Star.
London, England, 1831-09-21 00:00:00

k ~.

1

9!

J

~~ •1•

fore their lordships. Now, with respect to the charge against
he present Commissioners, he agreed in all that fell from
eoble and learned friend in favour of these Commie-
s.:.s.a-s. His objection was not against them, but the system.
Now the noble and learned Lord expressed his appreben.
viols of the possibility of getting ten efficient men at the
Coaneery Bar to fill the situation of Judges under this Bill.
Ile would ask his Noble and Learned Friend if it was not
eAsier to find ten efficient Judges than 70. being the num-
ber req dred at present. The mischief of the present system
NJ% 11.. a the nu nber of seventy must be kept up, while the
capacity es! those Judges was trot inquired into. The Noble
isil Learned Lord here mentioned some instances of deci.
• founded on the grossest ignorance of law by some
of
the present Commissioners; at the same time, he would
say that, consideting the mode in which they were elected,
the majority of th were unobjectionable. Whether there
was a regalsr nunilser of bankruptcies, or a stagnation in
trade, the nu:ssta r of Commissioners was always seventy.
There was one notorious tvil attending the present system,
is solely, that shere W.% one measure of justice before one
Ino, and a different measure under another. It bad been
a subject of discus-ion in the other 'tousle, sod also cont.
piained of in the c• ucts cf justice. that one list of Coin-
s:: istioners com i.i•te.l as 'natty persons to prison as all the
o•her lists of Commissioners together. He would take
upon himself w sac, that there was not a dozen among the
Cot.sns;ssiones3 capable of examining a stupid reluctant
witness, and no Mime to them, for they were appointed the
moment they stare into Westminster Hall ; in fact, when
they acre tally boys. A person may be a very'
gentlemanly man. at the same time a bad lawyer.—
He no more blamed these young men for not being excellent
judges. that. he blamed hi- noble friend for rot being capa-
ble of playing -sal on a fiddle. (Laughter.) Now with re-
gard to the patronage, he begged to say, that this Bill would
rather diminish, than increase the patronage of the Great
Seal, for, instead of the appointment of seventy Judges, the
Lord Chancellor would not have the appointment of more
tlitn ten. There was no part of the bill of which he more
highly approved than that which provided for the appoint.
Inent of official assignees. When he considered the amount
of money at present in the hands of assignees, who were not
hound to make an advantageous use of it fur the benefit of
the creditors, he did not wonder at the clamour which was
raised against the present system. With regard to the ex-
rents?, he begged to say that the present system cost the coon-
tty 36,0001. a year. while the proposed measure would not
relit more than 19,0031. exclusive of the salaries of the otfi.
cial assignees; perhaps the sem& establishment would cost
411,0001. a year, as stated by his noble and learned friend ;
Lot even if it did, it would be a saving, for the working of
the present system, cost at least 70,0001. a year. The corn.
.r.: ye patronage of the two systems would prove greater in
nie nresent practise, and the bulk of the patronage would
c ihasinished and lessened by the proposed plan. The
:Node and Learti:d Lord alleged that he (the Lord Chan-
.tslor) was increasing his own patronage. It was true that the
Lod Chancellor had the power to appoint his family to sine-'
ores as a . rovision. The Lord Chancellor Thurlow pro.
tided fur the prescat members of his family by the distria
Nation of sinecures. The bulk of patronage was cut off by
1.. c present measure from the Great Seal, and he would bel
inqsr;ved of the patronage (cheers). The merchants, bankers, I
trailers, and the Common Council of London, approved,
of the measure. He could not have ever imagined the
idea of bringing forward such an important measure,l
ithout having given it the most mature and
constant deliberation. Patronage to the amount of 12,0001.1
u year would be abolished by this bill. It was .
• that the present system was the best, because there
sacs alt appal to the Vice-Chancellor. There was no end to
tl!e swearing ; tad delay under the present law. He would
talhere to the provisions of the bill, because he thought it
absolutely reel scary. and a selection of the fittest persons
eisosen to pern.rnt tire duties intno sed upon them; and he
voulti show by his conduct that lie looked upon some of the 1
• mmissionersi of bankrupts as most able and learned men.
lie trusted that the time was not tat distant when the Vice-
Chancellor's Court would be done away with altogether.
There was every reason to believe that the new sys-
tem would work well. He did not intend that the bill:
sheuld apply to the country Commissions, but that the town I
Cet»otissions should be put upon the improved principle,
sad the country Commissions upon the same footing that
the town Commissions were at present. His sole object was
to amend the laws, and to prevent the waste of property
consumed under the present system, and to lessen the num-
ber of bankruptcies. He believed that traders, under the
improved system, would prefer being bankrupts to being
compelled to take the benefit of the Insolvent Act. His
Lordship apologized for occupying so much of their Lord-
ships' time. ( Hear, hear.)
The Earl of ELDON said that he was always desirous to
correct anuses when he believed that abuses really did exist,
arid thought It was the bounden duty of the house, before
they changed the law of bankruptcy, to institute an inquiry,
to ascertain how far those abuses did exist. He had con:
versed with some of the most influential men at the bar, and
who did not approve of the proposed bill. He could not
cansent to the passing of the bill in its present shape, and
impressed the necessity of an inquiry into the question. He
agreed with the noble and learned lend that the retiring salary
of a Lord Chancellor was not sufficient. He held the office fur
25 years, and the average of emolument amounted to
15A00L a year. He thought the retiring salary should de-
pend upon the number of years that the Great Seal was
held. lie condemned the proposed alteration, and thought
that the three additianal Judges were perfectly unnecessary,
as the present Judges had sufficient time to try all issues
that were dircctel to be tried. The Noble and Learned
Lord contended at considerable length, that the proposed
Bill was perfectly inexpedient and unnecessary, and would
create more delay and expense than the present system.
The LORD CHANCELLOR explained.
'Tice bill was then read a second time, and waited to be
comntitted on Thursday next.

SPRING GUNS.
The Report on the Spring Gun hill was brought up.
Lord WY N FORD said that the bill would prove bone.
&is'. as it was a good bill, with the exception of the clause
grant4og to one Magistrate the power to grant a license.
Lord 31E ',BOURNE defended the peopriety and meet-
si. v of the clause, and urged the expediency of passing the
WI! is i:l4 present form.
Tile bill was ordered to be engrossed, and read a third
time on Munilay.
'1 he Beer Act Amendment bill was reported.
Their Lordships adjourned at a quarter to ten o'clock.
110 USE OF COMMONS.
Sir J. N EW PORT moved for an account of the expense
of erecting the parish church of St. George, Dublin, and the
amount of the debt outstanding for the erection of that
ilaing, together with the original estimate and sum granted
by aivertitient for that purpose. He was induced to do
this. in consequence of a poor widow with sevenal children.
Living been distrained upon fur an arrear of 21 years' church
rate. (Hear, hear.)
air. LEA DER seconded the motion.
Mr. O'CONNELL said that. in Ireland, no more than
one year's Minister's money could be recovered. except in
the parish of St. George, which was regulated under especial
Act of Parliament.
Mr. LEFROY defended the conduct of the Ministers of
the Church, and said that the expense of the building was
borne by un assessment upon the inhabitants of the parish,
who did not complain of the expense.
air. H. GRATTAN bore testimony to the injustice
of the grievance under which the inhabitants of this parish
labour-31.
Mr. SHAW objected to imputations being cast upon the
Ministers of the Church, who had been guilty of no extra-
vagrnce.— Returns ordered.
511. EW ART presented a petition from Hugh James
Slunderson of Liverpool. merchant, complaining of the
capture of lass ships by the Brazilian squadron, and praying
that compeniation might be enforced from the Brazilian
Giivernment for such injuries in the same way that corn-
penkauon had been enforced for French subjects by the
French Government. _

- .....
After a few words tom Mr. Littleton and Mr. Dixon,
th. peiwioa WWI laid upon the table.
Mr. I.W ART postponed his motion for leave to bring in
a bill for abolishing the puniabnient of death, until the 13th
of October.

Mr. CA Al PBELL brought up his bill for the establish.
ing of a general registry. —The bill was read a tint time.
CA NIPBELL said it had been objected that this
bill would disclioe the private affairs of individuals, but he
(knits' it would have any such eff,:et, as was proved by a
reference to Doctors' Commons, where the will of any indi-
vidual might be inspected by any person who pleased to pay
$ shilling fur searching after it. The honourable and learned
gen lowan. in conclusion, moved that the bill be read a
_se-
cond time on the 4th of t/ctober._

Air. 0* CON N IRL L e apt need his unqualified approbation
of the measure, and thought it mould confer an incalculable
benefit ttpon the country.
Mt. *TRICK LA N U observed. that so far as Yorkshire
was eocerned, •there was ao occasion whatever ter this tun-

sure, as in that part of the kingdom local registries had lung
been established, and gave such general satisfaction, that it
would be unwise now to disturb them.
Mr. SLANEY concurred in thinking that such a mea-
sure as his boa and learned friend had proposed was loudly
called for, and would be of the greatest possible utility.
Sir J. NEWPORT supported the bill
Mr. PAGET expressed himself in favour of the Bill.
Mr, LANGTON was in favour of the Bill.
CRA MPTON declared that the Bill should have
this decided opposition.
Mr. JEPHSON supported the Bill.
Mr. HUME was glad that the subject was likely to un.
dergo investigation • such registries were found most useful
in Scotland, and he could not understand the opposition
which the Bill had received.
Mr. J. SMITH thought that the measure would be
beneficial.
Mr. HUNT was also in favour of the Bill.
Mr. CAMPBELL replied.
Sir J. SEBRIGHT approved of the Bill; which was
then ordered to be read a second time on the 4th of October.
A messenger from the Lords announced that their lord.
ships had agreed to the Hackney-coach and Double Assess-
ment Bills.