said, he had a petition to present from a Mr. William Walker, a solicitor of Manchester, which the House would be inclined to listen to-with attention, when he told them, that the petitioner complained, that his private and professional character had been attacked in the course of a proceeding under the sanction of the House, by charges which he had no opportunity of refuting, but which he was able to refute by evidence, and which he prayed to be allowed so to refute. He (sir J. M.) had no bias whatever on the subject of the proceedings, in which the matter complained of by the petitioner originated; or, if the names connected with it could give him any bias, it would rather be hostile to the party which the petitioner had espoused. The fact was, that a witness had been examined before the Manchester Gas-Light bill, who threw imputations upon the conduct of the petitioner, and subsequently before any evidence could be offered in refutation of this evidence, the committee adjourned sine die. Whether this adjournment was or was not within the words of the reference to that committee, he would not inquire; but when the petitioner stated, that by the imputations which he had been thus deprived of an opportunity of answering, his character would be taken from him, his professional prospects blasted, and himself reduced to utter ruin, if the House did not interpose, the petition could but receive the most favourable consideration. He moved that the petition be brought up.

rose to order. It was, he said, irregular for any member of that House to allude to the proceedings of a committee, unless the minutes of those proceedings were before the House. Now what was irregular when done by a member, must certainly be as irregular when done by a person who had not a seat in that House. He therefore objected to the bringing up of the petition.

said, it was clear that the petition referred to a matter of which the House had no cognizance whatever. This was the state of the case. The House had entertained a bill, and sent it to a committee up stairs. It having been so sent, the committee was bound, according to the strict forms of the House, to make a report; and, until the time had expired within which the committee had received directions to make their report, the House had no means of knowing that a report would not be made. At present, as there had been no order directing the minutes of the proceedings to be laid upon the table, the House could have no cognisance of what had passed in the committee, but must presume that every thing had been done correctly. In these days, it was very difficult to say what petitions should not be received, if they were properly worded; but it would be rather extraordinary to receive a petition which had been framed under such circumstances as that presented by the hon. and learned member for Knaresborough.

thought it extremely hard, that the petitioner should receive no redress for the injustice which he alleged to have been done to him by the committee.

was not quite sure that he had made himself perfectly understood. It was clear to him, that the case stated in the petition was not one for which there were no means of redress. All that he said was, that the House could have no knowledge of the circumstances mentioned in the petition. It was, however, competent to any member who knew that the committee was not sitting, to move that the minutes of their proceedings, up to the time when they ceased to sit, should be laid before the House. If such a motion were made and agreed to, the House would be cognizant of all the proceedings, and might then act upon any representation which should be made.

said, he was borne out by the orders of the House in declaring, that it was incompetent to any member of that House to speak of what had passed in a committee, before the minutes of the proceedings had been laid upon the table; a fortiori, it was incompetent to any individual, not a member of that House, to do so.

said, he did not know that he had even now made himself understood. It would not, he thought, be safe for a person in his situation to go the length of saying that, under no circumstances, could any representation be made to that House by petition of what had passed in committee. The course of proceeding which he had pointed out would be more efficacious, and more likely to afford a remedy for any grievance, than any other which, under the present circumstances, the House could adopt.

observed, that until the report from the committee was made, no motion on the proceedings in the committee could properly take place. It was not to be presumed that the committee would strangle by an adjournment the bill which it was referred to them to consider.

said, that the hon. member for Sussex had given notice of a motion for that day, on the subject of the adjournment of the committee, and he should therefore not detain the House on the subject. As to the supposed wrong done to Mr. Walker by the adjournment, he should merely state, that the committee on the bill had sat every day for a month; that every tittle of the evidence for the bill had been gone through, and in the course of the evidence against the bill, a fact had been incidentally spoken to, which bore on the character of Mr. Walker. The committee subsequently adjourned sine die; but it was evident to those acquainted with the course of proceedings, that if the committee had continued to sit, Mr. Walker would not have been allowed to offer evidence in reply to the evidence against the bill; because such a course was never followed, and would never bring the business on a bill to a termination. Evidence was first offered pro, and then contra, and the committee immediately after reported.—Such was the invariable practice.

in the understanding that the motion of the hon. member for Sussex would come on immediately, said, he should consent to withdraw the petition for the present.

then rose, in pursuance of notice, to move, that the committee, to whom the Manchester Gas-Light bill was referred, and which had adjourned sine die, should be revived and proceed to business to-morrow. His only motive for bringing the subject before the House was, that in the course of the proceeding, in the committee, most extraordinary practices had been detected, which the adjournment sine die had prevented from being brought under the consideration of the House. He proceeded to read from the minutes of evidence, a statement of a witness, that he had signed, on one occasion, to a petition in favour of the bill, 400 names of persons, some living, some dead, while a man assisted him by mending and changing the pens, to give an appearance of difference to the hand-writing.

rose to order, and objected to the reading of the minutes of evidence which had not been regularly laid before the House. He had been chairman of the committee, and he did not know that the minutes were yet regularly in the hands of a single individual.

said, that every member who had attended an open committee, might state in his place what had taken place there.

admitted that a member might state what had occurred, to lay a ground for the production of the minutes but to read those minutes before they were produced, was irregular.

confirmed the opinion of lord Stanley. It was difficult to lay down a strict rule, as to the statements which might be made of transactions in a committee, but the regular course was first to move the House, that the minutes be produced.

said, that his only object was, to bring before the House the manner in which petitions from manufacturing and mercantile places were got up; that, when the House saw the hon. member for Yorkshire, or any manufacturing county, come down loaded with petitions like Atlas, for the abolition of slavery, and what not, they might know what value to give to them. He had no concern with Manchester, and scarcely a wish on the subject of the bill; he only wished to see these matters investigated.

in a maiden speech of much clearness and ability, opposed the motion. The bill which had been under investigation had, he said, excited so much interest among many members connected by no local concern in the affairs of Manchester, that he would briefly state the proceedings of the committee, and explain the motives on which it had come to its final determination. He had himself attended during the whole of the proceedings of the committee, and he could truly state, that he had gone into that committee with no bias against the bill, but with prepossessions rather favourable to the objects of it. But, before the evidence in favour of the bill had concluded, from the cross-examination of its own witnesses, his opinion in favour of it was entirely changed. It had been represented, that this bill was advocated by the body of the population of Manchester. He found that it was neither demanded nor desired by them, nor by any considerable part of them. It was contended, that under the present mode of supplying gas, the quantity and quality were deficient: both these assertions were disproved. It was asserted by the petitioners for the bill, that their wish was, to break up a monopoly. It appeared that the "monopolists" were a committee elected by a body of commissioners, said by some of the witnesses to amount to 20,000, who consisted of all persons possessing or occupying property to the value of 30l. a year. Of these every one had an equal vote, while, under the bill, the petitioners proposed to give votes to the proprietors of shares, whether resident or not in Manchester, according to the amount of shares, with liberty to vote by proxy. In support of the bill a petition had been presented, signed by seven hundred names. Of these, one hundred and eight were duplicates. He acquitted the petitioners of any attempt at fraud in this particular; it was too gross to suppose it to be premeditated, But, what was the defence?—that they had attached to the petition a skin of signatures which had nothing at all to do with it. It was, however, intimated, to the committee, that a person of the name of Corbett had informed a friend of his, that he, Corbett, had signed 300 names to the petition on one occasion, and, on another 196 names; and, after considerable discussion before the committee, it was decided, that he should be sent for. Subsequently to the statement to his friend, Corbett bad made a deposition as to the facts; and, when he was examined before the committee, his testimony completely agreed with the deposition, and with his original statement. The only manner in which Mr. Walker was affected by the evidence before the committee was, by a fact mentioned in the course of Corbett's evidence. Corbett had stated, that he had been met by a friend of his of the name of Hardman, who had informed him that he was paid 6s. a sheet for getting signatures, and that he accordingly, to oblige him, signed 300 names. That as he was afterwards passing through the streets, he saw the same petition lying for signature at an office, and that he walked in and there signed 196 names more, some of persons who had been dead for ten or twelve years, and some of persons who had never existed at all. The fact that affected Mr. Walker was, that the office where the petition lay for signature was his; and that a young man, whom Corbett represented to be Mr. Walker's clerk, assisted him, by changing and mending the pens. It was on this statement only, that Mr. Walker complained that his character and prospects in life had been ruined and blasted. The motive of the committee in not bringing up the report, was that of mercy, because they could not make a report without bringing the authors of the fraud and contempt to punishment; and the reason of this mercy was, that not having obtained the evidence in the most regular way, they did not think themselves justified in using that evidence to punish the witness and his friends. In this decision the committee was next to unanimous. An hon. member who had supported the bill at the outset', had stated, that he was "shocked and ashamed" of the conduct of those whom he had supported, and gladly consented to the adjournment, sine die, on the express condition, that no further proceedings should be taken. As not a single reason of any validity had been adduced by the hon. member for Sussex, he should vote against the motion [hear!].

said, he had heard, with the greatest pleasure, the speech which had just been delivered by his hon. young friend behind him—a speech which must have given the highest satisfaction to all who heard it, and which afforded the strongest promise, that the talents which the hon. member had displayed in supporting the local interests of his constituents, would be exerted, with equal ardour and effect, in maintaining the rights and interests of the country. No man could have witnessed with greater satisfaction than himself an accession to the talents of that House, which was calculated to give lustre to its character, and strengthen its influence; and it was more particularly a subject of satisfaction to him, when he reflected, that those talents were likely to be employed in supporting principles which he conscientiously believed to be most beneficial to the country. He did not rise for the purpose of answering any of the objections which had been urged by the hon. gentleman, or of entering into the merits of the bill. This was wholly unnecessary; for the only question before them was, whether the House should order the committee to make a report upon the bill, that committee having resolved to make no report, and having consequently adjourned sine die. He did not mean to throw any imputation on the committee for having taken this course; but, as the act of adjourning sine die was, in point of form, a disobedience of the orders of the House, he thought the committee should be directed to comply with the order of reference. He thought also, that the prayer of the petitioner, whose character had been involved in the evidence before the committee was entitled to the attention of the House. Under all the circumstances he thought the hon. member for Sussex was justified in calling upon the House to enforce its original order.

thought, that as the committee had adjourned sine die, it was at present extinct, and the regular mode of proceeding would be to revive it. This course was justified by a precedent which occurred in the year 1816. A more gross and fraudulent attempt to impose upon a committee of that House had never been made. So far were the people of Manchester from concurring in this bill, that it had been promoted only by a number of ale-house keepers, a quack doctor, and other persons, who had no sort of connexion with the respectable inhabitants of Manchester.

said, he had supported this bill in the first instance, because the company, in whose bands the lighting of the town of Manchester with gas had been for the last seven years, had only lighted one-fifth part of the town. He bad withdrawn his support from it, not because he did not think the object of the bill useful, but because it had been promoted by means which could not be justified.

thought the proceedings before the committee ought not to go forward, because this step would be attended with additional expense to the parties concerned. Whether some step ought not to be taken—such, for instance, as the appointment of a select committee to examine into the way in which these petitions were got up—he would not now inquire. Such a mode of getting up petitions was, undoubtedly, a high parliamentary offence, which might be visited with severe punishment. It had been declared, in the case of the Barnstaple petition, that it was highly unwarrantable, and a breach of the privileges of that House, for any person to sign the name of another person in any petition sent to that House. It was high time that the House should take some steps to put a stop to this dangerous and unjustifiable practice.

said, he should vote for the revival of the committee, because that measure would afford an opportunity of doing justice to all parties.

said, that after what had fallen from hon. members, he had no wish for the revival of the committee. He thought, however, that the committee might have expressed some opinion in the form of a report, as to the nature of the evidence which had been brought before them.

thought the main question was, whether a committee of that House should exercise the discretion of making no report on a bill, in disobedience to the order of the House —a discretion which would give them an enormous power, and which might seriously involve the fortunes and character of individuals concerned in private petitions. He gave no opinion on the merits of the bill; nor did he mean to cast the slightest reflection on the committee, or to say a word in favour of the mode in which the bill had originated.

in presenting a petition from certain Freemasons in Ireland, praying to be exempted from the provisions of the law against Secret Societies, observed, that societies of this description had given rise to the greatest excesses and crimes in Ireland. Orange processions, and Orange associations, were pregnant with as much danger and mischief as Catholic proces- sions and associations. In fact, one procession led of course to a counter-procession; and he did not hesitate to declare, that he considered all processions of this kind, whether of Orangemen or Ribbon-men, as illegal and most mischievous, particularly in the north of Ireland. These processions, on days when strong political feelings were excited, such as the 1st and 12th of July and the 4th of November, had produced murders and mischiefs of every kind. He rejoiced at having an opportunity of expressing his sentiments on this subject, and he trusted that other gentlemen connected with Ireland would exert their influence, as far as possible, to discourage proceedings which could end only in mischief and disgrace to the country.

thanked his hon. friend for the observations he had just made. He could not help thinking his present declaration as one of the most important which had been made this session. He trusted the recommendations of his hon. friend would be carried into effect, by all who possessed any influence in Ireland. The evil arising from Orange lodges was of late date; those associations had only been established within the last few years. He again begged his hon. friend to accept his acknowledgments for his present statement; a statement which, he trusted, would not be lost on the government with which he was connected.

said, he wished to make one remark upon the subject; and it was this: that the lord chancellor of Ireland should turn his attention to the question, and remove from the commission of the peace, all magistrates who gave a countenance to these processions. He understood that most of the meetings, of which they had heard, had been attended or countenanced by some of the magistrates. The government had it in their power to put down these processions; and they could not hope to do it effectually, unless they resorted to some strong and decided method.

said, he had another petition to present on the same subject, and he was desirous to say a few words. The petition which had just been presented was, in every way, deserving of consideration. It was a petition from certain Freemasons in Ireland, in which they stated that the Orange Societies have not been put down, although the Freemasons' Societies had been effectually suppressed. That secret societies have not been put down, must appear clear to any man who had attended to the proceedings at the Spring Assizes in Ireland. The House could not but have felt surprised at the declaration of Mr. Baron M'Clelland, at the Assizes at Antrim, that although he and his learned brother had not completed half their circuit, yet they had gone through various trials of murder, arising out of these party processions. Though an Orangeman, and the representative of one of the most Orange counties in Ireland, he felt it his duty to call upon the government to take some steps to put an end to these processions; for he quite agreed with the learned judge to whom he had alluded, that as long as they were continued, no man's life was worth a pin's point; no man's property was worth a year's purchase in Ireland; and any man who was worth a penny-piece would transport himself beyond the reach of these hateful contests. The petitioners stated, that they were a charitable institution, founded upon benevolent principles; and the best security that could be offered for their character was, that they could boast to have the name of George 4th enrolled amongst their members, and the duke of Sussex for their Grand Master- The case then stood thus: the duke of Sussex and a large party of freemasons might dine together to-day in England; but if, to-morrow, they were to take a ship and sail for Ireland, the moment they arrived, they would be considered an illegal society. He therefore thought, that either the freemasons of Ireland should be exempted from the operation of the law, or the law itself should be made to extend generally throughout the whole empire.

said, that having called the attention of the House to these secret societies in the course of the last session, no individual could feel more sincere satisfaction than he did, at the opinions which had been delivered by the gentleman opposite. He could not help remarking the great change which had taken place in the course of one year; for when he had given notice of his motion last year, he had been admonished, directly and indirectly, that the only effect of the proposition must be, to increase the strength of the Orange party. Gentlemen opposite now concurred in his opinion, that there was the most imminent danger to be apprehended from the con- tinuance of these processions. He rejoiced in the statement of the gentlemen opposite, the more, because he had always been one of those who thought that more good could be done by influence than legislation. He had always been of opinion, that it was by the exertion of influence rather than by positive legislation, that these societies must be put down. He was the last man in the world for putting down opinions by violence; and would never consent, much as he hated the Orange institutions, to make them the objects of vindictive persecution. He saw, however, with great concern, that, notwithstanding the anxiety with which the government professed to put down these associations, persons of rank, holding offices of favour under it, still lent their names and countenance to them. He did not mean to say that those persons were privy to the secret oaths by which such associations were held together: no such thing. He thought, however, that they did nearly as much harm by holding nominal offices in them, as they would have done had they actually taken their oaths of secrecy. It would not be an act of persecution to those officers—on the contrary, it would be an act of humanity to those ignorant persons whom their name and authority misled, to make them feel, that the government would withdraw its favour from them, unless they withdrew their countenance from societies which produced little else than tumult, insurrection, and violence to the country.

said, he was sure that all gentlemen must agree, that the more opportunities there were for Catholics and Protestants to meet on neutral ground, the better. Now, as the Freemasons admitted amongst their members persons of all denominations, he thought it deserved encouragement, and he hoped that, in the course of the session, some gentleman would introduce a bill to exempt the Freemasons from the operation of the law respecting Secret Societies.

rose, in pursuance of notice, to move to refer the twelve reports of the commissioners of inquiry into courts of justice in Scotland to a committee of the Whole House. The noble lord observed? that so long as ten years ago; his right hon. friend, the member for Water-ford, had succeeded in getting commis- sions appointed to examine into the courts of justice in England, Scotland, and Ireland. But, though the commission, which had been appointed to examine into the Scotch courts had presented several voluminous reports to the House, little or nothing had been done to remove the evils of which they complained. His object in bringing forward his present motion was, first of all to discover, whether government had any proposition to bring forward in furtherance of those reports, and then if they had not, to suggest himself such propositions as he thought were required by the circumstances of the country. When he formerly alluded in his place in parliament to the first three, or four reports, which were presented by the commissioners, he was told by the then Lord Advocate, and also by the government, to wait till the whole subject had been under their consideration, and not to attempt prematurely to discover the intentions of government. He had now waited to the full extent of time which had been required of him, and sure he was, that the country would be disappointed at finding that one large portion of this important subject had received no adequate notice, and that another large portion of it had received no notice at all. He would state to the House, first, what the reports declared ought to be done; and then, what had been actually done; and he trusted, that by that statement he should convince the House that a great deal was still left for it to do. He would likewise show, that the proceedings of government were so slow in executing the recommendations of its own commissioners, that it was absolutely necessary for the House to apply a stimulus to the members of it. Though the bill for the abolition of the inferior commissary courts was a measure recommended to the adoption of government so far back as the year 1808, and though the Scotch judges had repeatedly expressed their concurrence in its provisions, it had not been carried into effect until the year 1823. If this was the way, in which the recommendation of commissioners was to be received, it was nothing else but a mockery to appoint them. Those commissioners had sat for seven or eight years at an expense of 5,000l. a year, and had so cost the country about 40,000l.; and yet their recommendation had not been attended to, when they proposed to make certain alterations in the, Scotch courts, which would have saved 6,000l. a year to the public, and 12,000l. a year to the suitors in them. Was such conduct fair, either to the country, or to the individual commissioners? The government had, indeed, made some saving; but he believed it did not amount altogether to 5,000l. The commissioners had likewise recommended the abolition of ninety offices; but, if the offices in the inferior commissary courts were excepted, it would be found that not more than fifteen had been abolished. He did not think it necessary to proceed into the details of the different courts, and should therefore confine himself to mentioning the number of offices to be abolished, without enumerating them more particularly, unless he was forced to such enumeration by any denial on the part of hon. gentlemen opposite. In the court of Session it was proposed to abolish ten offices. Now, three only had been abolished. When he thus found that the recommendations of the commissioners had not been carried into effect, he thought it was fitting that he should appeal from the judgment of his majesty's ministers to that of the legislature. It was calculated that a saving of 6,000l. a year would have been effected in this court, if the proposed alterations had been made. The ostensible saving by reductions was, however, only 1,600l.; and if from that sum they deducted the addition made to the salaries of the judges' clerks (contrary to the recommendation of the commissioners), it would be found that the entire saving made by his majesty's government amounted to no more than 380l. a year. One half of the propositions made by the commissioners appeared never to have been considered; and the result derived from those recommendations which had been attended to were not so beneficial as they ought to have been; since, though expense had been reduced in one quarter, it was increased in another. The next courts were the Commissaries' court of Edinburgh, and the inferior Commissaries' courts. In these courts it was recommended to reduce five officers, but one only had been removed. The total amount of retrenchment in those courts, if the recommendation had been obeyed, would have been 1,800l. a-year; but a saving of only 400l. a-year had been effected. The next court noticed by the commissioners was the Scottish Chancery. In that court very great abuses existed with respect to the collection of fees, especially in the director's department, which was executed wholly by deputy. He was not aware that any alteration, conformably with the recommendation of the sixth report of the commissioners, had been made in that court; but he wished to get some insight into the subject from the learned Lord Advocate. The commissioners, in the report he had just mentioned, referred to a very extraordinary charge which was made by the clerk of Chancery under the denomination of treatment money. That charge amounted, in 1816, to 677l.; in 1817, to 800l.; and in 1818, to 680l. The commissioners did not appear to understand on what ground the demand was made.— He would next call the attention of the House to the Exchequer court. It was recommended, that five offices should be reduced in this court; but, in point of fact, none had been abolished. It was very true, that the situations of one baron of the Exchequer, and of one deputy-remembrancer, had not been filled up when the vacancies occurred; but they ought to be abolished regularly by legislative enactment. He was convinced that the recommendation of the commissioners ought to be fully carried into effect with reference to this court; for no doubt could be entertained that four barons were amply sufficient to perform all the duties connected with it. In this court the saving ought to have been 5,000l. but he believed that, in reality, not a single shilling of the existing expense had been reduced. According to the sixth report it appeared, that enormous abuses were found in this court. The king's deputy-remembrancer had got his office secured to him, by patent, for life, while the principal only held his situation during pleasure. So that the deputy existed wholly independent of the principal; independent of any responsibility to which, under other circumstances, he would be liable. And here he could not avoid making a remark on the subject, which was very often brought before the House. He meant the doctrine of vested rights. He would read to the House four or five lines, which would shew what the commissioners thought of that doctrine. In the sixth report, they said, "It is thus, we may remark, that abuse in those matters originates, and is too apt to be perpetuated. An individual succeeds in exacting an illegal sum for a considerable length of time—his successor pursues the practice which he finds—and thus it goes on, until it is impossible to stop it, and that which was originally wrong, is finally elaimed as a vested right." Under circumstances such as these, compensations had been demanded from, and awarded by, this House, for vested interests, which, if the allegations had been properly examined, would never have been admitted, It was recommended to reduce the expense of the court of Lyon to the extent of 1,000l. a-year; but nothing had been done in consequence of that recommendation. The justice of Peace court was the next which the commissioners noticed; and they recommended an abridged form of proceeding in actions before that court. That recommendation had not, however, been adopted. In his opinion, the small debt jurisdiction of that court ought to be extended to a higher sum. At present the sum was confined to 5l. It ought, he conceived to be enlarged to 10l; and he had made up his mind to bring in a bill for that purpose. He now came to the borough courts; and he believed there never was a subject investigated by that House which required so much revision and reform as the internal state of the Scotch borough courts. He had not been fortunate enough to persuade the House to sanction a measure which he had brought in on the subject; and that which the noble lord had brought in and carried was wholly inadequate to the intended purpose. The reports of the commissioners fully confirmed his assertion, that the internal state of those borough courts required revision and reform. Of sixty of these borough courts, at least one half were liable to the strongest objection. Nothing had been done with respect to them; and he thought ministers were censurable, when twelve reports had been laid before parliament, in abstaining from taking the subject into their serious consideration. There was no uniformity—he mightsay there was no honesty—of charge in those courts. Many of the charges had been stigmatised by the commissioners as illegal. It appeared that, with respect to the Court of Session, little had been done. No bill had been brought in relative to the Chancery Court. In the Court of Exchequer, the vacancy of one baron and a deputy remembrancer had not been filled up. As to any intended alteration in the Sheriff's Court, the Lord Lyon's Court, the Justice of Peace Court, or the Borough Courts, he knew nothing. Certainly there was no bill or measure of any description, relative to any of them now pending in parliament. He wished therefore, that the reports of the commissioners should be referred to a committee. They would then hear from the learned lord what could be said in defence of the total neglect of the reforms recommended by the commissioners. The noble lord then moved "That the twelve Reports of the commissioners of Inquiry into Courts of Justice in Scotland be referred to a committee of the whole House."

said, that as this subject could not be interesting to the majority of gentlemen present, he would make his statement as short as he possibly could. If the noble lord had moved that the twelve reports of the commissioners relative to the fees and emoluments connected with courts of justice in Scotland should be referred to a select committee, to declare what had been and what ought to be done, he could have understood that proceeding; but he was somewhat at a loss to know what the noble lord meant by submitting those documents to a committee of the whole House, although he could perhaps guess at the noble lord's object. The noble lord, it appeared, was anxious that he (the Lord Advocate) should defend himself from the charge of having neglected his duty, by not giving effect to the recommendation of the commissioners. Now, he must say, that the noble lord had been for some years most attentive to individuals holding the situation which he had the honour to fill at present; and it was a matter of great satisfaction to him, considering the various duties he had to perform, to find that the only matter of blame affecting him, which the noble lord could bring before the House, was his supposed neglect of the reports of those commissioners. He, however, denied that he harboured any disinclination to carrying into full effect the recommendations of the commissioners. He was not in parliament when the right hon. baronet, the member for Waterford, made the motion, in consequence of which commissioners of inquiry were appointed. He was, however, glad that the proposition had been carried because much valuable information excellent historical accounts of the different courts, and various important recommendations had arisen from the inquiry. Still, however, looking to the whole sys- tem of the courts in Scotland, it could not be asserted that any thing radically wrong was pointed out in their constitution. He would now run over the practice of those courts, shortly and generally, but he hoped correctly. Two of the courts which the noble lord had mentioned did not properly come within the instructions of the commissioners—he alluded to the Lyon Court and the Chancery Court. The situation of Lord Lyon was exactly the same in Scotland, as that of Garter King at Arms in England. It was the duty of that officer to find arms for those who had not previously borne them, or in whose armorial bearings an alteration was directed. For this service the individual holding the office received certain fees. It was evident, that this was an office under the Crown—an office, the functions of which were exercised under the king's prerogative; and he felt that it was not competent for him or others to interfere with it. When he learned that an interference was meditated, he sent down an injunction, as he was bound to do, to prevent it from being carried into effect; as the office was one emanating from the king and not from the legislature. As to the Scotch Court of Chancery, it was a mere office. They had, in fact, no such thing as a Court of Chancery. It was a mere office from which certain writs were issued, and in which all charters were recorded. As to the fees of that office, the commissioners reported, that they were not excessive, and that they ought to be continued. The noble lord had stated, that the commissioners found fault that the Director of the Chancery, with his clerks, might levy fees to any extent he thought proper: but the noble lord did not tell the House what the commissioners recommended in consequence. They recommended, that at the termination of the existing interests in that office, the officers should receive a regular salary, and the surplus should be paid over to the public revenue. It was not, however, necessary to follow up that regulation; because, by the act of the 51stof Geo. 3., cap. 64, it was directed, that on the termination of the existing interests, a variety of offices, should be regulated—that salaries should be given to those performing the duties, and that the surplus should go to the revenue. Amongst those offices were, that of director of the Chancery, and the clerk of the Chancery in Scotland. Thus, that which the commissioners had recommended was actually done by act of parliament. When he came into parliament, he had found those reports before the House, and he immediately took measures to carry the recommendation of the commissioners into effect. With respect to the Court of Session, an act was introduced by him, which was deemed sufficient to carry into due effect the intentions of the commissioners. If some offices were not abolished, it only showed that, on mature consideration, it was not thought right to do them away, under existing circumstances. The noble lord, in mentioning the court of Exchequer, had admitted that certain offices in that court had not been filled up. So far, certainly, the recommendation of the commissioners had been complied with. As to the fees taken in that court, the 5th of queen Anne expressly declared, that "no officer shall demand higher fees than are authorized by the barons, and if any person shall exceed the fees fixed by the barons, right shall be done to the party complaining, and the offender shall be punished by fine or suspension from office". Now, in consequence of the recommendation of the commissioners, the court had gone over all those fees, and had regulated every one of them. With respect to the court of Justiciary, it had by the act of 1617, a right to regulate its own fees. Like the court of Exchequer, the judges of that court were authorized to declare what fees should be taken. He would next come to the Commissary courts, with respect to which a bill had been brought into the House last session, and the opposition of the noble lord opposite, and of his friends, to that bill, would not be readily forgotten. Really, the individual who filled his (the lord advocate's) situation stood in an enviable predicament! If he proposed new measures, he was resisted at every step; and if he abstained from proposing new measures, he was charged with neglect of duty. The bill which he had introduced last year upon the subject of the Commissary courts, had gone to abolish, at once, three-and-twenty patent places, all of them in the gift of the Crown; and yet that bill—brought in by an officer of government—had been divided against, even on the third reading. He was happy, however, to find, that whatever treatment the measure had experienced in that House, in Scotland it had been received with gratitude, and welcomed as a boon.—With respect to the Sheriff's court, it would be recollected, that he had deferred bringing in a bill, in consequence of a recommendation from the upper House, in favour of a commission generally upon the courts of justice in Scotland. That commission had reported, but the report was not yet in the hands of members. As regarded the state of the Sheriff's court, however, the fact would be found to be this: in the Sheriff's court, during the last year, fifty-two thousand causes had been tried, which, as compared with the business of the court of Session, was in the proportion of one hundred and seventeen to one; and the commissioners recommended, in their report upon the subject, that the practice of the court of Session should be assimilated to that of the Sheriff's court as much as possible. The hon. and learned lord then proceeded to notice the recommendation of the commissioners, as to an alteration in the jurisdiction of justices of peace in Scotland. At present, the justices had jurisdiction in cases of debts under 5l., and the noble lord opposite had given notice of a motion, to extend that jurisdiction to debts of larger amount. Opinions were something divided as to what should be done in this matter. Some persons thought that the power should extend to debts of 15l.; others thought that it should go only to 10l.; and others were for letting it remain as it was, at 5l. There were circumstances to be considered both ways. No doubt, the cheap and speedy recovery of small claims was an advantage; but, carried too far, it led to indiscriminate credit, and to the imprisonment of men for debt who ought to have paid ready money. Out of 212 persons confined for debt in Edinburgh—the total number confined within the last year—132 had been confined for claims under the sum of 5l. The justices; too, were empowered at present to decide these claims without a jury, and not according to law, but according (in the words of the authority) to "equity and good conscience." This might do very well in disposing of small stakes, but it would scarcely serve in the settlement of large ones; and for this, and a variety of other reasons, he thought the jurisdiction in debts above 5l. would be most conveniently lodged in the court of the sheriff: the justices having, in the last year, disposed of 8,700 causes, had already, as it would seem, as much work on their hands as they could dispense with; and as for himself, he should resist the noble lord's motion, therefore, when ever it came before the House, and move for the appointment of a committee upon the question. But, if he was unwilling to add any thing in the way of civil duty to the business already performed by the justices, there was a right of which he was most anxious to see them in the exercise. Whenever any step was to be taken with respect to arranging the administration of criminal justice in Scotland, it ought at once to be remembered—though the fact generally perhaps was hardly known—that the justices of peace in that country did not, in fact, act magisterially. The appointment of the sheriff, and the nature of the duty intrusted to him, took away all necessity for the interference, in criminal matters, of the justice of peace; but he (the lord advocate) was most anxious to take the country gentlemen from that unprofitable state of quiescence. It would be incomparably better, in his view, to give the justice of peace in Scotland, the same power which was exercised by the justice of peace in England; such a course would raise the consequence of the individuals acting (who were well entitled to so much attention), and would, further, very materially expedite the despatch of business. He repeated, that the giving of this additional power to the magistracy would prevent delays which now arose constantly from all the press of duty lying in one quarter —prisoners detained over from one session to another, and expenses incurred, which a more open course would avoid; and besides, it would awaken the country gentlemen from an apathy which they were inclined to feel upon such matters. At the time of the riots in Glasgow, none of the country gentlemen had come in to offer assistance to the constituted authorities: not from any indisposition, of course, to preserve the peace, or to expose themselves in such discussion; but because they thought the business was one with which they had, by right, nothing to do. But this was not a feeling calculated to aid the safety, or promote the' advantage, of a country. Government was entitled, in time of trouble, to look to the country gentlemen for their assistance personally, and by means of their authority and their influence. With this view, it was most' desirable that they should be accustomed to lake their share in the important duty of administering the criminal justice of the state; and cer- tainly, therefore, his feeling would be, to refer to a committee that part of the report of the commission which referred to the powers of justices of peace in Scotland. The hon. and learned lord then briefly recapitulated the effect of the arrangements which had been made in the several courts of Scotland, as those arrangements bore, in his opinion, upon the observations of the noble lord, the member for Lanark; and, after trusting that he stood clear, at least of having neglected his duty in the matters referred to, sat down, amidst loud and general cheering.

said, he rose hardly for any other purpose than that of expressing his satisfaction at the declaration with which the learned lord had concluded his speech. The learned lord's proposed reform in the manner of administering criminal justice in Scotland was a far greater consideration than the motion immediately before the House; and he most sincerely returned his thanks to the learned lord for the intention. For himself, he had long considered the large jurisdiction held by the sheriffs in Scotland to be a part of the Scottish law most especially requiring revision; because it gave a monopoly to the profession of the law, in the administration of criminal justice, to the entire, and most impolitic, exclusion of the country gentleman; and, what was worse, these high powers being too weighty to be born by the sheriff himself, the country gentlemen, who were deprived of them, had the mortification to see them in fact exercised by the sheriff depute. He did assure the hon. and learned lord, that he had listened with the highest possible pleasure to his suggestion, for increasing the qualifications of the magistrates of Scotland; and with no less, to his objection, that those magistrates should hold the power, in cases of debt above 5l., of deciding without the intervention of a jury. Hearing such opinions expressed from such a quarter, he could hardly entertain a doubt that a further measure of benefit to Scotland—he meant the introduction of the system of grand juries—would at once meet with that reception, to which it was entitled by its importance: and he wished that an instruction to consider the fitness of introducing that measure should be given to the committee for which the learned lord was to move. With regard to the answer which the learned lord had given to his noble friend, he must confess, he was not so well satisfied with that answer, as with the rest of the learned lord's speech. With respect to the court of Session, the commissioners had suggested a saving of 6,000l. a-year; the saving effected had been little more than 1,600l.; and so great a discrepancy ought to be accounted for. Again, with respect to the court of Exchequer, the learned lord said, that the barons had made alterations.—Certainly, they had made such alterations as to them seemed fit and necessary: but, did it appear that the barons had made the alterations suggested by the commissioners? It was mere waste of time for the House to appoint a commission, if the officers of the Crown could say, "We have done what we think right, and we will do no more." The question was, not—had the barons done that which they considered necessary; but had they done that which the House would consider necessary? For these reasons, he should support the motion of his noble friend.

declined following the noble mover through his speech, because he thought it had been sufficiently answered by his learned friend, the lord advocate. He rose for the purpose of thanking the learned lord, for his intention with respect to the magistracy of Scotland; and hoped the hon. member for Calne would not press the grand-jury question into the same inquiry.

admitted that the lord advocate had done more than his predecessors for the Scottish courts; but thought that that admission threw a very heavy blame upon those predecessors. He gave great credit to the noble member for Lanark for his perseverance, and hoped he would press his motion to a division.

felt so highly pleased with the intention of the lord advocate, with respect to the Scottish magistracy, that he wished to know whether it was meant to be proceeded with in the present session,

said, he had not made up his mind whether he would pursue the suggestion which he had thrown out in this session or the next. He must first know a little of the feeling of the profession in Scotland upon the subject.

protested that from the manner of the learned lord, he had doubted whether he would not move for the committee before the House adjourned. The case was very much changed indeed, if the matter, which he had been looking upon as certain, was only something which had passed through the learned' lord's mind, On his side of the House, the impression had been, that the learned lord's intention was absolute; but the value of his speech was at least diminished one half by his explanation.

had felt much satisfaction at hearing the declaration of the lord advocate, and conjured him not to allow anything to divert him from prosecuting his view. There might be, and; would be, a division of opinion in Scotland upon the subject; but the view of the learned lord himself was decidedly the enlarged and the liberal one.

said, that the lord advocate's speech had deceived the greater part of the House. Certainly, it had been understood that he meant to move for an immediate investigation. But, as the learned lord said, that he wished to consult the feelings of his countrymen upon the question, he begged to know who the parties were whom he wished to consult, and how and when their opinions were to be ascertained?

said, that the measure which his learned friend proposed to introduce was one of great importance, and deserved the greatest consideration. If the learned lord could introduce the measure during the present session, he no doubt would do so; but if, on the other hand, the learned lord should find that he could not press the measure, the House, he trusted, would not withdraw their confidence, but would leave in his hands a question, which he had no doubt would be treated by the learned lord with all the consideration which its importance claimed.

in explanation, stated it to be his intention to go on with the inquiry, but would not pledge himself as to the time.

in reply, expressed his surprise at the reluctance of the learned lord, after ten years of indecision, to fix the time. He took that opportunity of justifying his own parliamentary conduct from the aspersions of the learned lord. One assertion of the learned lord was most unjustifiable, and altogether unfounded. The learned lord had charged him with running away from his own country, at a time in which danger was expected from a general rising. This had been put forward in a newspaper, under the immediate sanction, if not di- rection, of the learned lord, in which there was no standee, however false and absurd, that did not find a ready access to the public. The real facts were these. He had delayed his departure for England from his own country, which was also the country of the learned lord, in consequence of notices which were received from the government of an intended general rising. No such event occurred then, though it did afterwards; and he had therefore made his way to Edinburgh, where he inquired for the learned lord, in order to ascertain the real state of affairs. He found that the learned lord was busily engaged in the pursuit of his own political game—he was canvassing for votes; as the general election was at hand. He then called at the office of the Solicitor-general, and found that gentleman as busily occupied as the learned lord, and in the self-same pursuit; so that here was an actual running away of these two learned persons. He then called at the office of the Commander-in-chief, and there he was told, that they had received information of a general rising, but that it had been repeated so often that they began to laugh at it. And these were the grounds upon which he had been accused of running away, by persons in the department of the learned lord, who had heaped upon him the grossest slanders, and the most abominable falsehoods; alleging, in one instance, that the only person executed in the subsequent riots, was a particular friend of his, and that on searching his papers, two letters in his (lord A. H's) hand-writing had been discovered, the whole of which was to be found in a newspaper which was supported and owned by the learned lord and ten other official gentlemen. He believed that there was not one man in the country, and he was certain that no member of that House, would continue to put faith in such calumnies, which they saw were refuted by the most simple reference to the facts.

rose to more for leave to bring in a bill to abolish Settlement by hiring and service. The noble lord referred to the great evils which prevailed at present from the facilities given for procuring settlement by hiring and service. Though the weight of this grievance was sometimes averted by hiring for 51 weeks and by other devices, yet these cases were met by the judgment of courts, which frequently made the contract void. It might safely be asserted, that a change in the law was necessary, were it only to cut off the enormous and expensive litigation which sprung out of this particular claim of settlement. Another evil arising out of the law, as it now stood, was the difficulty which a poor man found in getting work out of his own parish. This would be, in a great measure, removed by his bill. At the same time, he was aware that some evil must arise from any change. It was, therefore, on a balance of the advantages and disadvantages, which he thought to be decidedly in favour of his plan, that he took leave to propose the present motion.

said, he did not mean to oppose the motion for leave to bring in the bill, but, as an isolated measure, he could not help feeling that it must be attended with considerable difficulty. If the bill should be brought in and go to a committee, he would propose a clause to obtain for the poor a mode of gaining a settlement which the noble lord had not provided in his plan. The mode he would propose was, to give a settlement to all persons who paid poor-rates, in the parish in which they had paid them. As the law now stood, no person could obtain a settlement who did not pay rent to the amount of ten pounds a-year; but he would have the right allowed, without any consideration of rent whatever. It was his intention to have introduced a bill founded on the resolutions which he had proposed last year; but having consulted the opinions of the great manufacturing towns, he found them so averse to the plan, that he feared it would be impossible to carry the measure. The great grievance which the agricultural parishes had to contend with was, that their people were enticed away to the large manufacturing towns. There the young women were seduced and impregnated; and then they were sent back, and became incumbrances upon their former parishes.

observed, that more litigation was occasioned by the claim of hiring and service than by any other ground of settlement, and as far as the noble lord's measure operated to remove that cause of dispute, it was likely to have a beneficial effect. He thought the fairest principle was, that the parish which had enjoyed the labour of the pauper should have the onus of his support when he could labour no longer. His great fear was, with respect to the noble lord's bill, that, as it went on birth and the paying of poor-rates, it would appear still more objectionable to the manufacturing towns, than the bill intended to have been brought forward by his hon. friend.

approved of the bill, because it went to encourage residence, and to cut off one great head of litigation, which now thrived upon the uncertainties of settlement by service.

rose to move for a committee to inquire into the existing laws relating to the Salmon Fisheries. The importance of the interests which were connected with it, and the number of petitions which had been presented to the House, sufficiently proved the necessity of such an inquiry; and he had no doubt that, conducted as it would be, it would establish every private right, while it would protect the public interests. The reason for preserving these fisheries was, to secure a supply of the valuable and peculiar food they produced. They had been an early object of the care of the Scottish parliament; by an enactment of which, so long ago as the year 1424, the violation of their privileges was punished with no less a penalty than loss of life. It was obvious, that a law of such a date must partake of the barbarism of the age; but it continued with little change, up to the reign of queen Anne, when the existing laws were ratified and confirmed. That these laws needed revision, it was only necessary to refer to the state of decay in which many fisheries; once valuable, were at present; and to the fact, that many of them were completely destroyed. If the committee should be granted, there were three main points to which its inquiry would be directed. First, an investigation, which was no less curious than important, into the natural history and habits of the salmon. Upon this point, though little had hitherto been understood, a very considerable quantity of information might now be procured. The second object of inquiry would be, into the different modes of fishing which had been introduced at various times, all of which were under the sanction of the law; but some of which he was authorized in saying, were highly injurious to the public interests. It would also be for the committee to say, whether some of the old modes at present prescribed, might not be advantageously revived. The third topic would embrace an inquiry into the policy of the ancient and existing laws, as they affected the preservation of private and public rights. He was of opinion, that it would be impossible for the committee to come to a final decision in the course of the present session. He thought, therefore, that if they should report to the House the evidence they would be enabled to collect during the session, the parliament would be in possession of the subject; and then, if the committee were revived in the following session, it would be in their power to recommend some wise and salutary measure for the preservation of the fisheries. He concluded by moving, "that a select committee be appointed, to inquire into the state of the salmon fisheries of Scotland and of the United kingdom, and the laws affecting the same, and to report the minutes of the evidence given before them, from time to time to the House."

agreed, that this subject was a more important one than it might at first sight appear to be. With it, however, were connected many private rights of a very ancient date, which ought to be kept sacred. The persons holding these private rights, which in Scotland were all derived from royal grants, entertained some apprehensions, lest the proposed committee should recommend an infringement of their privileges. He was satisfied that the hon. mover had no such intention, and he thought there was no ground for such apprehensions. It was a notorious fact, that the supply of fish in the rivers of England and Scotland had considerably diminished, and this was of itself sufficient to recommend a parliamentary inquiry, not for the purpose of violating any existing right, but to exclude certain injurious modes of fishing. He perfectly concurred with the hon. mover as to the expediency of such a committee.

having moved for leave to bring in a bill for the sale of stock and other purposes relating to the land revenue,

begged to take that opportunity of inquiring the name of the architect under whose directions the new church in Langham-place was constructing? Every body who saw it shrugged up their shoulders, and inquired who could be the architect who invented such a monstrosity? Rumours had gone abroad and several persons had been mentioned as the authors of the plan; and it was but fair, using a vulgar proverb, to place the saddle upon the right horse. He should like also to hear what this mass of deformity had cost. For one, he was resolved not to pay willingly a farthing towards its erection; on the contrary, he should be glad to see it referred to a committee to inquire into the propriety of pulling it down, and for that object, though he was not rich, he was not unwilling to subscribe a fair proportion of the expense. Among the many deplorable objects of the kind' in the metropolis and its neighbourhood, this was the most melancholy departure from the rules of good taste that he had yet seen. The spire was only to be compared to an extinguisher on a flat candle- stick. He had looked at a great number of new churches, and they seemed to vie with each other in deformity. They seemed to proceed from bad to worse; and the faults were multiplied with each successive effort. The architects seemed to strive with each other, how to produce an edifice unlike any thing that had ever been seen before, as if they wished to surprise the world with a new order of architecture, most purely absurd and most truly British. The good sense and good taste of the public were disgusted in every quarter; and there was hardly a man in the community (excepting the architects employed) who did not join in one opinion upon the subject. Even the common people looked up with astonishment at the edifices, wondering who were the asses that planned them and the fools that paid for them.

begged to assure the hon. gentleman, that he was not at all responsible; he disavowed any connection with the church in Langham-place and admitted that it was not the most ornamental in the metropolis. But if the new street built under the auspices of his right hon. friend was looked to as a whole, he apprehended that a general charge of bad taste could not be established. The church in question certainly would be better away, but it might not be easy to remove it. He would rather not name the architect [cries of name! name!]. If he were required to give up the architect, he must say that the church was built according to the plan of Mr. Nash. He might be allowed to add, that if this building was not very creditable to that gentleman's taste, there were many others in its neighbourhood that were eminently so.

said, that up to that hour he had never seen the church in question, and was consequently not prepared to offer any opinion as to the good or bad taste or design. Neither had he inspected the plan, which he concluded had been submitted to the commissioners and adopted by them.