The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-07-04 00:00:00

NEW SOUTH WALES.

Mr. FORRES moved. that a humble Address be pro-
rented to his Majesty, th t he would be graciously pleas-
ed to order that there be laid before the Houw a Copy of
the I nstmetions given by Lord Bathurst to Mr. Bisgt,
on his proceetlihg to New South Wales.—Agreed to.

LAW MEFICII %NTS' BILL. •
This Bill ;yrs re•comtnitted, and the clauses h
(wen agreed to, and s one verbal alterations made, i
reported n ith the amendments, and was ordered
recd a third time to-morrow (4.is day)

CIIIEF BARON O'GRADY.
Oh the Motion of Mr. S. RICE, the House
ith. if i to a Committee fur the further consld(

ts,e eh. '_•+ against the Chief Baron of the Cott
chey er in Ire'and.
A Itesd'utinn, submit►ed by Mr. Rice, was, after
enne-ration between Mr. R. Smith, Mr. Caooir
he •401.tit..r General, withdrawn.
Mr. S. RICH then proposed another Reellnti,
civato►y} of facts connected with the Chief Baron
duct. Among.t other thing's it was asserted,' t'
had taken fees for 134 rau•e• titian their being
though decree* bad not bAn made upon theta:

.j

:

..

es having
Ide it W. 14
• to be
e resolve!
aeration of
urt of Ex-
after some
wing. a d
ntion,
iron's eoo•
I,' that h•
let Aiwa,
It wa ; •1/4.
. -

Vec--

also declared.lhat he bad, of his own authority, altered
the time of taking the fees from the entering to the set-I
tiny* down of the cause.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL objected to this Reso-
lution, as conveying too unqualified a criminatory charge
against the Chief Baron, which was not warranted by
the Report of the Commissioners. It appeared that the
whole sums takewip
.thmeway,sisarged amounted but to
two guriiiis a term, and that he contended was too small
tilfenail a grave censure' upon.
-- air~ WETHERRIaL repeated the same objection.
Mr. IL SMITH suggested the leaving out of the crimi-
' oatory part of the charge with regard to causes in which
decrees had not been given.
Mr. RICE said he had no objection to accede to the
Hon. Member's suggestion.
The Resolution as altered was then agreed to.
Mr. RICE now said that the Resolutions which he
bad hitherto proposed, aud which were adopted by the
Committee, were declaratory of facts only. It was his
intention originally to have followed those up by Reso-
lutions of inference, applying the law to the particular
conduct of the Chief Baron, but he would not now offer
them. All he wanted to obtain was, an admission that a
single judge, of his own authority, could not increase the
burdens (tithe suitors for his own profit,Aed this he con-
ceived was effected by the mere entertaining of the mo-
tion by the House. Under such circumstances then, anti
having the facts recorded upon the Journals, he would
press the matter no further. leaving it in the breast of
each individual Member to form such inferences as they
thought proper for themselves.
Mr. HU el K asked whether the Hon.Membee was really
sincere in the cause which be now proposed. To leave
accusatory facts a dead letter upon the Journals, appeared
.to him to be an act of the greatest injustice to the parties.
If the Hon. Member thought he had made out a case to
warrant an impeachment, he should go on with it, if not
the Chief Baron ought-to be dismissed altogether. In his
(Mr. Hume's) individual opinion, the facts adduced did
not warrant either an Impeachment or an Address to the
Crown to remove the Judge. The Report itself, in some
parts, justified charges which it alleged in others. As to
the object of the inquiry, it was already answered, for by
law henceforth no fees were to he taken in Courts, and
this proceeding would deter Judges from enforcing them
for their own emolument. lie did not mean to justify the
principle, though it might be said that the amount of
kes taken upon the whole was but trilling. A great
deal was also owing to the system, and if the Report was
credited, the practice of the Court of Common Pleas was
not more free from abuses in the way of fees than the Ex-
chequer. Upon all these gr•funds, therefore, he thought
thao an opinion to the Went of what he leel stated should
be expressed by.the House. He hail prepared a Resolu-
tion which be would submit if it was the pleasure of the
Committee. The Hon. Member then being called on to
state his Resolution, read the following, though without
moving it.
That it appears by Reports of Commissioners, and of
Se'ect Committees, made to this House. that Chief Baron
O'Grady did, in a way not to be justified, for his own use
and emolument, increase the fees of the Court of Exche-
quer in Ireland; that single Judges cannot by law so
increase fees of their own authority, but that by tables
annexed to the said Reports, it appeared such discretion
bad been exercised in Ireland by Judges fur the last lOU
years, and that in a Court of Common Pleas such a coarse
of judicial authority occurred; and that as the Chief
Baron appealed to this usage of the Courts for 100
years in Isis justification, and that fees were now abolish.
ed by law altogether, it was not therefore necessary to
proceed farther in the matter at present.
Mr. RICE said that be was now pressed to call the
House to decide upon the question of guilt or innocence,
although that course had been avoided by the House up
to the present time. How often was it said, that no
judgment should be pronounced until the Chief Barop
wss heard. As to the necessity which was urged upon
him of taking sante decisive steps, he should only sub-
mit, that the Committee was not tn a state to adopt any
measure which would hereafter influence the conduct of
the House.
Mr. C. HUTCHINSON said that if the Resolutions
were once recorded on the Journals of the House, they
now be recorded as a matter of charge, a proceeding
which would be most unjust and unfair towards the
Chief Baron. Was then his Hon. Friend to say, that if
these Resolutions were recorded, lie was prepared to fol-
io. them up with any ulterior prOceedings, for if not,
the mere affirming the Resolutions would be an act of
grief injustice. -The proceedings now about to he
adopted were, in his opinion, nut only unjust, but un-
ronsiitutional, because that high persunage, though in-
nocent, would be supposed guilty in the public iniud.
Mr. WETIIF.RELL said he objected to placing reso-
lotione,of facts on record, because. though they would not
be legally or logically conclusive of criminality, yet such
wool Ihe the inference in the public mind. lie would
never consent to be a party, by any inquisitorial proceed
ing, in I.ut'ing any individual in so nueivoniable a situ-
ation, fur tie se Resolutions did Hot pledge the House to
any future proceeding. and as long as so serious a charge
hung over the Chief Baron, it would be difficult to ce-
rmee from the public mind the impression of criminality.
Even the lion. Member for Peterborough (Mr. Scarlet')
admitted it could not be contended that the Judges had
no right in•all cases to increase the fees of their Courts;
and in Isidore', from the Report of the Commissioners, it
appeared for many years to have been the practice to in-
, crease the fees, not only in the Exchequer but other
Courts.- Unless Gentlemen were prepared to say that
they would ultimately go the length of ati impeachment
against the Chief Baron, or an Address to the Throne
for his removal, they were bound to negative the Resolu-
tions, which would impart the most serious criminality.
In justice to that individual he could nut consent to a
proceeding which implied so heavy a charge. Before
he came to any. decision upon this subject, he put time
question to his omen mind, whether time charges were of
such a nature as to cell fur Impeachment or MI Address,
and determining that they were not, he was bound to say
teat it was the grossest injustice to atioat a proceeding
which would leave the individual charged in a state of
There was nothing analogous to
this proceeding in any Court of Justice. If an indict-
ment were preferred, or an information filed against any
individual, the prosecutor could not stop, he must go on
to a decision or the individual be acquitted; but here
proceedings were kept in a state of suspense, and without
tummy pledge to an ulterior decision. Upon these grounds
he would oppose the motion;
Mr. CANNING said that he wished to recall the at
tendon of the Committee to the question really before it
—whether, having already come to certain resolutions,
they were now to put them on record ? It was clear that
if the speeches of the Honourable Gentlemen were intend-
ed to oppose the Report of the Resolutions, they would
be defeating time very object which they themselves bad
in view, because by prevention the receiving of the Re-
port now, Honourable Oentleinen would preclude them•
selves from arriving at the conclusion they desired,
namely, that of ultimately coining to a final decision.—
It would be more adviseable if those Honourable Gentle-
men also objected to these proceedings, should reserve
their objections for a future stage, when the Resolutions
came to be reported to the House. It would be unfair to-
wards the Chief Baron to stop the proceedings until the
what; amount of the charges against hint was known. It
was quiteanother question, whether it was prudent to
refer the Resolutions to a Committee ; but the House
having come to that decision, he as a Member of that
Committee conceived he was bound to discharge his duty
by lending his assistance to put the Resolutions into a
taagible shape, but in doing this, he did conceive him.