Star.
London, England, 1821-06-23 00:00:00

.4,
sk,

WAYS ND MEANS-SINKING FUND.

be against the Clover Seeds BM, he should, with leSTe of the
Route, withdraw it. Leave was accordingly given.

On the motioi, of the CHANCELLOR of the Execs-.
QUER, the House resolved itself into a Committee of
Ways and Meat s for making provision for the charge
in the Loan, and a Resolution being proposed,
Mr. ELLICE rose, and complained of the'tom-
plicated state of 'tile 'accounts, with respect to the
%Sinking Fund. As they now stood, it was.quite im-
possible to understand them, and he suggested the
expedie:-.cy of their being investigated in a Com.-
mittee next year. It appeared that a such of Seven-
teen
Millions was paid to the Commissioners for re-
ducing
the National Debt, and the interest of this
sum was now to be provided for. but in a manner
the most un%iti,factory that could be imagined. He
shoul4 introduce a measure on the subject next year,
;1 the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the
Exchequer should decline doing so.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER bad
no objection to a Committee next Session, when it
was probable that the difficulties complained of
Might be removed.
Mr. MABERLEY was happy to hear from the
Hom Member, that he did not object to a Committee
for inquiry into the state of what was erroneously
'cal ed the Sinking Fund.
Mr. GRENFELL was also glad that the proposal
for a Committee was agreed to by the Right Hon.
:Member. He was convinced there could be no real
Sinking Fund, except as the result of the surplus in-
come stove our expenditure.

Mr. CALCRAFt thought the Sinking Fund to be
a mere fallacy. The Right Honourable Gentleman
was running into debt under the head of the Con-
solidated Fund, while he pretended to pay off debt
under the head of the Sinking Fund. The Public
owed to the East India Company a debt of 1:1,4.00,00),
and a sum of £300,000 was paid to the support of
Greenwich hospital, while there would be a deduc-
tion from the Revenue to the amount of £500,090,
in consequence of the repeal of the Dutr.on Hus-
bandry Horses. After these sums .were deducted,
there would remain but 1.:1,500,000 as a real Sink-
ing Fund ; though he, the Right Honourable Gentle-
man, deluded both himself and the country, by
stating the amount to be £4,000,000.
Mr. RICARDO was a friend to the principle of
a Sinking Fund, yet he thought the country ought
to get rid of the National Debt by one great effort.
After a few words from Mr. Ilum E, the CHANCEL-
LOR Of the EXCIIEIWER, and Mi. MABEII LEY, the Reso-
lution was agreed to, and the House having resumed,
the Report was ordered to be received to-morrow.
THE CHIEF BARON.--(IREGAND).,
Mr. S: RICE moved the Order of the Day for the
House going into a Committee on the Ninth Report
of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the
fees, emoluments, &c. of the Officers of the Courts of
Jusice in Ireland.—The House having resolved itself
into the said Committee,
Mr. S. RICE proceeded to call the attention of the
House to the subject of fees taken in the Court of
Exchequer in Ireland; and he trusted the smallness
of fees, it' improperly taken, would not operate on the
mind of the House to disregard the charge he was
about to bring forward. He was aware of the risk
to which he exposed himself in standing forward as a
public accuser in any case; but more especially when
he declared he stood forward as the accuser of a
Judge of the highest rank. His charge would be
against the Chief Baron of Ireland. With the pri-
vate character of the Chief Baron of Ireland he had
nothing to do ; it might be, and he believed it was,
most exemplary ; but it was his public character to
which he now wished to call the attention of the
House; and public character was public property.
A Judge, above all others, ought to be presumed
pure; and he trusted, generally speaking, the pre-
sumption was correct; but we had, in four own his-
tory, seen melancholy instances of the contrary. He
need scarcely advert to the case of that great man
Lord Bacon. It was impossible in these days that
Judges could take bribes any more than Members of
the House of Commons could take bribes in the lobby
of the House. Exorbitant fees might be taken ;
which appeared to be the case in Ireland by the Re-
port. Contemplating such a case, a table of fees was
.returned to Parliament in 1715, and revised and cor-
rected in 1734; and on that table the present Report
was founded. The Commissioners who made this Re-
port were appointed in 1811, and appointed at the in-
stance of his Right Honourable Friend, the Member
for Waterford, against the wish of Ministers, and by
a majority of only one. This was a triumphant,
though an unostentatious, one, which entitled his
Right Honourable Friend to the gratitude of his
country, though it had raised up in every Court
inveterate enemies against him. The Honourable
Gentleman then proceeded to state the number of
fees taken in the Exchequer. The number was 96 in
all ; of these 19 remained as they were in 1731 ; 3S
had increased ; two had been diminished ; 24 had
ceased; and 19 were without precedent. Of the in-
creased fees, he would mention that taken on the
swearing in of Sheriffs. On this there was an in-
crease of £5 and a fraction, above that set dawn in
the table of 1734., which limited the fee to be taken
on this occasion to 15s. 10d. There was also a Reso-
lution in this Report, stating that certain fees had
been taken by the Chief Baron, as for putting his
signature to certain writs, to which it appeared he
had not put his signature ; and which, if he had
signed, the table of 1734 would give him no fee. He
had thus received a Fee for riot doing that which, if
he had done, he would have been entitled to nothing
for doing. Another abuse to which the Report acf-
,Yetted was, that it was the practice in this Court to
take the fees at the commencement of a cause ; and
thus secured the fees in all the respectiie stages of
the proceeding, whether the cause went on to an end
or not. Another case was, that the Chief Baron now
took his fees in British instead of Irish money, thus
increasing his fees eight and one-third per cent. The
defence of the Chief Baron was most extraorll._:try
it was, that the officers of the Court took the sees in
British :Loney, and therefore would have the benefit
if he did not. This was neither more nor less than
taking advantage of the tortuous conduct of his own
officets. The next head to which he adverted was,
an increase taken by the Chief Baron on affidavits.
If the fee was by his own act, he had no authority
for it; and on that point the Chief Baron and the
Commissioners were at variance, and the Cormnis-
skmets would have to decide, The fee was received

by the Chief Baron, by an arrange:n:ln between him
and his brother, who was Chief Crte • in the Court.
To all intents, the parnent was ma le to the Chief
Baron, however it might be applied. He had se-
lected the most prominent parts of the case to ena-
ble the Committee to pass an opinion. He should
prefer arguing the case on the stateme it of the Chief
Baron, rather than on that of the Commissioners.
He (the Chief Baron) said, his profits were much di-
minished by the 43d of the late King, while those of
the other Judges had been much increased ; but that
was so far from the case, that the Chief Baron re-
ceived £l,OOO a-year more than the Chief Justice of
the King's Bench, and £1,400 mpre than the Chief
Justice of the Common Pleas. The statement of the
Commissioners was clear and concise, while that of
the Chief Baron was confused and prolix. All the
Reports of the Commissioners had been sent to the
Coons to which they referred, and in that case the
respective Judges had made their observations upon
them. That had not been done in the case of the
Court of Exchequer ; for the three other Barons had
been mute, and the Chief Baron alone, and not the
Court, had commented on it. An order had been
served on an officer of the Court, calling for the Or-
der of the Court, to pay the fees in English money,
and the answer was, that there was no Order of
Court, but that the alteration had taken place in
MOS, by the direction of the Chief Baron, who had
told the officer that he was not bound to report any
verbal order. A compensation of £1,500 a-year was
to be paid to the Chief Baron in lieu of fees, which
it appeared now continued to he exacted. A new
inquiry was about to commence in Ireland, by
indi-
viduals fully qualified for the task ; but it should be
recollected, that the Report of a former Commis-
sion lay on the table inoperative and unavailing.
What could the Public augur from tke new Com-
mission, if the Report of the former Commission
should be a dead letter on the table of the House.
The Honourable Gentleman here adverted to the
case of the Insolvent Debtors' Court, on which a
Committee had repotted that a great increase of fees
had taken place,•and been appropriated by the Judge
to himself. The removal of the Judge immediately
followed. In the Irish Court of Exchequer the Chief
Baron had removed an individual of the name of
Pollock, for having taken illegal fees, though he had
pleaded the practice of his predecessors from 1799.
That case appeared to him to bear a strong analOgy
to that of the Chief Baron himself ; and he called on
the House to measure out the same justice. To point
out the ultimate proceeding required more experience
than he posse,sed ; but had a case of delinquency
been made out, it was obvious that the matter could
not stand still. The Honourable Member concluded
by moving a series of Resolutions, embodying the
leading facts of his speech.
Captain O'GRADY hoped for the indulgence of
the House under the peculiar circumstances of the
case; as he was in a new element, in which he had
never been before. Ile could assure the Honourable
Member he did not impute to him any improper mo-
tives. He could accept of no compliments for the
Chief Baron, if paid at the expense of his integrity
(Hear, hear). He gave the Commissioners full cre-
dit for the motives of their conduct ; and if any in-
accuracy had occurred, it was to be ascribed to the
multiplicity of their avocations. He must, at the
same time, deny that they had laid aground for
any legal prosecution ; and the Court of Exche-
quer had told the Irish Attorney-General that
such a Report could be no legal document:—
That, too, had been the opinion of all the Irish Judges,
in the case of Sir James Galbraith, though at the
same time they professed a willingness to admit other
evidence, which was accordingly produced, and Sir
James Galbraith was acquitted. He could see no
good from the inquiry, as all the fees had now been
settled. He was surprised that the Hon. Member had
confined himself to the Court of Exchequer, and paid
n 9 attention to the Reports relative to the other Courts.
Such a remark he should not have made had not
si-
milar observations been made by the Commissioners
as to the other Cow ts. He perfectly agreed with the
Hon. Gentleman that there could be no middle course;
or if there were, lie, on the part of the Chief Baron,
declined adopting it. On the subject of the fees fur
sweating the Sheriffs, if there had been any error, it',
was one of forty years standing ; and the Chief Baron'
had only done what had been done by his predeces-
sors for a tang period of years. The Hon. Member
concluded by thanking the Committee for the indul-
gence with which they had heard him, and sat down
amidst loud cheers.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, that the
Honourable Member who made the charge had made
a distinct statement; and the Honourable Member
who had spoken last had done so in a manner that
reflected the highest credit on his feelings: but he
did not think that all the facts were before the House,
and he himself felt he was unable to came to a defi-
nitive conclusion. He could not vote affirmatively
or negatively. The best way might be to keep the
Committee alive, and he dreaded to take any step
that he could not recal. He should move that the
Chairman report progress, in order to afford time
for deliberation, and to come to a safe conclusion.

Mr. RICE had no wish to precipitate the discus-
sion, and would accede to the suggestion of the No-
ble Marquis.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE wholly concurred in what
had fallen from the Noble Marquis. The present
was a most important case, as it might establish an
important precedent.
Mr. C. W. WYNN said, that the House must come
to a decision one way or anther; but, in the present
'state of the House, he should deprecate coming to
any decision without fuller evidence.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY should pro-
pose that the Committee be revived on Tuesday,
as the most convenient day for regulating further 1
proceedings.
Mr. ELUCE could have wished that the case had
been decided as quickly as possible, and that such
charges should not be kept suspended for months over
the distinguished individual. At the same time he
should nut oppose the course proposed.
Mr. NOLAN said it was impossible, at such an
advanced stage of the Session, to come to a conclu-
sion ; and the question was not whether the inquiry
should be deferred, but to what time it should be
so deferred.---The Chairman reported progress, and
obtained leave to sit again on Tuesday.