House of Commons
Wednesday, May 6, 1812.
Petitions from the Merchants of London, &c. Interested in the Trade to India and China—Owners of Ships—Ship Builders—Rope Makers, &c. Respecting the Renewal of the East India Company's Charter
A Petition of several merchants, traders and others of the Port of London, interested in the East India and China trades, was presented and read; setting forth,
"That, for a long series of years, the East India and China trades have been exclusively carried on to and from the port of London, under the express provisions of various acts of parliament made for that purpose, both before and since the partial opening of the trade on the last renewal of the East India Company's Charter; and that, under the regulations of those acts, and the restrictions thereby introduced, numerous classes of his Majesty's subjects have established themselves in London, in different branches of business connected with the East India and China trades, and have, for the purpose of carrying on the same, formed extensive establishments, and embarked large capitals; and that, for the purposes of this trade, as now carried on by the East India Company, and by individuals, warehouses have been built in the metropolis, and wet docks have been formed in its vicinity at an immense expence, and very large sums have been invested in the shipping employed therein, almost wholly by persons in London, and those immediately concerned in the Indian and China trades; and that the petitioners are informed, by the votes of the House, that numerous applications have been made from the outports and provincial towns of the United Kingdoms, that the East India and China trades may be allowed to be carried on to and from such outports, should those trades be still further laid open at the expiration of the East India Company's present Charter; and that the petitioners feel themselves deeply interested in any measure of this extended nature, as the same must materially affect them, in common with the numerous classes and descriptions of persons now engaged in those trades, which, whether confined as they now are, or under any extension thereof, must necessarily form the means of support to those who have embarked therein, and to whom any removal or dis- persion of the trade will be highly injurious and detrimental; and that the experience of many years has proved, that the legislature, by confining to the metropolis the trade of India and China, has beneficially created one large and open market, enabled purchasers to meet in one point, preserved to importers the full benefit of competition, and to purchasers the advantage of the greatest assortment, and the best opportunity for their respective selections; and that, by means thereof, the revenue has been most effectually secured, and materially benefited; and that, by the present method of conducting the import trade, and its being confined to the port of London, smuggling is prevented, and the ad valorem duties are collected not only with the utmost exactness and facility, but on the full value of the commodity, and at the least possible expence to the nation; whereas, should the import trade be dispersed, smuggling could not be prevented, and not only would the revenue be exposed to this loss, now so effectually guarded against by well proved regulations in the collection, but the duties paid ad valorem would be materially diminished by the want of those regular markets and concentrated competition by which they are now augmented; and that, as the most considerable part of the articles imported from India are for foreign consumption, it has been the practice to make the sales in London, at fixed periods of the year, best suited to attract purchasers from abroad, and to have the greatest variety of each species of goods put up to sale at one time, that their demands may be more extensively supplied, and their motives for visiting this country strengthened: but it appears to the petitioners, that if the present salutary system should be changed, it would be impossible so to regulate the sales at the different outports, in point of time, or assortment of goods, as to induce the foreign merchant to come to this country, and this circumstance would not only be a great loss to the revenue, but would be highly detrimental to the manufacturing interests of the country; and that the petitioners humbly submit that no advantages, commensurate with these sacrifices and with the losses which would be sustained by the petitioners and the numerous classes of persons now carrying on this trade in London, will be obtained by the public at large from its dispersion in the outports, and that such a radical alteration in the system now established by law, could only in justice be made upon an indemnification to those who would be injured by the change; and praying, that, on any renewal of the East India Company's Charter, the homeward trade from India and China may be continued exclusively to the port of London."
A Petition of several merchants, manufacturers, traders and others interested in the export trade to India and China from the port of London, was also presented and read; setting forth,
"That the petitioners have been long engaged in the export trade from the port of London to India and China, and that such export trade to India and China, from the first period of its existence, under the sanction of various charters, successively confirmed and regulated by the legislature, has been exclusively carried on from the port of London, to the great advantage of the manufacturing towns of the United Kingdom, inasmuch as the articles exported to India and China, although various, are not extensive in any particular manufacture, but require to be collected from every part of the kingdom, and the same are thereby drawn to the port of London, as an emporium, and brought to one concentrated point for exportation, whereby the coasting trade of the kingdom, the best nursery for seamen, the inland navigation, tending to the general improvement of the agricultural interests of the country, are encouraged, and the revenue itself materially benefited; and that, under the sanction of various acts of parliament, passed relative to such trade, and particularly the Act of the 33d year of his present Majesty, for continuing in the East India Company the possession of the British territories in India, and other purposes therein mentioned, and in obedience and conformity to the regulations and restrictions therein contained, the petitioners have enjoyed the advantage of such exports, and in full faith and confidence that no alteration would take place in the mode of carrying on such trade, have constructed extensive manufactories, and provided large stocks of various sorts of merchandize, peculiarly and exclusively adapted for the India and China markets, and have formed large establishments in the port of London, and otherwise embarked large capitals, for the purpose of carrying on the export trade from thence to India and China; and that the petitioners have observed by the votes of the House, that numerous applications have been made from the outports, and other towns and places in the United Kingdom, that the trade to India and China may be allowed to be carried on from such outports at the expiration of the East India Company's present Charter; and that the anxiety expressed by the various manufacturers in the provincial towns of the United Kingdom, in regard to the exports to India and China, is, the petitioners conceive, grounded upon erroneous data, as will appear by reference to the actual export of such manufactures, whereby it can be most clearly and satisfactorily shewn to the House, that not more than one-fourth of the tonnage offered by the East India Company to private traders, under the provisions of the said recited act, has been applied for; and that the Company have, by their printed notices (circulated generally throughout the trading interests of the community), held out encouragement to private adventurers in the export of British manufactures to a still larger extent; and that, notwithstanding such additional stimulus and encouragement on the part of the Company to private individuals, experience has shewn, that even the quantity now allowed to be exported has never been applied for, thereby proving, most satisfactorily, that the India market is not extensive in its demand, and already abundantly supplied, frequently to the great loss and serious injury of those who have engaged in such private export trade; and that should the export trade to India and China, which is now confined to the port of London, be extended to the out-ports, the very large establishments which have been formed, the extensive warehouses and manufactories which have been built or provided, and the large stocks of merchandize, exclusively adapted to the India and China markets, which have been laid in, and the several docks and wharfs which have also been formed, and workmen engaged, by the petitioners, at an immense expence, will become wholly useless, and the consequences would produce not only irremediable injury to the Petitioners, but tend to the utter ruin of many other individuals and their families who are now, and have been long, embarked in the export trade, under the sanction of the legislature of the country; and praying, that on any renewal of the East India Company's Charter the export trade to India and China may be continued as heretofore to the port of London, and that the petitioners may be heard, by their counsel and agents, against any alterations in the present mode of carrying on the export trade to the East Indies and China."
A Petition of several tea dealers and merchants interested in the trade with China to and from the port of London, as now carried on by the East India Company, was also presented and read; setting forth,
"That the petitioners view with considerable alarm the attempts that are making to introduce innovation into a trade which the experience of many years has proved to be highly and reciprocally advantageous to the established dealers in tea, to the East India Company, and to the public at large; and that, amongst the many advantages arising from the present system of the trade with China, as confined to the East India Company, the petitioners beg to point out the regularity of their quarterly sales, and the uniform proportion which they bear to the consumption of the country, the great and important improvement which has of late years been effected in the quality of teas in general, by the attention paid to that object by the Company's supercargoes, the controul which the Court of Directors have over those persons through whose medium the commercial intercourse with China is carried on, and the importance of having such controul, not only over the British subjects resident in China, but over those who are employed in navigating the ships trading to that country, from the peculiar nature of the Chinese government, a rupture with which, in consequence of any irregularity on the part of persons trading to China, would, in all probability, lead to a total interdiction of all communication whatever with that country; and that the trade with China, as now carried on, is of general importance to the country in a commercial point of view, is shewn from the immense capital employed in it by the East India Company, and by the numerous dealers in tea; and that the increase in the East India Company's sales since the practice of smuggling was put an end to by the Commutation Act, in the year 1784, is from about six millions pounds to an average of about twenty-four millions pounds per annum, and in the advantages arising to the nation at large from the present system, are to be considered the regularity, facility, and economy with which the revenue on the article of tea is now collected, to the amount of nearly 4,000,000l. sterling per annum; and that the consumption of tea has extended itself throughout the British empire to such a degree, and during so long series of years, as to have become an article necessary to the comforts of the people at large; and that it is of the highest consequence that the regular importation and fixed sales of tea, both as to quantity and quality, should be made as secure as possible to the public, and particular care is requisite to preserve an article of such general consumption from the influence of the private speculation of individual importers, especially in the arrangement of their sales, to answer temporary purposes; and that these advantages are secured, and this evil is most effectually guarded against, by the manner in which the trade with China is now carried on by the East India Company; and that any innovation on the wise salutary and prosperous system which has prevailed for so many years, would materially injure, if not absolutely destroy the interests of the petitioners, who have embarked their capitals in this extensive branch of commerce; and that, although the petitioners are desirous of avoiding any discussion on the present occasion with respect to the Indian trade, yet they cannot refrain from noticing, that, if vessels are allowed to trade generally between India and the out-ports of the United Kingdom, the facilities of smuggling tea will be revived equal to those in former times, from the large quantities of tea to be procured in India, and from the opportunities which will be afforded of clandestinely landing the same in different parts of the kingdom, were ships from India allowed to proceed to the out-ports; and this renewal of smuggling woud be equally detrimental to the fair trader and to the revenue; and praying that, on any renewal of the East India Company's Charter, the trade to and from China may be continued exclusively to the East India Company in the port of London; and that the interests of the tea trade, which are so connected with those of the East India Company and of the revenue, may be effectually secured by such regulations as will prevent the opportunities of conveying tea in an illicit manner from India to this country."
A Petition of the managing and other owners of ships built for and in the service of the United East India Company, was also presented and read; setting forth,
"That in consequence of an application from the East India Company to his Majesty's government for a renewal of their Charter, which is expected very soon to undergo the consideration of parliament, many Petitions have been presented to the House by merchants and others residing in the out-ports of this kingdom, praying for extensive and important alterations in the system on which the trade to and from India is now conducted; and that the whole of the trade of the East India Company is carried on in ships built by the petitioners and other private individuals under the direction and inspection of the agents of the said Company, and for their particular service, and if by the opening of the trade to India, or otherwise, they were thrown out of the service, the petitioners may sustain immense losses, such ships being wholly unfit for any other trade or employment; and that the hopes and expectations of great numbers of valuable and meritorious officers will be thus disappointed, and it may be expected that their attention will be directed to other means of supporting themselves and families, by which their nautical skill and talents will be lost to the state; and that there are now in the service of the East India Company 115 ships of different burthens from 1,400 tons progressively down to 500 tons each, amounting in the whole to a tonnage of 115,000 tons and upwards, and in value to above 6,000,000l. of money, the petitioners having embarked a considerable part of their fortunes in the building and equipment of such ships, in the full reliance that the present system of the Company's trade would be permanent; and that these ships are much better equipped and manned, and better prepared to resist an enemy than trading vessels of any other description, and there have been instances of their having engaged French ships of the line with effect; and that they have on various occasions been eminently useful to government, and particularly in India, where their services have materially contributed to the conquest of the enemy's settlements; and that the building of these ships hath been attended with great national advantage by promoting the formation and subsequent employment of large and extensive docks and establishments in the private yards of the ship builders within the port of London, in which a great proportion of the present royal navy hath been built; and that such private yards are ready for the service of government when wanted, free from the expence of keeping up any establishment; and that great national advantage hath also been derived from the said shipping, as affording a service in which many able officers and valuable seamen have been trained, who have afterwards rendered the most essential services in the royal navy; and also, by affording employment to naval officers whilst on half pay in times of peace; and praying the House for a continuance of the system on which the trade to and from India is now carried on, and particularly that the import trade thereof may be confined to the port of London, or that the large and valuable interests of the petitioners, as owners of India shipping, may be protected in such manner as the House in its wisdom shall see meet."
A Petition of the several persons, whose names are thereunto subscribed, being ship builders, boat builders, shipwrights, Caulkers, sawyers, ship joiners, and workmen resident in, and carrying on their business within, the port of London, and banks of the river Thames, was also presented and read; setting forth,
"That some of the petitioners have been long engaged as masters or principals in the building, repairing, and equipping of ships, boats, and vessels in the port of London; and that the principal part of the ships or vessels and boats built in the docks and premises of such of the petitioners, who are masters and principals, have been for the East India and China trades, and which constitute the most important branch of the business of this class of the petitioners; and that, in the confidence that the said trades, which have been exclusively carried on for upwards of a century in the port of London, would not be removed, the petitioners have constructed or engaged very large dock yards and premises, and formed very extensive establishments on both sides of the river Thames, in which they have invested, if not sunk, very large capitals, which, in the event of the export trade to India and China being laid open, will be almost entirely lost; and that the ships regularly built for, and now employed in, the East India and China trade, from their large dimensions and force, are capable of being converted, upon any sudden emergency, to the purposes of war, in aid of the regular navy; but it is more than probable, in case the trade be thrown open, that the ships to be employed hereafter will necessarily be of comparatively small burthen, and inapplicable to the public service; consequently the country will be deprived of an important naval resource, of which, the petitioners humbly beg leave to remind the House, in a moment of great apparent danger, the government had availed itself by the purchase of fourteen East India ships, which were converted into ships of war; and that the said petitioners have engaged in their different yards and premises a great number of apprentices, under the impression that the said trades would be continued to the port of London, the removal of which, the petitioners conceive, must prove most extremely injurious to this youthful class, and also eventually to the general service of their country, as they will constitute a never failing supply for his Majesty's dock yards; and that several of the petitioners are workmen employed in the different yards and premises in the port of London, and have, with their families, been long resident in Stepney, Blackwall, Rotherhithe, Limehouse, Bermondsey, Deptford, Northfleet, Greenwich, and other places contiguous or near to the river Thames, where the several establishments for the building of ships and vessels have for upwards of a century been formed and maintained by the principals or proprietors carrying on the said trade, and employing the petitioners therein; and that the class of ships engaged in the East India and China trade, from their magnitude, require a greater number of persons in the building thereof than vessels of a smaller description; and therefore, from the certainty of obtaining employment, the petitioners have been for many years, with their families, settled at the different places above-mentioned, within the port of London: and that the petitioners have observed, with great regret and alarm, the various applications that have been made to the House for opening the trade to India and China, which appear to the petitioners to be founded on delusion, and which, if granted by parliament, will be highly injurious, and indeed almost ruinous, to the petitioners resident in the port of London, without eventually benefiting those who apply for it; and praying the House, that on any renewal of the East India Company's Charter, the trade to and from India and China may be continued to the port of London as heretofore; and that the petitioners may be heard, by their counsel and agents, against any alteration in the present mode of carrying on the export trade to India and China."
A Petition of the several persons whose names are thereunder subscribed, being ropemakers and their workmen, resident in and carrying on their business within the port of London, and on the banks of the river Thames, was also presented and read; setting forth,
"That several of the petitioners are engaged as masters or principals in making and supplying of cables and ropes of every description for ships and vessels in the port of London, and have for that purpose constructed and built, or engaged, very large and extensive premises, and formed very large and expensive establishments (wherein they have invested large capitals) on both sides of the river Thames, or near thereunto, within the port of London, for the purpose of carrying on that trade; and that the supplying the ships and vessels fitted out in the port of London for the East Indies and China, form an important and very considerable portion of the business carried on by the petitioners: and that the petitioners have engaged a very great number of apprentices, with a view to a permanent continuance of this trade, the removal of which must prove extremely injurious to this youthful class, and that another portion of the petitioners are workmen employed by the rope-makers in the port of London, and that the petitioners and their families have been long resident in Stepney, Blackwall, Rotherhithe, Limehouse, Bermondsey, Deptford, Greenwich, and other places contiguous or near to the river Thames, where the several establishments have for upwards of a century been formed and kept up by the principals or proprietors thereof carrying on the said trade, and employing the petitioners therein; and that the class of ships engaged in the East India and China trades use cordage of a magnitude requiring a larger number of persons in the manufacturing thereof than vessels of a smaller description, and therefore, from the certainty of obtaining employment, the petitioners and their families have for many years been resident at the different places above-mentioned within the port of London, and that the petitioners are, in consequence of the large manufactures and establishments they have formed upon or near to the river Thames, for the purpose of supplying the East India and China trades, which require constant and extensive demand, been much employed in manufacturing cordage for his Majesty's navy, but which they have formed and kept up for the supply of the East India and China trades in the port of London; and that the petitioners have observed with great regret and alarm the various applications that have been made to the House for opening the trade to India and China, which appear to the petitioners to be founded on delusion, and which, if granted by parliament, will be highly injurious indeed, and almost ruinous to the petitioners resident in the port of London, without eventually benefiting those who apply for it; and praying, that on any renewal of the East India Company's Charter, the trade to and from India and China may be continued as heretofore to the port of London; and that the petitioners may be heard, by their counsel or agents, against any alteration in the present mode of carrying on the export trade to India and China."
Five Petitions, of persons whose names are thereunto subscribed, resident in and carrying on their business within the port of London, and on the banks of the river Thames;—being ship plumbers, painters, and glaziers; sailmakers and their workmen; mastmakers, blockmakers, and gun carriage-makers, and their workmen; smiths, coppersmiths, and anchorsmiths, and their workmen; and ship-chandlers and ship-coopers and their workmen,—were presented and read: setting forth,
"That the principal part of the employment of the petitioners has been the furnishing and fitting out the ships employed in the India and China trade; and that, in the confidence that the said trade would be continued to the port of London, the petitioners, for the purpose of carrying on their businesses, have constructed or engaged large premises, and formed very extensive establishments, in which they have invested and sunk very large capitals, on both sides of the river Thames; and that several of the petitioners are also workmen employed in the different dock yards and premises in the port of London, and have, with their families, been long resident in Stepney, Blackwall, Rotherhithe, Limehouse, Bermondsey, Deptford, Greenwich, Northfleet, Gravesend, and other places contiguous or near to the river Thames, where the several establishments for the furnishing of ships and vessels have for upwards of a century been formed and maintained by the principals or proprietors carrying on the said trades, and employing the petitioners therein; and that the class of ships engaged in the East India and China trades are of a magnitude that require greater number of persons in the furnishing thereof than vessels employed in any other trades, and therefore, from the certainty of obtaining employment, the petitioners have been for many years, with their families, settled at the different places above-mentioned, within the port of London; and that they have observed, with alarm, the various applications made to the House for the purpose of opening the trade to India and China, conceiving the same, if granted, will tend to the diminution or destruction of the East India shipping in the port of London, and thereby prove highly injurious, if not wholly ruinous, to the petitioners, who look to and depend upon the outfit of such shipping for their business and support; and praying the House, that, upon any renewal of the present existing Charter of the East India Company, the trade to India and China may be continued, as heretofore, in the port of London; and that the petitioners may be heard, by their counsel or agents, against any alteration in the present mode of carrying on the export trade to India and China."
The said Petitions were ordered to lie upon the table.
Civil Disabilities of the Roman Catholics
rose to give notice, that he would, before the conclusion of the session, submit to the House a motion on a subject which he was aware had already come before them for decision; but which, from the complexion of the discussion on that occasion, he trusted they would permit him to bring under consideration in another form. He alluded to the debate respecting the penal laws affecting the Roman Catholic subjects of his Majesty. The object of his motion, he begged to state, would be, that an humble Address be presented to his royal highness the Prince Regent, praying that he would, during the recess, take into his serious con- sideration the condition of this class of the people, with the view of ascertaining the nature and extent of such securities as might be necessary to fence the Established Church, in case any further concessions to them should be deemed advisable and expedient. As a call of the House was fixed for Wednesday the 27th of May, and as Thursday the 28th was not only a day on which notices took precedence, but an open day, he would fix on it for bringing forward this important subject.—The notice was accordingly entered for the 28th.
Property Tax
rose to submit a resolution to the House respecting the manner in which the Property Tax was collected, and its unequal pressure upon the subjects of the country. The hon. baronet examined several of the clauses of the act, in order to shew their inexpediency and injustice; and he cited the cases of various persons who had addressed letters to him stating the peculiar grievances that attached to the mode in which they were assessed under that act. He dwelt particularly on the hardship of subjecting those who had nothing but a life interest in an annuity, to the same rate of tax as those who had freehold property to an equal amount; the stake of the one and the other in the country being so different. In adverting to the unequal pressure of this tax upon the community, he instanced the case of a person having only 150l. per annum, and another having 1,500l.; the one, he contended, in paying his 15l. contributed more in proportion to the residue of his property, than the other in paying his 150l. He was aware, indeed, the revenue this tax produced was very great, but that was no argument why its oppressive features should be maintained. If the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer looked only to the produce of a tax, regardless of its policy or its equity, he would proceed, in his opinion, upon the principle of Moliere's Avare, "Il faut l'argent, l'argent, l'argent!" There was another thing which rendered the Property Tax more seemingly oppressive, the exemption from it which foreigners still enjoyed, namely, 63,000l. were thus suffered to be lost annually, though as much the property of the state as that which was derived from any other source. In adverting to the manner in which the tax was collected, he would venture to affirm, that he never read an act of parliament which gave a greater and more unlimited power to collectors and assessors than was given by the Property Tax Act; a power too, which, it was well known, had been too often used with a wanton and unjustifiable indifference to the rights of individuals. He alluded particularly to the vexatious manner in which assessments were made, and the mockery of redress which was held out to appellants. His chief object, however, in calling the attention of the House to the subject, was, in the hope that something might be devised which would equalize the tax, and, by rendering it less oppressive to the middle classes of society, secure to it the permanency of those sources whence it derived its present ample produce. If the right hon. gentleman would promise to give it his attention; if he would pledge himself to turn the subject in his mind during the recess, he would then withdraw his motion; if not, he should certainly make it, and, whatever might be its fate, he would persist in making a similar one every year till some alleviation was obtained. The hon. baronet concluded by moving the following Resolution, "That the Property Tax, however just in its principle, or necessary as a measure of finance, is raised by means that make it very oppressive to the middle classes of the community; and that it is expedient that some enquiry should be instituted, with a view to ascertain how far it can be qualified and rendered more equal in it operation."—The Resolution was handed to the Speaker, but no member seconding it, the motion fell to the ground.
Committee on the Orders in Council
The House then resolved into a Committee on the Petitions against the Orders in Council, in which the following witnesses were called and examined to much the same effect as preceding witnesses: namely, Mr. Greenwood, of Halifax, and Mr. Bailey of Sheffield. At half-past seven the House resumed; progress was reported, and leave given to sit again to-morrow.
Suits in Chancery
rose to make his motion, respecting the delays that so notoriously existed in all Chancery causes. He commenced by stating, that his primary object was to ascertain what could be done by legislative interference, to assist the suitors in Chancery; but if it should turn out upon en- quiry, that unnecessary delays were occasioned by the present Lord Chancellor, he trusted he should not be accused of any personal disrespect towards that excellent person. If, however, he should incur that imputation, it would not deter him from doing, as a member of parliament, what he conceived to be his duty. The business of the court of Chancery was not greater now than it was in the time of lord chancellor Hardwicke. He had himself once thought that the business had really increased of late years, but on enquiry he found that it had not increased. He knew it would be said, that an increase had taken place in the number of Petitions in cases of Bankruptcy and Lunacy. The increase in cases of Lunacy was trifling, but the unfortunate circumstances of the country had no doubt prodigiously increased the number of bankrupt causes. Much of the delay in the court of Chancery, he understood, was to be ascribed to the practice recently introduced of hearing cases on motions—a practice certainly productive of infinite mischief. It might be very convenient to those persons who made the motions, but it was of the utmost inconvenience to those whose causes came regularly on. With respect to the present Lord Chancellor, he believed a man of greater kindness and humanity, of greater affability and good humour, never sat in a court of justice; but with all these good qualities he might not have the talent of quick decision. His slowness of decision might arise from an over-anxious desire not to be wrong. A good deal of the inconvenience which this was calculated to produce was, no doubt, alleviated by the extraordinary dispatch of the Master of the Rolls; but if any thing were to happen to the Master of the Rolls, in what situation would the country be placed? The Chancellor's mind could not be turned exclusively to the court of Chancery like the Master of the Rolls. His situation necessarily prevented this. As an illustration of the slowness of decision in the court of Chancery, he needed only to state, that in Hilary term, 1812, five decrees were pronounced and no appeals were decided. There were on the paper 100 causes, so that gentlemen might easily conceive what time would elapse before many of these causes could be determined. There were at the same time 39 appeals from the Master of the Rolls. To shew the dispatch of the Master of the Rolls, he would state, that he made in 1810, 276 decrees, in 1811, 280 decrees, and in Hilary term and the sittings afterwards 102 decrees. What was the reason, then, that so few causes were decided, while from the paper it appeared that, taking away bankrupt actions, there were not more suits than in the time of lord chancellor Hardwicke? Had he not a right to enquire from those men who alone were capable of giving correct information on the subject—what was the cause of the delay? He believed the conduct of the Lord Chancellor, as a judge, would bear the test of the strictest examination; but this was no reason why those men should not be called on. The lord chancellor Hardwicke went on with great rapidity in the decision of cases. It was to be recollected too, that he decided much of what now came before the Master of the Rolls. It might be said that he too had arrears. But at the end of a session he was obliged to leave over 100 causes to the next, because the solicitors could not keep pace with him. Were gentlemen aware of the prodigious expence entailed on suitors, from their causes being set down for judgment, and again and again set down without any judgment being given? He would repeat, that he had the highest respect for the Lord Chancellor, and he professed he would rather take his judgment when given, than that of any man in England, not only on account of the general acuteness and soundness of mind which he possessed, but on account of his profound acquaintance with the law of property. But this was no reason to prevent inquiry. No delicacy to the Chancellor ought to stand in the way of it. They who maintained that it ought, supposed the Chancellor was every thing and the public nothing; but the public was every thing and the Chancellor nothing. He was liberally paid by the public, and that public was entitled to have a proper return. The House ought to bear in mind when such topics as these were urged, how many families were ruined with the very best cause before a decision could be given. After some further observations, the hon. and learned gentleman concluded with moving, "That it be a special instruction to the Committee appointed to enquire into the causes that retard the decisions of Suits in the High Court of Chancery, to examine persons practising at the bar, as well as solicitors in the said court, touching the causes of the delay."
seconded the motion.
declared, that there was nobody more anxious for enquiry into the causes of the delays alluded to than he was. It was not fair in his hon. friend to attribute to him, and to those who telt as he did on this subject, any wish to withhold enquiry. He disapproved, however, of transferring the bench to the bar, and allowing the bar to sit in judgment on the bench. His hon. friend had been at great pains to disclaim what he (Mr. M.) contended must have arisen from this proceeding, namely, to injure the feelings of the noble and learned lord who presided in that court. He might have felt regret, along with others, that the noble and learned lord had not at all times given effect to the first expression of his opinion; but at the same time it must be admitted, that where there was more time of deliberation, there was also greater advantage in the decision. If his hon. friend wanted to go the length of alleging that a practical evil was felt, then must he give up his waver, and charge directly that the Chancellor of England had done wrong:—a charge in which, he believed, very few would countenance him. It was impossible, he conceived, for a man to read the papers before the House and not to see the cause of the delay. It consisted in an increase of business, both in the court of Chancery, and in the court of Appellant Jurisdiction. His hon. friend had referred to the number of Bills filed in the time of lord Hardwicke, and in the time of the present Chancellor, and assumed that as a criterion of the business which had come before the two chancellors. This, however, was a very unsatisfactory way of judging. During ten years of the present Lord Chancellor's time, there had been 19,133 motions, and 1,015 Petitions, more than in the ten corresponding years in the time of lord Hardwicke. If the question was how the two important branches of Chancery business, and of the business in the court of Appellant Jurisdiction, which had both so much increased, were to be discharged by one man, he must say, he thought that a question of state policy, not one to be decided by gentlemen, however eminent he knew some of them to be, practising at the bar of the court of Chancery. No delay existed in the Master's offices: when the causes were not in motion, the Masters had no emoluments; when the causes were stationary, the emoluments of the Masters were stationary also.
said, that, feeling as he did towards the noble lord who presided in the court of Chancery, he had no hesitation in stating, that, if the present motion was to be considered as a personal attack on that noble lord, nothing but the strongest sense of duty would impel him to support it. But he thought that it was most unjust to consider it in that light; for the documentary evidence before the Committee was not sufficient, and they were therefore bound to seek for more, by examining the gentlemen practising at the Chancery bar. How then could the feelings of any one be harassed by such a proceeding, unless it threw blame on the noble and learned lord? Why should it harass and agitate the mind of the noble and learned lord, if it was ascertained that the delays arose from the great number of motions, and not from the small number of decrees? There was nothing so injurious to the Lord Chancellor as to say, "for God's sake do not enquire into it, from motives of delicacy." On these grounds he should vote for the motion.
thought, that as the House had gone so far as to appoint a committee, they ought to give that committee all possible means of bringing their labours to a satisfactory termination.
opposed the motion, observing, that the judicial qualities of the present Lord Chancellor had stood the test of fifteen years, and only three appeals had been taken against his judgments within that period. If there was in the court of Chancery, and in the court of Appellant Jurisdiction, ten times the business that could be done without working impossibilities, what occasion was there for an appeal to the bar on the subject?
made a short reply, in the course of which, he stated, that he should deceive the world, if he did not say that it would be impossible for the committee to ascertain the real cause of the delays unless they were permitted to examine persons intimately connected with the court of Chancery.
The House then divided,
For the Motion 20 Against it 84 Majority —64
List of the Minority. Babington, T. Duadas, G. Bankes, H. Eden, G. Brougham, H. Horner, F. Creevey, T. Kemp, T. Martin, H. Taylor, M. A. Milton, lord Whitbread, S. Moore, P. Wilberforce, W. O'Hara, C. Wrottesley, H. Ossulston, lord TELLERS. Ponsonby, F. Sir W. Lemon Romilly, sir S. H. Bennet. Stuart, lord Wm.