rose to move, that all papers relative to the Chest at Greenwich should be printed.

suggested to the noble lord, that if those papers had been laid on the table during the session, there would be no difficulty attending his motion, but if not, he should specify what papers he wished for particularly.

stated, that he wished for all papers on that subject since the 46th of the King; but on the motion being put from the Chair, no member seconded it, and it fell to, the ground of course.

then proceeded to express his wish, that the state of the funds in Greenwich Hospital should be known, in order to ascertain whether they were sufficient to make provision for that great body of seamen and petty officers, who would be entitled to be placed on the establishment at the conclusion of the present war. The House, he was satisfied, could have no objection to this information being laid before them. His reason for moving for it now was, the fact of his having learnt, that it was in contemplation to devote the Droits of the Admiralty to the current services of the year. The noble lord concluded by moving, "That there be laid before this House, an Account showing the Revenues of Greenwich Hospital, and the sources whence they are derived, also the disbursements for management, and the number of pensioners in each class; distinguishing those maintained within the Hospital from the out-pensioners; also, an account of the number admitted in each year since 1800, and the amount of the pensioners at that time maintained within and without the Hospital."

seconded the motion.

said, it was perfectly new to him that there was any intention of devoting the Droits of Admiralty in the manner stated by the noble lord. He knew of no right which existed in his Majesty's government, to make such an application of those Droits, and if they were so applied, it must be considered entirely as arising from an act of royal bounty. The noble lord had adduced no "reasonable ground for the production of the papers for which he had moved. Whether they were of an objectionable description or not, he was unable to judge, but he could not see why, the table of the House was to be crowded with, useless and unnecessary documents. He should therefore move the previous question.

persisted in the propriety of the House having before them the information for which he had moved. There never was a period at which it was more desirable that some steps should be adopted to ameliorate the situation of his Majesty's navy. Those brave men oft which it was composed, were subject to the most heart-rending oppressions, and, in his opinion, bad every cause to complain of their situations. After having been released from the labours, of a long and arduous ser- vice, they were not, as they richly deserved, suffered to return to the bosoms of their wives and families, but were kept almost to the last hour of their existence in a constant and unremitting state of servitude, unless where they determined to sacrifice that reward which their country had provided for them, as a consolation for the buffetings they had undergone, to purchase their discharge. This had frequently been the case; and he had received constant applications, complaining of this species of hardship. Two men had lately. applied to him, who, after a service of seventeen years and a half, as petty officers, had been sent to perform that most scandalous of all duties, harbour duty, where there was no distinction whatever between petty officers and private men, and who, rather than submit to be longer disgraced, had expended 80l. or 90l. each to obtain their discharge. These men were entitled to pensions of 12l. or 14l. a year; and he was convinced that there was not an insurance office in town, that would not have given them, at their age, for the sums they had paid for their discharge, annuities equal to their pensions. Instead of Greenwich being a source of advantage and reward to aged seamen, it was made a means of recruiting for the navy. Unless some alteration was made in this system, he should feel it his duty to move for leave to bring in a Bill to limit the service of the navy. The House, he was convinced, would see the necessity of pointing out some term at which a seaman's service was to be brought to a conclusion, and at which he might have some hope of resting his frame after an arduous and gallant service, in the lap of domestic happiness and retirement. In consequence of the present arrangements, men were employed who were absolutely incapable of performing their duty, and in his own ship he had found men who, if he had the power, he would much rather have discharged than have suffered to remain on hoard. In other instances he knew individuals who had been invalided three times and sent into harbour duty, volunteer into active service three times, in order to avoid that disgrace, and finally the amidst the roar of battle when their tottering limbs were scarce able to support them to their quarters.

could not see that any grounds whatever had been laid for the noble lord's motion. The statement into which he had entered, tended to censure the practice that at present existed, with respect to the discharge of seamen. He re-collected that this subject had been before under discussion in the House, and that it was then stated, that the present practice had been introduced in order to exempt the men from the necessity of finding two substitutes, under which they before laboured. This question, however, had no connection with the motion, which referred entirely to the management of Greenwich hospital. He believed that the affairs of that department were as Well and regularly conducted, as any other branch of, the public service.

said, he understood the noble lord bad complained of the present system by which the allowance received by seamen from Greenwich hospital was rendered useless to them in consequence of the large sums which they were compelled to pay for their release.

confessed he could see no connection between the matter of the speech, and the motion itself of the noble lord. As the case, however, to which he had called the attention of the House Was undoubtedly hard, it was very desirable that information should be communicated in some mode.

The previous question was then put and carried, when lord Cochrane immediately gave notice that he would, that day month, move for leave to bring in a Bill to limit the Service of the Navy.

, before the House adjourned, rose to make a few observations upon what had fallen from the noble lord in the early part of the evening, when he did not happen to be present. If, however, he had correctly understood what had fallen front that noble lord, he begged leave to say that the noble lord had been wholly misinformed with respect to the sums of money taken instead of substitutes for the navy. The fact was, that the grossest frauds having been practised upon the poor men, under the pretence of providing substitutes for them, the Admiralty had come to the resolution of receiving a certain Sum of money from them, and to find substitutes.

rose for the purpose of calling the attention of the House, to the Petition from the booksellers and publishers of London and Westminster, which he had the honour to present on the 16th of December last,^* praying for, a revision of the laws respecting Copy-right. There were existing acts of parliament, by which those booksellers and publishers, who wished to secure to themselves the exclusive right to the property of their works, could do so by entering the same in Stationers' Hall, and furnishing a certain number of copies to the Universities, &c. There were other acts which seemed only to apply to the penalties, which booksellers and authors would be entitled to, on condition of furnishing such copies, but by which, if the penalties were not sought to be enforced, the Universities did not seem to be secured in their copies. By a recent decision, it had been held that the Universities were entitled to those copies, whether the proprietors, of the works chose to enter them in Stationers' Hall or not. The booksellers thought this was a hardship upon them, and that there were certain points relating to it, in respect of which they were entitled to relief First they were required to furnish eleven copies of each work, upon the best paper that should be printed and published, or reprinted and published with additions. In the present system of printing costly editions on fine paper, with a profusion of plates, it was peculiarly hard on booksellers to deliver such a number of copies to the learned bodies; nor did it end there; for they were obliged to deliver subsequent copies of every successive edition in which there was the slightest addition of any kind. This was evidently a very severe imposition, and was felt peculiarly by those who contemplated the publication of books containing prints. It also happened, that in some cases but whether any and what alterations are requisite to be made therein; together with their observations thereon to the House."

^* See vol. 24, p. 308.

very few copies of learned books were ever printed; and he would quote one instance, the Flora Græca of Dr. Sibthorpe, late professor of botany at Oxford, a most expensive work, of which he believed not mare than thirty four or five copies were sold in all Europe. In cases like this, the condition of giving so many copies amounted to a total prohibition of publishing the work, and would have suppressed this magnificent addition to natural history; but for the affluence and liberality of his lamented friend; who, having spent several years in the Levant to collect materials, left a considerable property applicable in the first place to publishing the Flora; and then to founding a professorship at Oxford of the art, most useful at least to the whole of mankind. He had undertaken to present the Petition of the Booksellers, on the clear understanding that he was not to stand forth as their champion. No man in the world could be less disposed to oppose the just claims of the Universities than himself. He was sincerely attached to those learned bodies; he recollected with pleasure the many years he had spent in Oxford, and would always support their just rights; but he thought some expedient might be found to relieve the booksellers from this enormous pressure. The hon. gentleman concluded with moving, "That the Act 8 Anne, c. 19, for the encouragement of learning, by vesting the copies of printed books in the authors or purchasers of such copies, during the times therein mentioned; and the Act 15 Geo. 3, c. 53, for enabling the two universities in England, the four universities in Scotland, and the several colleges of Eton, Westminster, and Winchester, to hold in perpetuity their copy-right in books given or bequeathed to the said universities and colleges, for the advancement of useful learning, and other purposes of education; and for amending so much of an Act of the 8th year of the reign of queen Anne, as relates to the delivery of books to the ware housekeeper of the Stationers' company, for the use of the several libraries therein mentioned,—and the Act 41 Geo. 3, c. 107, for the further encouragement of learning in the united kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, by securing the copies and copy-right of printed books to the authors of such books, or their assigns, for the time therein mentioned, might be read;" and the same being read; he next moved, "That a committee be appointed to examine the said acts, and to report

agreed that some mode ought to be fallen upon, to secure their copies to the Universities without too much trespassing on the property of authors and booksellers.

concurred in the opinion that the law, as it now stood, operated as a severe tax on a body seldom able to meet great exactions—the body of authors; He had the utmost filial respect for the Universities, and was anxious for the enlargement of public libraries, but thought no grievance ought, with a view to their interests, to be suffered to oppress the professors and cultivators of general literature. The tax fell too, it ought to be observed, on valuable publications, and did not at all apply to the insignificant productions of the daily or periodical press, which the Universities did not think it worth their while to claim. He might mention, that the copies of lord Valentia's work, which he, was obliged to send to the public universities, were said to have cost him 5001.These copies, likewise, if not wanted by the bodies to whom they were sent, were sold, and thus came in competition with the impressions already in the market.

did not intend to oppose the motion, but merely to state a general observation which had occurred to him. The law had been called a tax on authors, but it was the booksellers who now complained of the law, and asked for its revision. It would not be difficult to show that it was impossible it could press upon both. In fact, in his opinion, it was really paid by the public at last, whatever was the previous expense incurred by the one or the other. Upon the whole, he thought that the cost of one copy was not so great an evil to the publisher as to be any balance to the advantage of furnishing the Universities and public bodies with copies of all literary productions.

thought the object of the present application was to get rid of the obligation imposed by the Act of queen Ann, and to retain the benefit conferred by it. His hon. and learned friend (Mr. Wynn) had called the regulation alluded to a tax on authors: it was incumbent, however, on those who thus characterised it, to shew that its evils were less than its advantages. No author, he was convinced, would object to such a distribution of his work, if its effect would be to shew it to thousands of eyes which would never otherwise see it, in which same proportion his own celebrity would be increased. As to the idea of works printed on fine wire-wove, hot-pressed paper not being subjected to the operation of the Act, he thought those were exactly the works on which, more peculiarly, such a burden ought to fall. The time for allowing to authors a property in their works, he thought ought to be enlarged; and also, that an alteration should be made on the Act of the 41st Geo, 3, by which the works to be furnished to the Irish libraries were limited to those actually entered at Stationers'-hall.

though connected with one of the great bodies affected by the regulations in question, declared that he had no private feeling on the subject; on the contrary, he was certain that the learned body to which he belonged would be happy to meet the question liberally, and that their only object was the advancement of learning.

said the hon. gentleman who spoke last but one was under a great mistake when he stated that the object of the present application was to get rid of the obligations of the Act of queen Ann and to retain the benefits of it. No man could do so without depositing eleven copies of his book: and by the late decision, though a man did not claim any exclusive benefit under the Act, still he must give the eleven copies. There was another mistake under which the hon. gentleman laboured, in supposing that the Act of queen Ann conferred a benefit on authors: no such thing. Before the passing of that Act, authors had the exclusive property in their works; and the Act in question went to limit that right to 14 years in the first instance, and to another period of 14 years if the author should be alive at the expiry of the first period. The only privileges conferred by this Act which authors did not before enjoy, went to some penalties which were immaterial. It was extremely desirous that every encouragement should be given to the public libraries; but was it necessary that this should be done by a tax upon learning? This was said to be a tax not on authors but on booksellers. Was it not, however, a tax on authors wherever they kept their works in their own hands? As the case now stood, no doubt, the privilege was absurd and unequal. A man had a second period of 14 years in which he had an interest in his work, if he survived the first 14, years; but, if he died before the expiry of the first period, then his executors had no farther interest in the work. It operated in a way most injurious to the best interests of literature; for as young authors were more likely to reach the second term than old, it gave the immature and jejune compositions of the former double the reward reserved for the productions of ripened genius.

The motion of Mr. Giddy was then agreed to, and a committee of 21 was appointed.

rose to submit his proposition to the attention of the House, previous to their entering upon the discussion of the Vice Chancellor's Bill, as it was closely connected with it. With regard to the office of Lord Chancellor, it seemed to be the general opinion, that some relief should be afforded to the person filling it, and the only question was, what step was most likely to render that relief permanent and efficient? His own plan had met with the approbation of several gentle-men in that House, and it was rather in' obedience to their call than to any confidence in his own power of enforcing its utility, that he now ventured to submit it. One great objection he had to the Vice-Chancellor's Bill, was, that it would render in times to come the Lord Chancellor of England more a political man than he wished him to be. As the keeper of the royal conscience, and as a cabinet minister, it would be farcical and ridiculous to say that he must not be a political character; but he would maintain that his duty in those respects was only a secondary one, while his first and most imperative duty was in the court of Chancery. He had many other objections to the' Bill, which, however, he would not press now, as the question had already been so fully discussed. He was decidedly of opinion, however, that it would not afford that relief to the Lord Chancellor which was expected. For example, the Vice-Chancellor might be ill, or in the course of nature, he might become old, and then what assistance could he give? and, indeed, there was that general impression upon the minds of the suitors with regard to the ultimate decision of the great seal, that they would not be satisfied with what was pronounced by any deputed authority; appeals would therefore ensue, and the hearing of them would be just as laborious as hearing the causes originally. He did not object to the Bill because it intended to give relief, but because it would not give relief enough. With respect to the plan he meant to propose, it would have for its object the removing of the bankrupt jurisdiction, from the office of the Lord Chancellor, of which office it formed no part quasi Chancellor. It was in no shape annexed to the great seal, but had been superadded by statute in the reign of queen Elizabeth. And why was it then superadded? Because the regular business of Lord Chancellor was not so great, as to render the additional jurisdiction of bankruptcies any impediment to its discharge. But, suppose it were now to be proposed for the first time, to superadd the jurisdiction of bankruptcies to the office of Lord Chancellor, would they with their eyes open, and knowing the various and important duties already attached to it, consent to its being so superadded? Certainly not, and neither would it have been superadded by statute in the reign of Elizabeth, had the duties of the Lord Chancellor then been what they now are. If, then, the object was to relieve the Lord Chancellor, the most effectual way would be to take from him what had been superadded by statute. Bankrupt causes were likely to increase. He did not mean to refer to any particular pressure as the cause of that increase, for if there were a peace to-morrow, in an opulent country like this, there would always be speculations that might end in bankruptcy. Many of those bankrupt causes were of a pressing nature, and it was necessary to hear them, often to the interruption and delay of the regular Chancery business; so that it became a matter of real importance to consider how the jurisdiction of them might be removed from the office of Lord Chancellor.—The hon. member then entered into some observations upon the nature of the objections which he had heard made to the separation of the bankruptcy causes from the office of Chancellor; and maintained that none of them were valid or satisfactory. If the fees of the bankruptcy causes were not sufficient to induce a man of talents and eminence at the bar, to accept the situation of judge of these causes, they ought not to hesitate to provide liberally for the office. He should move that the House do resolve itself into a committee on the subject, when he would propose the few arrangements necessary. Few arrangements would be necessary as the business would be done by introducing in the statute on the subject the name of the chief commissioner of bankrupts to the Lord Chancellor, there being at present a secretary, and all the other accompaniments of a separate jurisdiction. If the measure which had been brought down to them from the Lords were adopted, he was convinced that in a few years the delay would be as great as ever, and they must come again to the House with the expedient he now proposed, or some other. If the House adopted his plan, they would afford relief to the Master of the Rolls, as the chief judge in matters of bankruptcy, might sit at the Cock-pit, when not employed in his peculiar jurisdiction, and the Master of the Rolls might, during his unoccupied time, assist the Chancellor, He concluded by moving, "That this House will resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, to consider of such, parts of the Statute of the 13th of Elizabeth, c. 7, and other subsequent Statutes, as give the jurisdiction in matters of Bankruptcy to the Lord High Chancellor of England."

said, that on the present occasion he did not feel it necessary to enter into the discussion of the Bill, which would soon come again under their consideration, nor to discuss that plan which he had on a former night suggested to the consideration of the House. The hon. gentleman who had brought forward this motion, had applied himself with much attention to the subject, and the public was greatly indebted to him for his application to it, but that hon. member had not obtained the most correct information as to the amount of the bankruptcy business in the court of Chancery. It could by no means be estimated, at one-third or one-fourth of the business of the court. Formerly the whole business was transacted in six days at the end of each term, and till very lately never occupied more than twenty. From commercial distresses of late years, the causes had much increased, and the number of causes last year must be esteemed at much more than the average. But he should calculate on the business of the last year, without making allowance for the fractions of time occupied by persons wishing to be heard out of season. During that year 604. orders were made on causes of bankruptcy, and of these, 396 were made in 14 days of the month of August. During 10 of these days, indeed, the Chancellor had sat both morning and evening, so that these 14 might be reckoned as equal to 24 days. As it was certain that in 24 days two-thirds of these causes had been heard, so in 36 days a judge might hear all. Was it fit, then, that a separate judge should be constituted for this purpose? They had come there, however, not to consider what was fit in the abstract, but to consider whether the proposed measure would be a remedy for the acknowledged evil. The extent of the evil might be learnt from the noble lord who had proposed the Bill, on which they should that night have to consider. It was by him proposed to withdraw the Chancellor from his court to the House of Lords three days in each week during the sitting of parliament. These three days, during the six months, would amount to 72 days; and unless they gave the Chancellor an assistant for 72 days, they would not provide against the evil. Indeed, time must be added to subdue the arrears, and if the bankrupt causes occupied only 36 days to subtract these causes, the effect would be that the arrears would go on accumulating. In short this measure could not succeed. Another reason for his objecting to the motion was, that as the jurisdiction in bankruptcy causes was equitable, it should be performed by a judge practised in the court of equity, as it was universally admitted, that a judge habituated to an equitable jurisdiction must make a sounder application of the principles of equity than any other. For these simple reasons he should object to the motion.

made some remarks on the defects in the bankruptcy jurisdiction in general. At Guildhall there were sometimes from 100 to 130 meetings of creditors on the same day, which created such a scene of confusion as resembled more a bear-garden than a judicatory. From the press of people, and the difficulty of getting the business done, he himself had often been induced to defer the time of proving his debts, and on finding this scene renewed, had been at last unable to prove them at all. This might be obviated by separating the controverted from the uncontroverted debts. The assignees were, notwithstanding the statute provided in the case, not sufficiently checked, and had an interest to protract the distribution of the property-By an office similar to that of accountant-general of Chancery, this might be provided against. It was remarkable, also, that the Secretary of Bankrupts' office could now afford scarcely any information, as to the Chancellor's part in this business. The causes, owing to his other multifarious business, frequently did not come on at the days appointed, which he had experienced in a case in which he was an assignee. From this arose great inconvenience and expence, against which the motion before them was, as he conceived, the most effectual remedy. If the bankruptcy cases were transferred to a separate judge, the commissioners might revolve round him as satellites, round their planet; while at present the Chancellor visited them like a comet, once in a century, and with inconceivable velocity. After touching on the benefit of division of labour in this, as in other cases, and on the inconveniences of the situation of Vice-Chancellor, he concluded by supporting the motion.

observed, that the objections of the hon. gentleman who spoke last, would apply more properly to a motion of which the member for Oxford had given notice. The Vice Chancellor's Bill, and the measure before the House, were totally distinct. The first was a complaint from the House of Lords, that they could not do their judicial business, and offering a remedy; and the motion before them included a complaint against delay in the court of Chancery. As to this last subject, they had no information before them; though a committee had been sitting on the subject during two sessions, yet they had not been permitted to examine those persons who were best acquainted with the subject. As to the Bill from the Lords, if it were injurious to other parties, that House ought to reject it, and the Lords should devise a less objectionable remedy.—As they had not sufficient information before them he should oppose the motion.

was of opinion that it was expedient to separate some great limb from the office of the Lord Chancellor, and he conceived that none could be se parated with so little diminution of the general importance of the office, and with so little change of its constitution, as that which was not in its essence, but which had been superadded to it by statute—the bankruptcy jurisdiction. He was pledged to the hon. gentleman, if he pressed his motion to a division, to vote with him; but he did not expect that he would have brought the subject forward in its present shape. He thought a better mode would have been to have discussed the merits of the Vice Chancellor's Bill, and, had it been adopted, to move the present proposition as rendering it less objectionable.

did not conceive that he could have brought forward his present proposition in any other shape. He certainly should not press his motion to a division; but he trusted that those who thought his plan preferable, would vote against the Vice Chancellor's Bill.

really thought that the hon. mover had brought forward his proposition in the only fair way in which it could have been made to the House; and that the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Canning) had exhibited more of generalship than friendship in the way in which he had treated the subject. At the same time he must decidedly oppose the motion, as substituting an operose, novel, and expensive arrangement, in lieu of that which had already been proposed to the House.

although he did not entirely approve of the mode adopted by his hon. friend, yet assured him that if he pressed his motion to a division, he would vote for it.

was very unwilling to address the House, as he found it impossible to support the motion, brought forward as it was, as a relative, not as an individual motion. The noble lord was right in treating it as he had done; but would he support it? The noble lord had described it as expensive—expensive, no doubt, as compared with the proposed Vice Chancellor. He did not see why it should cost a penny. At present the Chancellor received the bankrupt fees; fees received by the secretary for bankruptcies, to whom he paid a salary. No judge ought to be paid by fees, not that any judge could be influenced by them, but they were in this case levied on misery and insolvency. He approved of the proposed measure, because it would leave the Chancellor at liberty, and not take him out of his own court. It was particularly worthy of observation, that out of twenty bankrupt cases, not more than one, perhaps, would comprise a question of equity; and where such a question did arise, the Chancellor ordered a Bill to be filed, that it might be brought before him in the regular and ordinary way. The danger which would arise from the measure introduced by the noble lord struck him most forcibly—when they made him, by the proposed Bill, a political, instead of a judicial character, it would operate a most mischievous change in the whole system of the profession. It would be the means of withdrawing the Chancellor from his court, to attend to his political duties; and he would maintain, that the judicial business of that officer was not so much increased, in modern times, as his political avocations. The question, therefore, was, should the House go into the committee as proposed by his hon. friend, or, in the outset, declare that his proposition was unworthy of consideration, and proceed to pass the Vice Chancellor's Bill, and perpetrate that mischief which, if once done, would be irrevocable? In the first place, they ought to consider the evil which must arise from taking the Lord Chancellor out of his court. Gentlemen, founding their opinions on a pamphlet which had been published on the subject, argued, that he would be only wanted in the House of Lords three days in the week, and that this would be his only absence from Chancery. But why was his absence to be restricted to that time? The statement of the Lords was, that it would be necessary for them to sit at least three days in the week, from ten o'clock in the morning. In addition to this, the political duties of the Chancellor would occupy much of his-time. Even in the last week, the Court had been shut up two days, in consequence of his attendance to political business. But, if the Bill were carried into effect, it would be the means of taking the Chancellor from his court almost entirely. He would cease to be acquainted with it—he would be an absolute stranger to it—he would no longer reside in that part of the town where the professors of the law were to be found—he would become an inhabitant of the political part of the metropolis. The person filling the situation of Chancellor, ought to be a man perfectly well acquainted with the law of real property—a law which was not only to be acquired in the course of practice, but which must, in the first instance, be understood by deep and sedulous study, before a lawyer commenced his career in that branch of the profession. He should be a perfect master of the doctrines of equity, which were, in fact, dicta emanating from the Lord Chancellor—not from him who immediately exercised the functions of the office, but from his predecessors, extended and enforced by himself. And, it was most important, that the Chancellor should also be acquainted, with all the persons who practised the law. This was necessary, because the whole patronage of the law was in the hands of the Lord Chancellor, except the situations of the Welch judges—and these, he understood, were excluded, as being of a political nature—they were, therefore, in the appointment of the first lord of the Treasury. All other judicial offices were, however, in his nomination—the Master of the Rolls, the twelve judges, the King's counsel, and the commissioners of bankrupts, mainly depended on his recommendation for their appointment. Why, then, should such a power as this be placed in the hands of a man ignorant of the court of Chancery, incapable of judging of the individual merits of lawyers, and who would be only important as a great political engine? The person elevated to the rank of Chancellor should have a practical knowledge of the state of business in this court, that he might be able to expedite it, to correct any abuses which might be observable, and to bring back the practice to what it was in former times. At an earlier period, it was customary for the Lord Chancellor, when he first took his seat in the court, to enter into a brief view of the situation in which he found it, and to state what course he intended to adopt, for the reform of evils, and the general dispatch of business. The great lord Bacon, and others, the glory and the pride of the profession, had done this. The inauguration speech, (if he might be allowed the term) of lord Bacon, was still preserved; and in it he pledged himself as to the line of conduct he would pursue; thus laying down certain principles, by which an accurate judgment might be formed of the manner in which he fulfilled his covenant with the public. But was this course to be expected from some lord Shaftsbury—some mere intriguer—some common public debater—some hackneyed politician, ready at the nod and beck of those in power? And yet, such would probably be the Chancellors hereafter to be formed under this Bill. The hon. and learned gentleman then entered into the merits of the Bill, which he censured, as making the Lord Chancellor less a judge, and more a political character; and, therefore, as tending to induce him to make appointments on the ground of political connection, rather than of professional excellence.

moved the third reading of the Vice Chancellor's Bill. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw; when the House divided, there appeared

Another division took place, on an Amendment proposed by Mr. Canning, that the duration of the Bill should be limited to seven years.

The Bill was then passed.