The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-06-18 00:00:00

.

I

'S. ,

rin. He regretted that he could not treat the queer
on as an abstract one, but he would endeavour to give
s little offence as in his power. He would not_ tittle
more than was necessary fir his case 1 for if lie did,
his own feeling, nould be the best punishment for his
unworthy conduct. It was quite clear that he wield
not have any petty object in view, as the House was well
aware that those with whom he bad the honour to act
0 ~.*:einearliehad a seat% would repel from thoLnigh..intlig..
~. -nation ant- attempt froiiatny to make them' -fr parte to
anekast object. 'lib; .ffelooked to the House on public
ea; Siples only—on therso.msioneterfallY bilerdwien by
re
4., •
.Imrke ; and in comiliance :with Omen, fees would call on
.e.,, ellouse, as it rallied its•owa dignity, sot lightly to
~, -abandon an inquiry intasoberges affectiog the jedicial
, litthotity. The Neceseity of Parliamentary-interference
. , was.pointed out. he a referesie to a statute 'Willa had
I .been much allielicho - it Was -perfectly; 'clear that the
e,.. etatute did not-give the 71644_7. _*e,. lirlit• to their 'places
during good behavionK •Ipitlinybel that before ; bit
3,• 'the etatt,te took witty tile power of granting patent's
to Jhdeee during plennure. When he addressed the
• • 'House heft re he 'mole a few observations on the Reports
of the Committee, but at present fie would m.-rely re-
peat the leading facts of the case. The authorities on
• the Subject were of historical notoriety, the first in die,
.s. tirost of Lord Stafford. A Commission was next issued
e.• in the rsign of Charles the Srtiel, which sets forth the
very words which he embodied in his Resolutions, " that;
• .
....the Making of improper fees was a dishonour to the
King's Justice, and s grievance to the suitors." Prom
'-' that time to I i6S, the vitae complaints' hive been fre7
~ quently renened, and various attempts at redress also
• simile. I n'l7lt3 a sitnilar complaint took place, and a
onitniesion of the lmrds was appointed, who called on
all persona to give in a list of fees. In the 4th of Geo. I.
an Act wai passed eallintrfor a list of fees, and complain.
ing of the departure (torn the ancient established fees,
an I the illegal exactionilf new. These were the two
. points on whir% Clement- the dipariOre from ancient
• , liod,estahlished fees, and the illegal exaction of others.—
ejessed.oo front that time to 1814, when a Right
, ton, Friend, whose absence he regretted, hail also taken
..: al, the subject. On the discussion in 1814, it was ad-
• mimed by both sides of the House, that the question was
'Apse of the highest importance, arid the only objection
• was that of expediency. The motion was, however, car-
' Vied. and a Conimission issued, from the Reports. of
• • *hreh the grounds of his motion were takeu. •It so.
iAained to be Teen how the JioNse tumid act, anti •if
the object of his RiNht Han. -Friend would yet be an-.
swered.. Whether they would treat the reports of
- their Commissioners as • pikes of , waste paper, or on
the charge which they
.aohtiin institute an inquiry.
That Combission pensented their Report in IS2I,
. end. thii Was the third Session in which the sub-
ject came before the Denise, so that no one
ewtht complain. that sufficient time for deliberation was
• not afforded. Having brought down the Reports of the'
. Commissioners to the present day, he waited to see hoWthei
House would deal with them. ,He wished' to see not only '
the charges against the Chief Baron, but the answer which
Mat officer could sake to them. The Report of the Gera-
suissionem wee submitted to a Committee up stairs and their
Report wawield on the table. By these Reports it ap-
peered that the Chief Baron had extended the old- fees, and,
created new fees to the injury of the suitors. 'nil that he
thereby violated his duty as a Judge of the Courf. It; was
difficult to say what answer could be given to this chtrge..
I' it, was contended that aJudge had a right to increase fees
at pleasure, then there was not ii word more to tc said on
his part. Rot he contended that Such a positioe was not
maintainable, and would contend that if a Judge did so 13.-
v.ease his fees, the offence was indictable and punishable by
'the common law. If it were such an offenc... Share was a
cave at-once mide cut for the interference of Parliament.—
lie could distinguish the present case from many others.
which he would not discuss. The case which he brought
forward was that of a Judge—of one officer of a Court,
without any authority of theCoart, extending old fees mot
Imposing new. In the twenty•tesenth Financial Report he
found tbese words :—" Fees in. a Court of Juatice should
be. considered es so many direct taxes levied on his Ma-
jesty's Subjects for the apecific purpose of .Paying the charge
of. the Officers of this Court: The old lair authorities
went farther. Lord Coke stated, that, by the Statute of
'Edward the First, the Crown had no right to originate anl
oftlee with fees, or give to au old office new fees, without
the consent of Parliament. He would nett proceed to show
abet theChlef Heron had exceeded his powers by taking'
-those fees; and that, In doing so, he had dune wrong. On
tire authority of Blackstone and Rawlins, the offence was
dirtily tbit defined. 'Tile same principle was also enforced
iitt 'the case of Lord Mreclestleld. The charges against the
Chief Baton were comprised under four distinct heads, 1
which he would open to the House, then propose specific
. ,
resolutions, and refer to evidence. The first charge was
on the question of, a decree... When a case in the Court ofl
Exchequer was brought In, it was set down for shearing,
Wert Men iit neon fib wdecree was obtained. There
,were
neaes: however. where a case was set down, but never went
tollielength of a decree. It is Similar to the proceeding
by Bill in the Mouse, which, though introduced, might not
pass into a law. In the first place he took fees (Cr &ewes,
*lnch weloo never made out; ant, secondly, he touk fees be-
fore they aw4re due. But what would surprise the House
the most was, that he charged double fees for the same
thine,... Avai.ing himself of the colour of his office, .he
eherge:i.fees to which he was not legally entitled. But he
illr..1111ce), might he asked, was the amount of the fees great
or small', From the statements to which he had referred,
',Vetypeared tioit there Wits an augmentation of charges to
.noao .1 to the amount-of 14101. But he meant not to deal
With Worley. but with principles. if he weld show to the
Howse that the undue demand •of fees were part of- a
opium, the sandiness of the sum was nothing.. In the
Case of Jord -Melville, Mr. Whitbread slid that he cared
lot for the amour.t of loss, as he looked only to the prin.;
eiple...Part of the defence of the Chief Baron was, that
'fees were . taken as deposits. That was not the fact In
ibis instance, fir no part of the money was ever renm nedl
to the 3,14-ors. The assertion was not only not supported'
by evidence, hut. was ebsolutely negatived by the state-
' Merit of the Chief Baron. himself. The Chief Baron
jeferred• to preceediogs where Judges had directed tees
to be taken as precedents. lint in those cases the
&one), was given back to the suitors, and the contrary
peactice resulted only, frim the misconduct of the officer
of the Court. The Honourable Oentleman then went
• into some devils to show that the Chief Baron had
' taken fees on decrees. where none had been made out,
'And charged double fees on decrees that had been made
'out. He cline now to the qwestion of writs, which
' . Were proceedings in the Court of Exchequer. There
were two classes of ,writs, in one of which the Chief
Baron was entitled, to tees, but not-on the other. How.
eater, the present thief Baron immediately after his
impointment eltarged fes on both chimes. The House
were aware that the Chancellor of EXchequer was an
officer of the COure ; hut he was nut authorised to affix
his vial to any doennwitt without the consent of the
residieg Judie.. Y. t the present Chief Baron seemed
inclined out of courtesy I' dispense with this forMality,
saying that the or• re soul i he given only by theelxna.
Sure.. for ohieu, of e •urse, he wont' be entitled 'to a
fee: But titre the Ilmse would obeervethat he 'otnitted
ill. IliKtintitre, u foie he took the few. The •pkoposition
be, maintained wee, that the Chief throb took ursine
Wes to a consi4erahle antenna; Tataitlon of Costs was
tee flair point to wields be shouldattiert. • lliffs.ot CO M&
qf a .p..riicular dgecripti,in were sr:vie out on the law
eiile of the. Court of Excheapter. 'lice: late Lord'Veriei
Rains Avoumnre signed every .bill uf.inits,...and reteiv,
ed the;;fer, One advantage that remitted from . this
pried & was that no lee* were paid mikes when the hills
of gaits oft, actually
.made out. But thestilsent We!
lama itbsiidotirithe practice, and rinsed fees to he
tattecen bills of
.tlets, when 113 such Mlle
.Were evej
MOdeidut. icy ancient usage the ices given were olitrays
Wilted to the number of bills examined and signed.
Tbit.bystesi eat present was entirely sittled. - There
- - • • • .
.: ' •