Star.
London, England, 1830-03-20 00:00:00

EQVITY BILLS.

The LORD CHANCELLOR—My lords, in moving the se-
coed reading of the bill, entitled, ‘• An Act for altering and amend-
ing the law regarding commitments by courts of equity fur con.
tempts, and the taking bills pro confearo," with the other bills
which were brought into the other house of parliament by the Soli-
eitor-General, your lordships will naturally expect me to offer some
explanation as to their nature and object. The manner in which
that learned gentleman has brought forward these bills is highly
creditable to him; he is entitled to the thanks of the country for
his laborious exertions in forwarding the object in view. I shall
very shortly state the nature of the bills. The first is, as to the ap-
pearance of the parties in the courts of equity. Parties are committed
foe disobedience to the orders of the court. The first fact to which I
beg to call your attention is this :—lf the party does not appear to
the suit, he is committed to prison ; but before this, he is brought
to the bar of the court, that the court may appoint some one to ap-
pear fur him, if he refuse. In order to avoid the additional expense
by first issuing process, and then compelling the party to appear, the
court has now the power of bringing the party before it without that
additional expense. The next point is with reference to the answer
—the only mode being, if a party refused to answer, of enforcing the
order of the court to commit. There is a clause, Al far as re
members of parliament, if they refuse to answer, the bill shan
taken pro emsferso. With respect to the relief given in eases where
parties are committed for contempt, I think this part of the
bill highly important. There have been instances of persons con-
fined for 16, 20, 26, and even 30 years, nobody atteddini; to them,
anti without any inquiry. For the purpose of preventing this,
there is a clause Introduced, requiring a register of the names of the
persons who are committed for contempt. nese persons, thus
committed, am divided into awe classes; the first class comprises
those who are committed for contempt in open court, the improper
marriage of wards ; the second class comprises those committed
for contempt in not answering. Returns are to be made from time
to time of the names of those who are committed. The Solicimr-
I General, in the course of his inquiries, ascertained that several per-
, sons had been committed, and they scarcely knew for what ; there
they were, however, lying in prison, with a prospect of being per.
petually confined. It is for the purpose of srua:ding against these
evils that the clause to which I have referred has been introduced.
The Court of Chancery has frequently ordered an act to be dome by
parties which has not been done. Foe instance, the • court has di.
meted a deed to be signed, or a fine to be levied, which'it had nos
the power of enforcing in the manner that was beneficial to justice.
rh, Chancery commissioners saw the inconvenience of this system,
and they recto:mended that the Court. of Chancery, having ordered

the deed to be done, upon a certain time it should be done, and the
party be declared entitled to relief. There it, therefore, a clause on
this particular subject. The Chancery commissioners also sug-
gested a mode of shortening the process or the court. Before a
party could be compelled to answer he was brought up under
a habeas corpus writ, and been told what he must do; if he
refused, however, to do that, he was brought up under an alias
habeas : he was then reminded of what he ought to do ; but, if he
still refused, a pluries habeas was issued. (Ilear, hear.) He was,
again reminded what was required of him, which, if he would not
comply with, an alias pluries habeas was opened. (A laugh)
All this expense and process took place before the bill could be
taken pro conlesso. The nt bill meditated the shortening of
the process in other ings in the Court of Chancery. These
are some of the objects of the bill—which is drawn up with great
care, and with but few alterations, that may be more properly men-
tioned in the committee, is calculated to be of considerably more
service—which I recommend to your lordships fur the second read-
ing. Another bill, of which I now propose the second reading, my
lords, is intituled "An Act for consolidating and amending the
laws relating to property belonging to infants, femmes-covert,
idiots, lunatics, and persons of unsound mind." The whole at the
laws relating to these parties have been consolidated and brought
into one act. There are various improvements in the law ring the surrender of copyholds. I will, my lord, state one or respect
There is a clause to enable a femme-covert, infant, or lunatic, to
appoint a person to enter an appearance with respect to copyholds;
and by another clause no forfeiture by the infant, femme-covert, or
lunatic, of copyhold land shall take place. There are also clauses
to enable parties to surrender or grant new leases. It is exceed-
ingly proper that the court should have the power to enable its
wards to grant the renewal of leases of any lands belonging to in-
fants, when it is for the benefit of the estate—it is provided always
that it shall not be injurious to the infant when the infant comes of
age. There is also a prevision to affect the conveyance of an
estate of a lunatic which parties have contracted to take
previous to the act of lunacy. The Court of Chancery could
always compel the vender to complete his part of the agree-
ment, but there was no power en the other side to surrender
the estate, although the purchase money were paid into Court, the
estate remaining in the lunatic. There is a clause to direct the
transfer of stock by the committee of a lunatic, on the order of the
Court of Chancery, to a new committee. There Is also another
portant clause to which I beg to revert. Some of the provision of
the old law did not extend to Ireland and some of the provisions
with respect to Ireland did not affect England. Now it is proposed
that the law between the two countries be assimilated. The third
bill, my lords, is intituled "An Act for amending the laws re-
specting conveyances and transfers of estates and funds vested in
trustees and mortgagees; and for enabling Courts of Equity to
give effect to their decrees and orders in certain cases." My learned
predecessor recommended to the Solicitor-General some improve-
ment with respect to the power of trustees. If a party, by the law
as It now stands, being a trustee, shall sell an estate, the heir at
law, if of age, is bound to conform, under the direction of the Court
of Chancery ; hut if the heir at law be under age, the proceedings
are suspended until he becomes of age. The proposed bill has a
clause enabling infant trustees or mortgagees to convey an estate of
an infant, under the direction of the court. At present, with re.
spect to the trustees of an estate, if a trustee dies, it Is necessary to
file a new bill, thus creating an additional expense for the appoint-
ment of another trustee. It is now proposed that the Court of
Chancery should have a jurisdiction of appointing new trustees
without filing a new bill, merely on petition—(hear). With respect
to trustees of charities which have existed for a course of time, and
where the trustees cannot be found, a decree may be now made (by
the proposed Bill) on an affidavit to that effect. These are the pals.
cipal provisions of the three bills. Most of the provisions in the
second and third bills will be found united. It was, however, coo.
sidered that the two bills should be divided. My lords, I have
stated the general outlines of these bills. When they come .inso
committee there are other particulars proper to be stated.
The Earl of MALMESBUIIY expressed his thanks for the very
honest statement of the noble and learned lord. The noble earl rose
to ask whether, in the clause in one of the bills empowering the
Court of Chancery to grant leases of any lands belonging to infanta,
when beneficial to the estate, it was intended to grant a lease of the
mansion-house ? If it were so, a trustee, for instance, might let as
estate when the heir at law was 19, with the family mansion, and
thus the heir might be deprived of the mansion house until he was
40. He should like to have a clause inserted, but the committee
would be the proper period for introducing it, to prevent such a
thing as what he had pointed out.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the Court of Chancery
would never deprive the infant, when he arrived of age, of the fa.
mily mansion.
The Earl of MALMESBURY said that, when the bill wu in
committee, be should move such a clause as be had alluded to.
The bills were severally read a second time, and their lordships
adjourned, at a Quarter to Six, to Monday.