
the Great Seel. The proceedings of the Commissioners
would be still subject to the revision of the Chancellor. As to
the funds, he did not think it at all unreasonable that the fees
paid into a Court. should be applied to pay the officers of that
Court. But his Noble and Learned Friend supposed errone-
ously that it was intended to take the salaries of visitors out of
the general suitors' fund of the Court. That was-not the case.
The fund he (the Lord Chancellor) meant was the fee fund in
lunacy alone.
Lord BROUGHAM did not see any objeAirm to such an
appropriation of the fee fund. He thought one Commissioner
would be enough.
The LORD CHANCELLOR would propose that in general
one Commissioner only should preside—( Hear, hearr)—but
that in cases of great importance the Lord Chancellor might
direct both to sit.
Lord CAMPBELL—Suppase the Court is divided in
opinion.
The LORD CH aNCELLOR had a clause authorising the
addition of a third Commissioner. The Lord Chancellor had
the power to appoint additional Commissioners under the pre-
sent system, as in Lord Portsmouth's case, when six Commis-
sioners sat, and Mr. Hulke, soon after appointed a Judge,
presided.
lii CAMPBELL, seeing no difference between such
trials and those that took place before the Lord Chief Justice
of England, could not perceive why one Commissioner would
not do as well as two.
The LORD CHANCELLOR would consider all objections
and suggestions when they came to Committee.
LAW OF MARRIAGES IN IRELAND.
The LORD CHANCELLOR moved the Committee to con-
sider the question. Amongst the names were the Lord Chan-
cellor, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lord Privy Seal,
the Duke of Wellington, the Marquis of Lansdowne, the Earl
of Devon, the Bishops of London, Carlisle, and Exeter, Lords
Minto, Melbourne, Brougham, and Cottenham. He (the
Lord Chancellor) hailed they would name as early a day as
possible for the sitting of the Committee, as the law of mar-
riages in Ireland was in a most obscure and unsatisfactory state,
and there should be no longer doubts respecting the obligations
anti nature of such an important and solemn contract. Per-
haps their Lordships would agree to Thursday.—( Hear°
fhe Marquis of CLANRICARDE said he would tiso,,e
some amendments to the retrospective Bill that would. come
before them.
Lord CAMPBELL hoped that retrospectively as well as
prospectively their Lordships would succeed in placing the law
of marriage on a basis satisfactory to all parties.
LOAN SOCIETIES BILL.

Lord WHARNCLIFFE moved the second reading of this
Bin.

Some conversation ensued, in which Lords Brougham,
Radnor, Monteagle, and other Peers took part, recognising
the benefit Loan Societies had done the poor, but hoping that
a clause would be inserted to prevent the meetings from being
held at public-houses.
Lord BROUGHAINI hoped his Noble Friend would apply
himself to the subject to which he had referred.
The Earl of DEVON said he would give his best attention
to the subject, and endeavour to introduce some measure ap-
plicable to the point adverted to.
After a few observations from the Marquis of LANsnowige
and Lord CAMPBELL,
' Lord WHARNCLIFFE said that all he asked for now was,
that the present measure should be continued for a year.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be
committed on Thursday.
PARISH APPRENTICES.
On the motion of Lord WHARNCLIFFE the Parish Ap-
prentices Regulation Bill was read a second time, and ordered
to be committed.
DUCHY OF CORNWALL.
The Duchy of Cornwall Leasing Bill went through Com-
mittee, and was ordered to be reported on Thursday.
LAW OF EVIDENCE.
Lord
rose to move the second reading of the
toßill improve the Law Law relating to Evidence. He begged to
theirrd N3'lA
call
DE
attention to the great importance in the administra-
tion of the law, of that part of which he ventured to propose a
great change. But he believed he might say that the principle
with
oft
the he change was admitted by every one who was conversant
practice of our Courts of Law. It was the opinion of
Lord Mansfield that witnesses ought not to be excluded from
giving evidence because they were interested in the matter at
issue ; for it was most important for eliciting the truth that
every person should state every thing which he knew, and that
evidence of interested persons should go to the Jury, upon what
credit they could attach to it. The object of the present Bill
was to receive in all cases the evidence of interested
persons, except the parties to a suit. Besides the
importance of getting the truth by all possible Means,
there was another reason for the change which he proposed.
It was the extreme difficulty in deciding what degree of interest
was sufficient to disqualify a witness. There was no difficulty
which led to greater litigation and inconvenience. There was
no book in the Courts in which there were not cases of doubts
arising on this question, and occasion ng great delay, great
waste of time, and great expense and vexation to the suitors.
He thought he need say no more to recommend that part of
the Bill to their Lordships, and he was happy to say that it
had been suggested to bins by some of his brethren now on
the bench.—( Hear, hear.) But on the second part of the Bill
there was rather more doubt ; but he thought, when their
Lordships came to consider the reasons which he would have
to submit to them, they would see that the proposed change
was desirable, and of great importance. They knew that by
the law of England a man who was once convicted of certain

.•••••
crimes—of some felonies, and particularly of perjury—had his
mouth closed to the end of his days, however important, however
necessary his evidence might be to reveal the truth. Yet it never
happened at our Assizes and Criminal Courts, when great
offences were committed by many persons together, but that
persons were put into the box covered with crimes, avowing
themselves guilty of crimes, and of the worst of crimes the
betrayal of their Osociates into the commission of crime.
Therefore it was clear that it was not the commission of
crime which prevented criminal courts in England from
receiving the evidence of a criminal. But if it happened
that one of the accused had the means of obtaining a record of
the witness's conviction, he could exclude his evidence—
(Hear, hear)—and, on the other hand, if the prosecutor had
the means, by his wealth and influence, to obtain a pardon,
his witness became again admissible, so t
that their Lordships
would see that the law was rather whimsical in this respect.
It was mere matter of accident whether a person
against whom such a witness could speilk should escape,
or one in whose favour he could give evidence should
be convicted.—( Hear, hear.) This showed
that it was
not the commission of crime which rendered evidence inad-
missible, but that depended on accident; on the wealth, con-
sideration, or legal knowledge of either side.—( Hear, hear.)
Now, there was one crime which seemed reasonably to be a
ground of exclusion—that was perjury. It seemed reasonable
that if a man was once convicted of falsehood in a Court. of Jus-
tice his evidence should not be received again ; and t was said
that this was an appropriate punishment. But it was, in fact, not
guilty—thehend
a punishment on him, but a punishment on those to whomjus-
tice was denied by his exclusion. But even this was sub-
ject to the same accidents which he had just pointed out. The
record of his conviction must be produced, and even then his
mightpar( pardon
ed might
their acq i
Lordshipstta l o f
the innocefne
feel he alone in possession of those from which
would come the elucidation of truth, the condemnation of the
u be ighitn be
p oobstsaeisisseio dn, as
of has
m often been the case. But he
most impen tent facts, amid
he appre-
hended
that situation prevented from laying that evidence
before a jury 9 that great injury would result.
Now he had a ca;e'before him bearing upon this question. In
would t
ht Therefore,
to
person
any
the course of last term a gentleman called on his attorney to
money for large sums of oney received for him for several
years past. He was reauired to put in an answer, and he did
80, stating in that answer the person to whom he ha I paid the
money belonging to his client. The client had, for some years
past, employed a steward, and he it was to whom the money
had been paid. The client who brought the attorney before
the Court to answer for this malappropriation of the money,
produced
in Court the copy of the record of conviction, for
perjury, of the very man whom he had put in communication
with the attorney, and then this attorney was deprived of the
m
evidence of this an, in consequence of the production of a
copy of the record of the conviction for perjury. Now this
was a perfect case in point —it proved the propriety of an altera-
tion in the law. Great Inconveniences were 'daily arising
in consequence of the law as it at present existed, and yet they
were unable to remedy the evil in one case, without carry:-
mg the principle thoughout. If in its application it was
found to be wrong, and no person endeavoured to make it ,
right, by applying it to all cases, It ought not to be applied

Lord DENMAN expressed his satisfaction at the manner in
which the Bill had been received by the House. It was his
anxious wish that the Bill should undergo great consideration,
and he should be happy to delay the Committee till the most
convenient opportunity.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be
committed after the Easter recess.
Their Lordships then adjourned till Thursday.

rto any case in particular. The two first objects of his Bill
were to admit to the hearing of the Court, and to the con-
sideration of the Jury, persons whose evidence was in doubt,
and others who had previously been convicted. To these
points he had added two others of minor importance; one
was to allow Baptists the privilege of making an affirmation
instead of taking an oath ; and the other was to regulate the
proceedings of the Grand Jury, where some of their body en
tertained religious scruples against taking an oath.
The LORD CHANCELLOR did not rise for the purpose
of opposing the second reading. On the contrary, he
was disposed to support it. He believed that the opinion
of the generality of professional men in Westminster-hall cor-
responded with the view taken by his Noble Friend. It ap-
peared proper to him that the Bill should be allowed to be read
a second time, in order to its going into Committee ; but at the
same time he thought it should net go into Committee till after
the Circuits, in order that the first legal authorities should give
their opinion on the subject. He always thought persons of
whatever character should be allowed to give evidence to a
Jury, the Jury after to decide upon their credit. At present,
that law was full of absurdities and contradictions. A person
convicted of felony was not allowed to give evidence. This
exclusion was considered a punishment of his crime, whereas, as
his Noble and Learned Friend remarked, the punishment fell
on the individual who wanted the evidence ? Again, an indi-
vidual who steals, within an amount of petty larceny, may give
evidence ; whereas, he who steals to the amount of grand lar-
ceny, is incompetent : so that it depended on the fact whether
or not he stole to the amount of 12d. or 14d.; could any thing
ho more absurd? So, a man who ran over a child by
mischance, and having killed it, was committed of
manslaughter, was incompetent to give evidence until
he had gone through his punishment, when he was
competent as a witness. In the case of Lord Warwick,
a man who had committed manslaughter was offered
as a witness, but objected to because he had not been
burred in the hand—whereat if he had been burned in the
hand he would have been competent.—( Laughter. ) But this
principle was not carried out, for an accomplice was a com-
petent witness, though the jury were cautioned against relying
on him unless his testimony were supported by material facts.
Again, there was another anomaly as regarded interest. A
man having a direct interest to the amouut of Is. in a case
was incompetent to give evidence; but suppose a person were
the heir apparent to a rich old man, an only child, having of
course a probability, almost equal to a certainty, to succeed
him, the former would be a competent witness in a case which
his father had an interest in, to the amount of 20,0001. or
100,000/. Next, if there were a dozen subscribers to a policy
of insurance, if an action were brought to recover, each of
these would be a competent witness, though each would have
a direct and positive interest in the result. In cases when
suits came on in the shape of motions, parties interested were
competent witnesses, but when actions came on in a court of
common law they were not. For these reasons he would
support the Bill of his Noble and Learned Friend. Whether
he (the Lord Chancellor) would agree to the admission of
perjurers and other parties he would not now say, but those
points they could consider when they had an opportunity of
consulting the Judges on their return to Westminster-hall.
Lord BROUGHAM entirely agreed with his Noble and
Learned Friend, and he hoped the second reading would be
agreed to. Even the heir apparent, alluded to, would still be a
competent witness, if his father were bed-ridden and lunatic,
and had made his this case he would be a competent
witness in a cause in which his father was concerned to the
amount of 40,0001. a year ; but the son having a direct interest
to the amount •of ls. would be incompetent. The measure '
now proposed he (Lord Brougham) proposed, in a great de-
gree, in the other House 14 years ago ; he then failed, but
now ie had almost an immediate prospect of success, and also
he was encouraged to hope for much greater changes. Even
now, the parties to a suit were allowed to give evidence when
they did it by affidavit. He hoped, therefore, the restrictions
as regarded the interest would be done away with, as well as
those that regarded the infamy.
Lord WYNFORD was understood to express his approba-
tion of the Bill. He hoped the clauses excluding the plaintiffs
and defendants from giving evidence would be struck out.
:le referred to the clause affecting the Baptist congregations,
believing that no congregation of that sect would object to it.
They saw every day in their courts of justice that persons re-
fused to make oath, but he had also seen in several instances

that these conscientious person; were receivers of stolen goods,
and the reluctance to swear arose, not from any scruple, but
from a desire not to convict an old friend, who, if left to go on
in his iniquity, might prove a source of profit to them. He
thought in such cases the minister of such a congregation might
be admitted to say that such an objection existed. He per-
fectly agreed to the Bill being read a second time, but he
thought it would be advisable to allow parties to the suit to be
examined as witnesses. In some cases justice would fail if
this were not allowed, and he was anxiaus that some words
should be introduced to provide for cases of that sort.

Lord CAMPBELL said he entirely approved of the Bill of
his Noble and Learned Friend, and, with great deference to
the Noble and Learned Lord opposite, he thought he had pur-
sued the proper course in excluding persons from giving evi-
dence for themselves. From his own experience he believed
that very great evils would arise frem admitting parties to give
evidence for themselves. When a party was swearing for him-
self, lie quite forgot all distinctions between right and wrong,
true and false ; his passions were inflamed, and he states what-
ever might suit his own interest. He would draw the atten-
tion of his Noble and Learned Friend to a case in which a
man of the most profligate character might proceed against a
lady, and be his own witness • she would be dragged into the
jury-box to swear against him, and it must go to the jury
to decide which was to be believed, one or the other. He thought
this principle was the great objection to the French
system of examining prisoners. By giving an astute answer to
a question, a prisoner very often defeated the prosecution ;
while, if he were inexperienced and confused by circumstances,
which, though awkward, were not sufficient to prove his guilt,
he might, by his own answer, be brought in guilty. But though
a party should not be examined for himself, let him be examined
against himself.—( Hear, hear.) In a court of equity, by filing
a bill of discovery, a man could be compelled to disclose all he
knew of a subject, and it was worthy of consideration whether,
in an open court, it might not be an advantage for a party to
be examined against his own interest. It would frequently
prevent justice being defeated byfrivolous objections . at present
a witness was often excluded who might give important evidence
What they had to guard against was bias, it was not interest.
The law of Scotland was much more uniform and consistent on
this subject. By the law of Scotland no relation within the
degree of affinity which prevented marriage were allowed to
give evidence one against another, but this was found very
inconvenient, and in the last session of Parliament it was re-
formed. But his Noble Friend's objection deserved great
consideration. He hoped he would overcome the difficulty of
which he complained ; but the principle of his bill was to ex-
clude the party, but to admit interested witnesses. In this
case how were they to decide who were the witness and who
the party. A Bill had been introduced into the House of
Commons during the lost Session of Parl.ament, but which
provided that neither the nominal party nor the substantial one
should be admitted as witnesses. He would not further
trouble the house on this subject, but he would say
it was preposterous to make a difference between a
person who had been convicted of the crime of per-
jury, and who confessed in open court the, same crime.
With regard to the remaining part of the Bill he only la-
mented that his Noble Friend had not gone further, and ad-
mitted all persons who stated that they had conscientious
scruples against taking an oath to give evidence without it.
Upon the whole the Bill seemed to him to be founded on the
best principles, but it would require great attention and con-
siderable modification in Committee.