, seeing the right hon. Secretary of State (Sir. Robert Peel) in his place, wished to draw his attention to a recent occurrence of public interest. By the death of Lord Kilwarden the office of Registrar of Deeds in Ireland had become vacant. He (Sir John Newport) considered the present a very fit opportunity for the Government to show its disposition for retrenchment, by abolishing the office of Registrar altogether, as it was a mere sinecure, and there could not be any noise about vested interests, which were now extinct. He wished to see the regulation of these offices on the same footing throughout the United Kingdom, and he considered that the excellent regulations adopted in the Register Office in Scotland afforded an example worthy to be followed. He therefore hoped that the Government would pause before it filled up the appointment; and, if it really were intended to continue it, that the House would previously have the opportunity of expressing its opinions on the expediency of its continuance.

condemned the present regulations of the Irish Register Office, and stated that since the passing of the new Act more expense was incurred, and confusion created, than formerly.

stated his impression to be that the sinecure office was already abolished by law, and that there were no vested interests existing. He could assure the hon. Baronet and the House that before the office was filled up ample opportunity should be given for taking the subject under consideration. He felt assured that there was no disposition on the part of the Crown for the continuance of an useless office.

said a few words in explanation in a low tone of voice, and the conversation dropped.

presented a Petition from certain inhabitants of Rye, complaining of the Interference of a military armed force, under the direction of Herbert Curteis, Esq., on the occasion of a recent disturbance at that place between certain landowners and other persons, relative to the sluices which served to clear the harbour. The hon. Member entered into a detail of the disturbance which took place there on the 26th ultimo., he justified the conduct of the people and considered the interference of the military as illegal.

maintained, that Mr. Curteis acted with great discretion and firmness. If the rioters had been allowed to proceed with the work of destruction, a great deal of valuable land would have been ruined.

stated the proceedings that took place in the Court of Chancery upon an application about the sluice. There was ultimately a decree of the Court, to the effect that the sluice was a nuisance. It was, however, unjustifiable in the people of Rye to take the law into their own hands. Their going by night to destroy the sluice was, in his opinion, an aggravation of their improper conduct.

found fault with the hurried manner in which the late bill for Rye and other private bills were passed through the House. He could not approve of the conduct of those who proceeded riotously to break down the sluice; but it ought to be considered that they had provocation, seeing that the Court of Chancery did not enforce its own decree, and that the Commissioners disregarded it. That was the state in which the petitioners were. He hoped that the Admiralty, as the general conservator of ports and harbours, would take notice of the case, and would not let the bill pass through Parliament, but would see that the decree of the Court of Chancery was carried into effect.

said, that the landholders near Rye had no bad feeling towards that town. There was no opposition made to the bill as it was passing through the committee, and it was known to all parties that application was to be made to Parliament. The hon. Baronet defended the conduct of Mr. Curteis, who acted with promptitude and discretion on the occasion of the riotous proceeding.

said, that he would not give any opinion on the question between the people of the town of Rye and the Commissioners. He absented himself from voting on the bill, upon the principle that it was better for a Minister of the Crown not to interfere in giving an opinion on a private bill. The time for making repairs in the sluice would not, by law, expire till 1831, and yet, at ten o'clock at night, about 500 persons, preceded by a band of music, went to level it by force, and so destroyed the communication between Rye and Dover. He felt it his duty to say, that the magistrate (Mr. Herbert Curteis) acted with promptitude and temperance. The men in the Preventive Service were called to assist in putting down the rioters. Rye was not a place from which the Blockade Service could be safely drawn away, and, in order to let them attend to their own duty, he (Sir R Peel) ordered troops to go in aid of the civil service. There was no alternative but to give protection to property. He hoped the gallant Colonel would interfere with his constituents, and advise them on their conduct in this matter. The Magistrate was perfectly right in preventing the destruction of the sluice by night and by violence.

agreed with what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman, and bore testimony to the proper conduct of Mr. Curteis.

said, that one reason why there was no opposition to the bill in going through the House was, that there was no Member then in the House to represent the interest of the town of Rye. The Court of Chancery decreed the sluice to be a nuisance, and yet a new bill was brought in, in the face of that decree; by which bill only seven feet of water would be left in the harbour. He was not much surprised, under all the circumstances, that the people took into their own hands the execution of the decree of the Court of Chancery.

in moving that it be printed, contended that it was a very dangerous precedent to allow the Magistrates to call in the military whenever they thought proper, particularly in those cases where their own pecuniary interests were concerned as in the present instance. Mr. Curteis, the father of the Magistrate, was the owner of 3,000 acres of land in that neighbourhood. No doubt it was very convenient for him to have his land drained, though it might be the ruin of other people. He spoke not from the slightest personal feeling on the question; but he could not help observing that one of the persons, who was himself the most interested in the result, was foremost among the number of those who were most active in furthering the infamous and flagitious bill that was now pending before the other House of Parliament. It appeared that, in consequence of what had already occurred, the public market had been removed from Rye to Winchelsea. The town of Rye had experienced a double grievance; for some time, in the first place, its political privileges had been usurped; and, in the next, its local interests were trafficked away. But the former grievance was now removed, and he sincerely hoped that the latter would very soon be redressed. A proposition had been made to remove the military, upon condition of security being given for the peace of the town. To this he could only reply that the peace of the town had never once been disturbed, and the military were kept there only for the purpose of protecting a public nuisance.

maintained, that the hon. and gallant Member was misinformed in stating that the market had been removed to Winchelsea, and he explained, that what he said about giving security was, that the troops would be withdrawn whenever security was given that the peace of the town should not be disturbed.

observed, that the great object appeared to be for certain landed proprietors to consult their own immediate interests at the expense of the people and harbour of Rye.

said, it was quite a mistake to suppose that the landowners in the neighbourhood of Rye desired the ruin of the harbour.

would suggest to the hon. and gallant Member not to press the printing of the Petition, as the subject was now under consideration. At the same time he thought it the duty of the right hon. Secretary of State for the Home Deparlment, to oppose to the utmost extent the Bill that was in progress through the other House.

said, it was no part of his duty to interfere with the progress of any bill that was before the other House of Parliament; neither did he think that he was called upon to interfere officially with private bills in any respect. Presuming even the alleged grievance to exist, he still thought that it ought not to be redressed in a tumultuous manner. If the parties should find that they had a right to abate the nuisance by law, there would be no opposition whatever offered on his part.

briefly supported the prayer of the Petition. The proposed measure would very much increase the expense.

said, the provisions of the Bill were very little known in Scotland, and that if they were well known there would be many petitions against it.

then said, that he had a Petition to present on the same subject from the Dean and Faculty of Advocates of Edinburgh, and he felt highly flattered in having been selected for the purpose of presenting the Petition by so distinguished a body. In the present instance all that the petitioners asked was, that the measure might be allowed to stand over till the next Session, suggesting that all the improvements of which it was susceptible might then be made. They wished not to be understood as being by any means unfavourable to the principle of the Bill, for, on the contrary, they were all, with seven or eight exceptions, most favourable to it—the only thing they desired being some further delay, so that the details might be duly considered.

felt very happy at seeing such a spirit of honourable independence evinced by the learned body from whom this Petition came, more especially when he considered that one great object of the Bill was to do away with a number of useless places, which the mem- bers of that body might be supposed to have an interest still to keep up. As the Jury bill was so soon to expire, he thought it necessary to press the measure without delay.

could not see that the learned Lord had any occasion to be in a hurry on that account, as the Jury bill would not expire before the end of the next Session.

was opposed to the principle of making it obligatory upon Scotch Juries to be unanimous in their verdicts. From the information he had received, he believed that the people of Scotland were by no means favourably disposed to the measure.

supported the Bill, and said that much inconvenience would be experienced if it were not carried through as soon as possible.

said, he felt bound to commend the liberality of the learned professions, not only in this, but in all other instances that had come to his knowledge. There was no error more vulgar than that which would impute interested motives to the members of those professions when the public good was concerned. He was enabled to state from experience that he had received essential assistance from members of the legal and medical profession in some public measures upon which he had consulted them.

said, he felt pride in bearing testimony to the liberality with which the parties were actuated on the present occasion. Though all their personal interests would be directly injured by the proposed measure, yet they never once suffered their minds to be warped in the conclusion at which they had arrived with regard to it. This was a test to which the members of the legal profession in England had not yet been put, but he hoped that, when they were put to it, they would follow the example of their brethren in Scotland.

, in rising to move for some Returns relative to the Duties on Soap and Candles, observed, that, under the present state of the law, as the manufacturer of these articles in England was allowed a drawback on exporting them, he was able to undersell the manufacturer in Ireland, after paying the expenses of sending the articles thither, at the rate of twenty per cent. There was one curious and important circumstance connected with this subject, to which he wished particularly to call the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and it was this:—The duty on the Soap and Candles manufactured was not payable for two months, while the drawback was paid immediately on exportation. The consequence was, that the Soap manufacturers could make their commodity and send it over to Ireland three or four times over, between the payment of the drawback and their being called on to pay the duty. The further consequence was, that the commodity that was sold here for 25s. was sold there for 19s. The manufacturers were thus actually trading, not on their own capital, but on the public revenue. The right hon. Baronet observed, that formerly a similar trade was carried on with glass. He objected strongly to the continuance of such duties and drawbacks, as tending to encourage fraud. The least scrupulous availed themselves of these loop-holes, and acquired property at the expense of the honest. They evaded the duties, the Revenue suffered, and the fair trader was injured. The right hon. Baronet concluded, by moving for "An Account of the Revenue received on Soap and Candles for each of the five years, ending with the 1st of January last, specifying the rate of the duty in each year, and the amount of the drawback, together with the quantity exported to foreign countries—including Ireland—stating the ports from which they were exported, and also the time between the payment of the Duty, and the re-payment of the Drawback."

said, he meant to offer no opposition to the Motion, and he expressed his cordial concurrence in the principle laid down by the right hon. Baronet. He had long felt the evil of having different duties in the different countries, and he should be glad to see a general scale of duties adapted to all parts of the country. We might then get oft' drawbacks, and certainly we might get rid of many frauds. Since he had been in office he had endeavoured to equalize the duties, and had carried this object into effect with very beneficial consequences as to glass. He hoped that he should be able to do something of the same kind with other duties.

hoped, that the right hon. Gentleman would carry into effect his views as to Soap and Candles, and at the same time reduce the duty on them. The quantity of smuggling, at present carried on in these articles, as he should be able to prove when the motion of the hon. member for Hull came before the House, was enormous. The duties at present amounted to 4½d. out of every 6d. for which the Soap sold, and it was too bad that the people of this country should have to pay 4½d. to the Crown before they could get a pound of Soap.

said—"Sir, in moving the first reading of a Bill intended to make a temporary provision for enabling his Majesty to affix his Royal Signature to those public instruments which require that formality, I must repeat, in concurrence, I am sure, with the unanimous feeling of the House, and of this nation, my deep regret at the circumstances which have rendered this application to Parliament necessary. It is, as his Majesty has informed the House by his gracious Message, on account of the indisposition under which he is labouring, painful and inconvenient to the King to attach his sign manual to the multitude of official instruments which require the Royal Signature to give them validity. I must at the same time state that, under all circumstances, when application has been made to his Majesty for his signature to any instrument, the completion of which was necessary to the public service, particularly instruments connected with the administration of justice and pardons, when it was thought fit to extend mercy to those who had received a penal sentence; on all such occasions, whatever pain or in- convenience affixing the Signature might have subjected the King to, his Majesty never suffered those considerations to stand in the way of his desire to facilitate the administration of justice, or to exercise his Royal prerogative of mercy, and to forward the due execution of the public service. I am sure that this House is animated by a unanimous desire to spare his Majesty the pain and inconvenience, if measures can be devised to effect that object consistently with the due discharge of the public service. I hope, consistently with that object, and with the prevention of all detriment or fear of injury to the public service, that the measure which is now introduced, is likely to be satisfactory. The present Bill provides that his Majesty may, by his Royal warrant or commission, to be signed with the sign manual, appoint one or more persons to attach a stamp to those instruments which require the Royal Signature. That stamp will be provided under the direction of the Lord President of the Council. There will be two stamps; one of which will bear the words 'George R.,' and the other, 'G. R.,' the initials only, for such instruments as are usually signed in that way. The Bill provides that the persons so empowered to affix this stamp, shall not be authorised to affix it to any instrument without a memorandum, specifying the nature of the instrument, and bearing the signature of at least three out of seven officers of State, who are named to be responsible for its application. Of those seven signatures, three, at least, must be attached to every instrument, as a certificate of its authenticity. The seven persons so appointed are the-Lord Chancellor, the Lord President of the Council, the Lord Privy Seal, the First Lord of the Treasury, and the three principal Secretaries of State. There is a provision in the Bill that no one of these seven officers so appointed shall act alone; and, in order to guard against the possibility or the supposition of any possible fraud, an oath is provided by the Bill, to be taken by the parties by whom the stamp is to be affixed. The stamp can only be affixed by the King's express command, and in the presence of his Majesty, and the party affixing it must attest by his own signature, that the stamp has been affixed by his Majesty's express command, and in the presence of his Majesty. These are the conditions which accompany the passing of this Bill. However temporary it may be in its duration—for it is proposed to limit the Bill to the end of this Session—and God grant that it may not be necessary to extend it longer—but in case it should become necessary to continue it for a longer time, then there will be a necessity of bringing the measure again under the consideration of the House; so that every caution possible has been used in this case. It is right that it should be so, because we must bear in mind that we are establishing a precedent which may be appealed to on future occasions. There is one other provision which I omitted to notice—namely, an express enactment that his Majesty may, at any time, attach his sign manual in the ordinary way to any instrument when he sees fit and convenient, and that such signature shall have the ordinary operation, notwithstanding the concurrent power given to attach the Signature in the other manner. His Majesty will, therefore, if he sees fit, exercise his Royal prerogative with his own hand. There have been various instances in the former history of this country, of the Royal Signature being attached in the manner proposed by this Bill. In the reign of Henry 8th more than one commission was issued, empowering persons to apply a stamp, instead of the Royal Signature or initials, and giving it equal validity with the Royal sign manual. In the reign of Queen Mary, also, the same power was given by Royal commission; and it is also recorded, on the authority of Bishop Burnett, that, in the reign of King William, a stamp was applied in a similar manner. But although there exist all these various precedents for devolving to individuals the power of affixing a stamp, by the authority of the sign manual, we have thought it the safer course to apply to Parliament in this way for its sanction. I could enter into a more detailed explanation if it were necessary, but from the circumstances under which this measure is proposed, from its temporary duration, and the caution with which it is surrounded, I should hope that the House will be unanimous in the desire to afford his Majesty this accommodation. It will be felt that it is extremely desirable that the measure should be passed with as little delay as possible, particularly on account of those public instruments which would now be pressing for signature, if it were not for the pain and inconvenience which the operation causes to his Majesty. At the same time I propose, that we should see the provisions of the Bill in print before it is finally carried. I shall move that it should be read a first and second time to-day; it can then be carried through its remaining stages to-morrow, and receive the Royal assent on Saturday."

said, that it must be the wish of every hon. Member present to do whatever was in his power to alleviate the sufferings of his Majesty, under the unfortunate circumstances in which he was placed. The only difficulty in the case was, the necessity of using great caution in establishing a precedent, which might be so important in its consequences. To the statement of the right hon. Baronet, so far as his own opinion went, he saw no objection. He only wished to suggest, whether it would not be proper, before the Bill was finally passed, to have some evidence that his Majesty was in such a state, as to render a measure of this nature necessary. It was to the possible abuse of the precedent hereafter that his hesitation applied. They ought to be particularly cautious to prevent any application of it without a sufficient necessity. He did not mean to object to the reading of the Bill at present, but before it was finally passed he hoped the House would have some proof of its necessity.

said, he was sure that when the noble Lord thought of the circumstances under which the Bill was proposed, he would not press his proposition. The House had his Majesty's distinct assurance, in his gracious Message, that he was labouring under indisposition which rendered it painful and inconvenient to sign the various official documents presented for that purpose. He entirely concurred in the opinion that it was necessary to be cautious in a step of this nature; but when the House had the Royal Message, saying that it was painful and inconvenient to his Majesty, he thought it would not be respectful to imply a doubt of the fact.

did not mean to press for any specific information. He merely threw out the suggestion.

said, that there certainly were precedents of kings of this realm having, instead of their own hand-writing, used a stamp, impressed with their own hands; but no cases had occurred, he believed in which the King had issued a commission to authorise persons to sign for him by a stamp. It was necessary to advert to this distinction; if his Majesty used a stamp with his own hands the only difference was between the impression being made with the stamp and with the pen. The physical act was done in either case by the King himself. There was no difference, except that of the physical act being done by means of a stamp or of the King's hand-writing. He had turned his attention a good deal to this subject, and he found that one of the most learned writers and most sagacious antiquaries, (Lord Coke, in his "Institutes,") although he did not quote any one of these cases, in one passage evidently supposed that the Royal Signature could only be done by writing. Lord Coke, in defining the duty of the Clerk to the Signet, said, that it was his office to write out such grants as were passed, super scribed with the Royal Signature or sign manual. The case of Henry the 8th was prior to that time, yet this eminent writer evidently supposed that the Royal Signature must be made by the sign manual in the hand-writing of the King himself. Speaking of the abstract question it was difficult to say that the King's will might not be expressed by George Rex or G. R. yet undoubtedly the more efficient mode was the signature in hand-writing. He must, therefore, deprecate the proposed perversion of the constitutional mode of designating the Royal will by the King's hand-writing, because, if a change were made, unless a person were appointed to keep the stamp, there was no security that it might not be used surreptitiously, which could not be done in the case of hand-writing; surreptitious hand-writing could not be obtained, except by forgery. Undoubtedly a case of necessity would furnish a reason for substituting a stamp for the Royal hand-writing; but he must say that it did not appear to him that the securities proposed in the Bill were securities which would prevent the surreptitious obtaining of the designation of the Royal will by a stamp, as effectually as that object was precluded while the Royal will was designated by hand-writing. There was not in this Bill, as it now stood, any protection against forgery. He thought it would be proper that some provision of this kind should be introduced, because the sign manual was the original authority which put in motion all the subsequent formal acts, which were necessary to give authenticity to public instruments. He thought it would be useful to add a clause to make it forgery to counterfeit the stamp. As far as he could judge of the Bill, all the securities and guards necessary in the substitution of a stamp for the physical hand-writing of the King, were adequate in other respects; yet he thought it would not be improper to have an additional clause, to make it treason to counterfeit the stamp; and when the House should go into a committee on the Bill, he would propose a clause to this effect, "That, it any person or persons shall counterfeit the said stamps, or either of them, or the impression of them upon any warrant, commission, or other instrument, they shall be deemed guilty of high treason, and be punished accordingly." He had abstracted this clause from a Statute of Mary for a similar purpose; and he thought that the substitution of a stamp ought to be accompanied by such a security. But if it were not generally approved of by the House, he had no wish to press it.

said, that there could be no danger arising from the precedent established in this case. It was admitted that no other measure could have been adopted in the present emergency. With respect to the danger of forgery, he thought that none could arise. As so many safeguards were provided, he could not conceive a scintilla of danger to exist. If he understood the right hon. Gentleman correctly, there must be the indorsements of three out of seven of the Cabinet Ministers, so that it would be necessary to forge not only the impression, but also all these different hand-writings. It could not be denied that the Government had, in this instance, discreetly fulfilled its duty. If the addition of the clause suggested by the hon. and learned Member would not delay the measure, he saw no objection to it; but he hoped that it would not be made the means of any delay of the Bill.

said, that he had not thought it necessary to trouble the House with any further details before, but there was a precedent for a commission to authorise a party to attach a stamp, instead of the Royal hand. It was in the reign of Mary, and it was really curious and remarkable how closely the precautions adopted on that occasion coincided with those provided by the present Bill. The precedent had only been discovered yesterday, after this Bill was prepared, and if the House had any curiosity, he would read it. The right hon. Baronet then read an extract from the 5th and 6th of Philip and Mary, which stated, that the Queen, in consequence of the great labour which she sustained in the government and defence of the kingdom, was unable, without much danger and inconvenience, to sign the commissions, warrants, letters, missions, and other papers, and she therefore appointed certain persons therein named, and gave them authority to seal the necessary instruments, instead of the Queen, at her command, and in her presence, and in the presence of the Archbishop of York, the Lord Chancellor, the Master of the Horse, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, the Chancellor of the Order of the Garter, and others named therein, or any two of them, and declared that all instruments so signed should be as valid and effectual in law as if they were signed by the hand of the Queen. This precedent had been discovered subsequently to the preparation of the present Bill; but it would be seen, that the precautions taken were the same. Indeed, the Bill went further than the precedent, because (a point which he omitted to mention before) it would be necessary that the instruments should be signed also in the presence of a confidential servant. The question of forgery had been considered; but, as the duration of the Bill was to be so short, and as it was environed with so many cautions, it was thought that forgery would not be possible, because the forgery of the stamp alone would not be sufficient. It would be necessary also to affix the names of all those who attested it. In almost every instrument there would be five signatures. Referring to the Regency Act, he did not find in it any provision making it treason to counterfeit the sign-manual—[Sir C. Wetherell said, he did not desire to persevere in his suggestion]. If it were necessary to continue the present measure after this Session, it would then be right to consider whether it would be desirable to make any additional provision to meet this point. But at present he did not think it was necessary, for the reasons which he had stated, and also as forgery was at all times subject to a high penalty at common law.

begged merely to observe on the subject of the punishment of the forgery of this stamp as an act of treason, that he hoped the number of treasonable offences would not be extended.

expressed a wish that the Bill should be in the hands of Members as soon as possible, as some alterations might suggest themselves.

said, that it would be printed by a very early hour in the morning.

, in moving for a Select Committee to inquire into the Revenue and Expenditure of the Island of Ceylon, said, that he wished 1o put the House in possession, by that means, of some information in addition to that which had been already afforded it through the Finance Committee. By a Return on the Table of the House, made up to the 1st of December, 1824, it appeared that the debt of the Island of Ceylon of every description, amounted at that period to the sum of 463,201l.; while the Sinking Fund intended for its extinction, and which at one time amounted to 176,000l., had been wholly devoted to other purposes. In December of the year 1826, this debt had increased to the sum of 491,000l., without a single shilling being provided for its extinction, and it was still accumulating. At the time the island was in the hands of the Dutch, the whole Civil Establishments were a mere trifle, compared [we believe the hon. Member said 16,000l. a-year] with that which they now cost under the present extravagant government, notwithstanding the pressure of this continually increasing debt. In the year 1825, the salary of the Governor was 10,000l. a-year; and the civil expenses, including this salary, were 111,340l. a-year. This enormous expenditure was coupled with, and supported by a monopoly of trade, which was more vexatious even than the debt and the expenditure, more injurious to the interests of the Island, and more close and annoying than the very worst monopoly ever practised by the East-India Company. The trade in cinnamon, one of the exclusive products of the Island, was a monopoly of the worst description. All cinnamon grown in Ceylon was sent home by the Government, and sold on its account; and every tree which produced it, whether it grew on the side of the highway or in the hedge of a private garden, was claimed as its property. It was to this injurious system of carrying on trade that he wished to direct the attention of the House, parti- cularly as Sir Edward Barnes, in the course of his correspondence, expressly declared that the throwing that trade open would be attended with the greatest benefits to the mother-country, and the colony. He would take the liberty of reading what that officer said in his letter to Lord Bathurst, dated August 18, 1820. "On the great question of the future disposal of the whole of the cinnamon of the island, I must venture to express my full coincidence in your Lordship's opinion, that throwing open the trade in that principal article of export will have most advantageous effects on the general commerce of the island." On the 2nd of November, 1820, Earl Bathurst wrote as follows to Sir Edward Barnes. "Entertaining also the opinion, that it would be most for the advantage of the island to leave the trade in cinnamon, at the expiration of the present contract, open to general competition, it appears to me that the activity and enterprise of individual merchants may find that vent for a greater quantity of the article, without reference to its quality, which has hitherto been wanting; and therefore, although I should be desirous that your attention should be immediately turned to the best means of improving the culture and ameliorating the quality of the cinnamon, yet I cannot recommend any attempt to diminish the growth of that spice, until the experiment shall have been made of the effect of a free trade upon its consumption." Again he wrote to Sir Edward Paget on August 21st, 1821, who was then Governor of the island. "It has been determined that the trade in cinnamon should, like that in other articles, be open to all who are desirous of embarking in it." Notwithstanding all this the cinnamon continued to be a close monopoly, and any one attempting to export or cultivate a pound of it was subject to a heavy penalty. Sir Edward Barnes said, in a letter dated December 27th, 1821. "The culture is completely within the control of the Government, as every tree in the island, whether growing wild or in private grounds, or in the preserved gardens, equally belongs to it; so that, if it became an object to eradicate it partially or in toto, it is perfectly feasible, and within the unshackled power of the Government to do so." Of late years, also, the Colonial Government of Ceylon had been extending its trade. It sent home cocoa-nut oil, and supplied the India squadron with arrack. When he compared the opinions he had just quoted with the restrictions which existed in the island, he was at a loss to conjecture what possible notions of free trade could be entertained by Sir Edw. Barnes or Earl Bathurst. The whole of this subject required revision, and he could not conceive a more likely method to obtain both revision and improvement than to appoint a committee of that House. It was not, however, merely of a monopoly that he complained; the whole of the fiscal regulations of the island were onerous and unnecessarily restrictive. All imports into the colony were taxed to an extent unknown in Madras or Calcutta. All woollen goods paid a duty of nine per cent; cotton goods five per cent, and iron nine per cent, while on the continent they paid little or nothing. On these, and other points of commercial interest, he thought a Select Committee could obtain much useful information. He was not so well acquainted with military affairs as with commercial or civil, but he understood that a large military establishment was kept up as a great burthen on the colony, while large sums for staff appointments and other purposes were also voted by the mother-country in that House, and that too for an extent of force totally disproportioned to the wants of the colony. The island was much more salubrious than any part of the continent of India. All who were acquainted with it pronounced it one of the finest climates in the world. Coffee grew wild in the fields; every article of necessity and luxury was to be had in abundance; and yet all these advantages were lost by a bad administration of its resources. He had always, indeed, been of opinion, that a military officer made a bad Governor for a commercial colony, and it was the lot of Ceylon to have had no other governors than military men. Alluding to another branch of the subject—the administration of justice, he was bound to say that it was very defective, and it could never be better till the courts were made independent of the local government. Sir Alexander Johnston had recommended the gradual abolition of the provincial courts, in which it now sometimes happened, that the Judge was also the suitor. It was a remarkable exception to the ordinary independence of Judges, that the Governor of Ceylon had the power to suspend the execution of an order of the highest court of justice. Every thing like the independence of the Judges was therefore quite beside the question; for it was in the power of the Governor to suspend the order of the Judge, or set it aside altogether. There was a remarkable instance of this in the time of General Campbell. A vessel had arrived at Columbo, in 1824, in which a person named Rosier was found, and apprehended as a deserter from the East-India Company. He applied for a writ of habeas corpus, which was granted him; but the Governor, through the Attorney-General, denied the right of the Court to issue such a writ in opposition to the order of the Governor, and on the Court persisting, the Governor resorted to his arbitrary legislative power, and declared that no such writ should in future be issued in opposition to his order. The Court was bound to obey this order, and the conclusion of the learned Judge's speech, in discharging the writ, was so remarkable that he should beg leave to read it to the House. Sir Harding Giffard said, "It is not that, such a regulation impends over me as well as every other subject on the island—it is not from the possible case of a bad Governor, though a tremendous use might be made of this power, that I abstain from making any observation. I trust, that if personal danger only were to be encountered, I should not fail in my duty, but it is because I bow to the authority of my Sovereign; thus, as I trust, temporarily exercised by his delegate, that I say this return is supported by the regulation; that this regulation is the law of Ceylon; and that we have no right to inquire why this British subject is deprived of his liberty; and that the Court is reduced to the heart-breaking necessity of saying that his Majesty's writ of habeas corpus is of no effect." He must state that the King disapproved of the Governor's conduct, and directed the regulation to be cancelled. The means also of extending colonization, and giving the trial by jury to the Kandian provinces, which had already been introduced into the island with the happiest effects by Sir Alexander Johnston, would be important subjects for the Committee to investigate. For the last twenty years the island had been open to all persons to settle there, and the Government had offered grants of land on advantageous terms to settlers. The proclamation published in July 1812, said, among other things, "His Excellency is pleased hereby to publish the rules and conditions by which the grants will be regulated, in pursuance of instructions received from his Majesty's Ministers on this subject. Grants in perpetuity will be given to his Majesty's European subjects, and also to such Europeans, or their descendants, as were settled in Ceylon before the conquest of it by his Majesty, and who, by their good conduct since, may have entitled themselves to that indulgence. The quantity of land so granted will not exceed 4,000 acres to any one individual. Such lands will be held free of all duty to Government, for a period not exceeding ten, or less than five years." But, notwithstanding that encouragement, notwithstanding the fertility of the soil, notwithstanding the salubrity of the climate, the monopoly to which he had already alluded, and the want of a proper administration of justice, had deterred persons from availing themselves of the advantage which settlers would unquestionably enjoy. The inquiry which he recommended would therefore conduce to the attainment of two desirable objects;—a reform in the administration of justice in the island, and the establishment of the best means of further colonization. That the inhabitants of Ceylon were perfectly prepared to give efficiency to any measures calculated to improve the condition of the settlement, was evident from various occurrences, to two of which he would allude—he meant religious toleration, and the abolition of slavery. The Catholics were emancipated in Ceylon before they were emancipated in Great Britain, and the abolition of slavery was the spontaneous act of the slave proprietors. In 1806, at the suggestion of Sir Alexander Johnston, Sir Thomas Maitland, who was then Governor of the island, passed a legislative act in favour of the Catholics, who were before subject to a rigorous exclusion. It was published in May of that year, and as it was short he would read it to the House. "The Governor in Council enacts as follows:—1st. The Roman Catholics shall be allowed the unmolested profession and exercise of their religion in every part of the British settlements on the island of Ceylon. 2nd. They shall be admitted to all civil privileges and capacities. 3rd. All marriages between Roman Catholics which have taken place within the said settlements, since the 26th of August 1795, according to the rites of the Roman Catholic Church, shall be deemed valid in law, although the forms appointed by the late Dutch Government, have not been observed. 4th. This regulation shall take effect on the 4th day of June next, that day being his Majesty's birth-day. 5th. Every part of any law, proclamation, or order, which contradicts this regulation, is hereby repealed.

"By order of the Council," &c.

The slaves were emancipated also by the recommendation of Sir Alex. Johnston. In the year 1810, being then governor of the Colony, he addressed a letter to some of the principal slave-proprietors, recommending them to adopt a means gradually to emancipate their slaves. The letter might be found in the eleventh report of the African Institution, and he would take the liberty to read the reply of the slave-proprietors. It was addressed to Sir Alexander Johnston, Chief Justice, &c. and was as follows:—

"May it please your Lordship, we, the undersigned, respectfully beg leave to acknowledge the receipt of your Lordship's very kind and condescending letter of the 10th instant, accompanied with the eighth and ninth reports of the African Institution, the perusal of which we did not delay, in consequence of the honourable distinction which your Lordship has shewn in addressing us on so important a subject, with the laudable and humane view of directing our attention to the measure which your Lordship has heretofore proposed in the year 1806. We sincerely beg leave to assure your Lordship, that the proposal conveyed by your Lordship's letter is gratifying to our feelings; and it is our earnest desire, if possible, to disencumber ourselves of that unnatural character, of being proprietors of human beings; but we feel regret in adding, that the circumstances of every individual of us does not allow a sudden and total abolition of slavery, without subjecting both the proprietors and the slaves themselves to material and serious injuries. We take the liberty to add, that the Slaves of the Dutch inhabitants are generally emancipated at the death of their owners; as will appear to your Lordship, on reference to their wills, deposited in the records of the Supreme Court; and we are confident, that those who are still in a state of slavery, have likewise the same chance of obtaining their freedom. We have therefore, in following the magnanimous example of those alluded to in the afore- mentioned reports of the African Institution, come to a resolution, as our voluntary act, to declare—That all children who may be born slaves, from and after the 12th of August, 1816, inclusive, shall be considered free, and under such provisions and conditions as contained in a resolution which we shall agree upon, and which we shall have the honour of submitting to your Lordship, for the extinction of a traffic, avowedly repugnant to every moral and religious virtue." That document was signed by above seventy slave-owners; the number of slave-proprietors who acted on these principles was upwards of 700, and the number of slaves whose children were referred to in the document, was not less than 10,000. The example was worthy of imitation in our favoured colonies of the West Indies. Their inhabitants had been repeatedly called on to do the same thing; but they had been deaf to the call. Was Ceylon treated as well as these slave colonies? No; her produce was subject to heavy taxes, and her inhabitants to most unwise restrictions. Before he sat down he would beg leave to refer to the correspondence lately laid on the Table, between Mr. Herries and Mr. Morton in 1827, relative to the Colonial expenditure. In that correspondence he found a passage, which was worthy of the attention of the House. "In the case of Ceylon" it said, "the ordinary excess of expenditure has been increased by the charges of the Kandian war, and rebellion, by a diminution of the proceeds of cinnamon, and by the remission of a debt, to a considerable amount, to the East-India Company. Upon these points, however, Karl Bathurst has lately had occasion to communicate with the Board of Treasury, and he had only, therefore, to add, that whatever measure might be adopted for the relief of the colony, it would be necessary to provide the means for paying off the outstanding debentures, which will become due in the course of seven years, to the amount of 365,000l." In that indeed there was nothing to make him hope that the management of our colonies would be improved. He believed in fact that the Colonial Office at home was more to blame than the governors of the colonies. The right hon. Gentleman might oppose his Motion by requesting the House to wait till the commissioners appointed to inquire into the state of the island had made their report, but that might not be made for five or ten years, and as he deprecated every species of delay, which was only calculated to protract evils that ought long ago to have been remedied, he would conclude by moving "that a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the Revenue and Expenditure of the Island of Ceylon."

said, that he had not expected that so many observations, not strictly referring to the question itself, would have grown out of the hon. Gentleman's Motion. To many of those observations he should feel it unnecessary to advert. He was very willing to admit that the finances of the Island of Ceylon had been labouring under considerable difficulties—difficulties arising from the expenses which had attended the Kandian war—and from other circumstances. The hon. Gentleman had, by implication at least, recommended the introduction of the principles of free trade into the Island of Ceylon. Those principles had been tried there with respect to cinnamon; and the result was, that, in the course of a single year, the revenue had fallen off 50,000l. He was no friend to the monopoly system; but these were subjects which must be looked at practically. He. also admitted that the expenses of the colony were considerable. A commission however had been appointed to inquire into these matters, and so far from its being probable that the report of that commission would not be made for ten or twelve years, there was every reason to believe that it would be received in July. With respect to the patronage of the island, he (Sir G. Murray) had no desire to exercise it, except for the interest of the colony; and he believed that the only patronage which he had exercised with reference to that colony, since his accession to office, was the appointment of a single writer. He perfectly agreed with the hon. Member as to the fertility of the soil and the salubrity of the climate. That those considerations were insufficient to induce settlers to go to that colony was probably in some measure to be attributed to the recollection that it had lately been in the possession of a savage people, whose barbarities were well known. As to annexing the colony to our East-Indian empire, that was a subject which had better be considered in the general investigation which was making into the affairs of the East-India Company. Under all the circumstances of the case, he thought it would be very injudicious to enter into any inquiry till the commissioners had made their report, and he must therefore oppose the Motion.

was of opinion, that the hon. member for Beverley had made out a case which demanded inquiry, for he had shown that there existed in this interesting colony the very worst system of government; nor had his statement of the evils under which it laboured been at all answered by the right hon. Gentleman. The hon. Member below had stated, that the revenue of the colony was less than the expenditure, to the amount of 100,000l. a year: that was not denied; and he had shewn that the civil establishment was eight times greater now than it was when the colony was in the hands of the East-India Company. The Company governed the island at one-eighth of the expense at which it was now governed, and there was a deficiency, which this country was called upon to make good, to the amount of 100,000l. a year. Then there was the monopoly; the whole trade was in the hands of Government, always a bad merchant. Then came the tax laid upon all articles of British manufacture imported into Ceylon: and taxing our manufactures when imported into our own colony, seemed very objectionable; then it appeared that the will of the Governor was the sole law, that there was no other legislator; and though the Colonial government decided that he had acted improperly in the case of Rosier, it did not prevent this man from being the victim of an ex post facto law. The revenue, it appeared, was deficient, and the Judge who levied exactions was afterwards the individual who decided as to the right of levying them. All these were the facts of the case, and when all the inconveniences of the present system were admitted, it seemed naturally to follow, that an inquiry ought to take place immediately. 'When the Dutch were in possession of this colony, they treated the natives with the greatest inhumanity: but there was a religious order, to the members of which allusion was often made in that House in no very favourable terms—he meant the Jesuits: and it would not be wondered at, if knowing their history, perhaps, a little better than some of those who were most forward to speak disrespectfully of them, he should stand up to defend them, and characterise them as most bountiful benefactors, not only of literature, but of humanity: the conduct of the Jesuits in India, at all events, had been, beyond all dispute, most praiseworthy, and they had been very successful in propagating Christianity in Ceylon. They converted the inhabitants to Catholic Christianity; but when the Dutch got possession of the island, they commenced the most cruel system of persecution against the Catholic converts. They were sent to Siam, and the Dutch re-established the idolatrous worship when the line of priesthood became extinct. When Sir Alexander Johnston became Chief Justice of the Island, he pursued a line of conduct which reflected the greatest honour on him. He had the great glory of giving freedom of conscience, of establishing Trial by Jury, and of abolishing the Slave-trade in that Island. No one person had ever before had the honour of introducing three such measures into any country. This excellent judge found the Catholic Christians in Ceylon persecuted in every way, but he made those persecutions cease, and what was the consequence? Why the number of Christians had increased beyond all former comparison. He was sorry to say, that there were but twenty-six Catholic Clergymen in the Island, but that proceeded from causes over which the Government had no control. These Clergymen belonged to a monastic order, and, perhaps, the right hon. Gentleman was aware that they had been offered a stipend by Government, and had refused to take it, saying, that they preferred deriving their subsistence from the Christians whom they instructed, to deriving it from the Government. That was highly to the credit of those persons. The Catholic clergy in Ceylon were dependent on the Portuguese Archbishop of Goa, and he thought it was deserving of consideration whether they should not be placed under the authority of a Bishop, who should be a British subject residing in the colony. At least the religious situation of the inhabitants of the island deserved the serious consideration of the House. A great deal was said in the House about Christianity when there was an intention of excluding persons from civil rights; and as a means of enabling them to enjoy civil rights, it certainly should not be lost sight of, that the natives of our colonies might obtain the blessings of the Christian doc- trines. The missionary labours of the Roman Catholic clergy in Ceylon would certainly be most useful, if they could be extended to other parts of India; and the means of doing that might, he thought, be inquired into in the committee. There was no point of view in which the subject could be looked at, in which inquiry was not immediately called for. Whatever the commissioners might report, it would be better that the arrival of their report should be preceded by the labours of a committee. If the report were received in July, as was expected by the right hon. Gentleman, a double advantage would be gained; if it should not arrive, some progress would be made in investigating a subject which called strongly for investigation. It had been said, that persons were not desirous to settle in this colony, because its natural advantages were not sufficiently known. This was an additional argument for inquiry. The report of a committee of the House would get abroad, and inform persons now ignorant of the advantages of colonization. On the whole, he was of opinion that a perfect case had been made out for inquiry, and no reason whatever assigned for delay. What but beneficial results could arise from inquiry when it was admitted that there was not a single rule of political economy, or of sound legislation which was not violated by the present system of government in that island?

could not allow the question to go to a division after the very insufficient reasons brought forward by the right hon. Gentleman for opposing the Motion, without expressing his opinions on the subject. The way in which it was attempted to slur over and excuse every instance of abuse in our colonies was not to be borne. In his opinion this was a case crying for inquiry and reform, not only as related to the pecuniary affairs of the colony, but as to its trade, its judicial administration and its government. The speech of his hon. friend did him great honour, and it would find its way where it would be sure to take effect. So gross a case had not been brought before the House for the last two years. There had been a vast increase of the judicial and all public establishments in all the colonies during the time that Lord Bathurst was Colonial Secretary. Five years ago 350,000l. of debt was due on debentures, and no part of that had since been paid off. It was the duty of government to provide for the payment of the debt, and a sinking fund had been appropriated, but that too had been swallowed up by the rapacious hand of the Colonial Minister of this country. The sinking fund was applied to meet some immediate case of emergency, and the debt had now accumulated to nearly half a million sterling. Sinking funds, indeed, were uniformly applied to immediate purposes, which shewed the inutility and absurdity of establishing them. Here was one of the finest colonies in the world, with a revenue of 350,000l. a year, and yet that was not sufficient to pay the expenses, and to maintain the individuals sent out from this country to be provided for. These individuals had not salaries allotted to them according to the services they performed, but according to their rank and connexions, and to the importance of those through whose interest they get their appointments. There were some very curious appointments in this colony. There is one instance of superintendent of the Poor Fund, with a salary of 180l. per annum, but the same individual had 2,000l. a year, as an appendix to the 180l., for doing nothing. The expenses of the colonial governments were deserving of as much care and attention from that House as any expenses incurred at home. Thousands were wasted in the colonies, and yet the House had heard the right hon. Secretary for the Home Department, with all that gravity which so well became him, and with all those imposing attitudes which he indulged in, read a lecture to it, a few nights ago, upon the extravagance of expending 6l. upon the printing of a petition. The account of the salaries in this colony was printed, and he called upon the Members of the House to look into the returns. The right hon. Secretary said, let us wait until July, till the Report of the Commissioners is obtained; but that was no reason why the House should wait even one month; and he could only say, that if the Report of these Commissioners was received by July, they would make their report three years sooner than any other commissioners had ever done within his remembrance. They might be like the commissioners who were appointed several years back to inquire into the Post-office in Ireland, and whose report had been laid on the Table only this Session. The way in which the colony had been governed was quite a mockery. The revenue in 1813 was 320,000l.; subsequently it rose as high as 460,000l. and in 1824, in consequence of mal-government, it was reduced to 297,000l. being a deficiency of one-third, whilst the expenditure all the time was progressively increasing. Under such circumstances, it was fit and proper to see how far it had been injurious to the interests of all parties that the Sovereign should be the only merchant of the island: in this character, his interests were opposed to those of other merchants, which were identified with the interests of the community: and, therefore, the interests of the Sovereign, as a merchant, were opposed to those of the community. The governor of Ceylon was in a situation to cramp the energies and destroy the means and resources which existed so abundantly in the colony. What was to prevent the country from having imported into it 450,000l. worth of King's cinnamon; Why should the King not import that as well as sugars? How did it happen that the Attorney General was blind to this, or that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who was so anxious to take 35,000l. for the King's sugars, should not be equally anxious to take 70,000l. for the King's cinnamon? There had not been one point stated with respect to this colony which was not of the utmost importance. Was it fit or proper that the Governor of this colony should put the country to an expense, one way or another, of about 16, 000l. a year? Then there was the Chief Secretary, with a salary of 7,800l.; whilst the Members of that House were squabbling for sums of 50l. and 60l. and wasting hours in discussing the disbursement of a few shillings. In the Island of Ceylon the Commissioner of Stamps, and the Paymaster General, had a salary larger even than that of the right hon. Gentleman opposite. It was not treating the right hon. Gentleman fairly to give the Paymaster General of Ceylon, a minor colony, a larger salary than he enjoyed as Paymaster General of Great Britain. The colonial Chaplain had the enormous salary of 4,920l. Good God! was it not desirable that such a subject should be referred to a committee, which might inquire who all those persons were, and what duties they performed? This was the way in which our wealth was wasting, in which this country was drained, and which would at length be its ruin, if such a system was persevered in. Even the suggestion of Lord Bathurst had not been carried into effect. The trade in cinnamon was not free, and no reason had been given for preserving the monopoly. The King was the trader, the profits of the trade went to the people in office. The civil establishment of the island cost no less a sum than 111,000l. The superintendant of the Vaccine Establishment had a salary of 1,651l.; the superintendant of the Botanical Garden, 1,437l.; and all the other salaries were on the same footing. The expense was eight times as great as it was when the island was under the East-India Company. The expense of the Judicial Department was 43,000l., and of the Revenue Department, 65,000l. The different establishments cost more than the whole revenue of the colony. The whole trade was monopolized by the Government, and commercial enterprise destroyed. Could any one say, that this was not a proper subject for inquiry? Was it not worthy of consideration, whether this colony might not be made valuable and productive to us, instead of being a source of expense? He was surprised that the right hon. Gentleman should say, with so much indifference, let us wait for the report, when reductions had been recommended by his predecessor. Why, the military establishment alone cost 170,000l. and the mere Staff itself cost 20,000l. It was not possible for the country to flourish under such a system? Could it be expected that any individual should go to settle under such an arbitrary government? Any one must be ignorant of the practice of colonial governments, to place his person and property in such jeopardy. If ever there was a question calling for inquiry it was the present. The right hon. Gentleman admitted that the finances were embarrassed; but that was of no consequence as long as the Chancellor of the Exchequer could provide the money, by a grinding system of taxation on the people of this country. As long as this House neglected its duty, and did not prevent such an expenditure, it was of no matter to the right hon. Gentleman. He admitted that monopoly was bad; then why not put an end to it? When even Lord Bathurst, the most illiberal Minister that ever governed the colonies—a Minister who obstinately maintained a system of misrule, and endeavoured to perpetuate every abuse—when such a man recom- mended reform, and his successors did not effect it, it was no great compliment to that successor; and facts shewed that he had no claim to the character of a liberal Minister. The right hon. Gentleman admitted too that the establishments were unnecessarily large, and yet he contended that inquiry was not necessary. He also said, that he had no fear of colonization, and that declaration gave him pleasure; the fears entertained on that subject were perfectly ideal. The capital and talent of Englishmen employed in our colonies would no doubt bring forth their capacity and resources, and admitting that—and at the same time admitting that Englishmen did not go to Ceylon, was not that a reason why the House should inquire into the circumstances which closed that beautiful country against the enterprise of our people. As far as promoting civilization and wealth went colonization was of great importance; as far as regarded the number of inhabitants, colonization was not of importance when the climate and the amount of the native population was considered. He was glad, however, to hear what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman on this subject, because colonization was a bugbear and a signal of alarm just now held out by the East-India Company. Was i there no necessity for inquiry, he would further ask, when this colony every year cost the country from 100,000l. to 200,000l.? besides it had a debt of 500,000l., for which this country was responsible, and which could not be paid off till the colony was placed on a different footing. If the shackles which now cramped industry and commercial enterprise were removed, and the establishments of the island put on a fair and liberal footing, the colony would pay all its expenses, and pay off its debts. Upon these grounds, thanking his hon. friend for bringing forward this Motion, for which the country was greatly indebted to him, he should give the Motion his most cordial support. The name of Sir Alexander Johnston had been mentioned; and before he sat down he must be allowed to express his regret that that gentleman should be idle on a pension in this country, when there was no proper Court of Appeal for the colonies, which he thought the Government would do well to establish, instead of having colonial appeal decided by the Privy Council, very little to the credit of the judicial character of the country. Those Judges who retired from the colonies in full health, and with their faculties unimpaired, should not be suffered to eat the bread of idleness at home. If a Court of Appeal were established, and they were made the Judges in it, the duties would be more properly discharged than at present, appeals being now tried by persons utterly ignorant of the colonies, the customs of the inhabitants, and every other circumstance which it was desirable they should be acquainted with. Sir Alexander Johnston's services would be of great use to the country if he were placed in an appeal court of this description. His conduct at Ceylon had immortalized his name, and his example he hoped would be followed by other Judges throughout the colonies. He called upon the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if there was the least sincerity in his professions of a desire to economies, to agree to his hon. friend's Motion, as the commencement of an improved system for our colonies. He had no doubt that the result of the inquiry would be most favorable to the resources of the country, and that we might save at least 150,000l. a-year in the expenditure of Ceylon alone. The extravagance of the establishments in the West-India Islands had been mentioned, but they were nothing compared to this, and most of them paid their own expenses. Those islands which were under the government of the King in Council, were much the most extravagant in their establishments; Ceylon, the Cape of Good Hope, the Mauritius, and Malta, were all colonies of this description: every one of them was a load to this country, draining us of the means which were collected with so much difficulty at home. Unless some change took place, it would be in vain to expect a return to prosperity and a cessation of complaint. An inquiry by a committee might put things on a proper footing. If the recommendations of that committee did not meet the approbation of the right hon. Secretary, he might refuse to carry them into effect: but if he did not choose to commence the inquiry, let him not refuse to allow others to carry it on, for if the Government desired to effect economy in the colonies, such an inquiry must take place.

supported the Motion because he believed that great abuses existed in Ceylon, which the committee might be the means of remedying.

thought, that the state of the colony required examination before a committee, and suggested that the word "commerce" ought to stand first in the Motion, in order that, if it were carried, the committee to be appointed might first investigate that part of the subject, so as not to anticipate the Report of the Commissioners, which might be expected in July.

observed, that it would be convenient, while the General Committee was sitting upon Indian Affairs, to have another distinct committee on the state of Ceylon, and whatever the recommendation of the committee might be they might afterwards be considered.

adopted the recommendation of the noble Lord (Althorp), and altered his Motion accordingly.

, referring to the Bill brought from the House of Peers for the regulation of the Court of Chancery, said that he intended to propose that it should be read a first time to night, and that the second reading should be fixed for the 10th of June, when the discussion might be taken. He hoped that this arrangement would be satisfactory to the House, and that it would allow him to name the same day for the second reading of the two other bills, connected with that Bill, one being for the regulation of the Master's Office, and the other for the regulation of the Registrar's Office. He hoped, if this suggestion were approved, that Members would not fix motions for the 10th of June, which would precede the Orders of the Day for the second reading of the three bills he had named.

was of opinion that this important subject well merited a separate day's discussion. The subject of the Court of Chancery had been postponed in that House for two Sessions, in consequence of the expectation of the bill which had just made its appearance from the House of Lords. Why it had been so long delayed he knew not, but per tot discrimina rerum, it had at last been sent down to the Commons. He must freely state that he felt the strongest repugnance to the plan proposed by the Bill and on the day named, for which he hoped no other business would be set down, he would not scruple to detail his objections.

took this opportunity of urging the Lord Advocate to fix some early day, prior to the 10th of June, for the debate on his measure, which had excited great attention in Scotland, and was, in fact, of the highest importance to that country.

said, he was surprised, when he reflected that this Bill had been framed by a learned Gentleman, who had passed the greater part of his political life on the Opposition benches. So far as the wants and wishes of the people were consulted by that Bill it might have been drawn up by the Grand Vizier, and would then have been quite as well adapted to the people as the Bill that had been drawn up by the King's Attorney General. What did this Bill do? In the first place, it multiplied all the difficulties which the inhabitants of the county of Chester and the Welch counties now complained of, and it changed the character of their system of judicature. He should have been quite ready if the Bill had been for the advantage of Chester, to waive his objections to a great many clauses of it; but the objections instead of being obviated after remonstrance had been made, had been multiplied, and this Bill was an exacerbation of the original measure objectionable as that was. He objected to the Bill altogether, and let the House observe what it proposed to do. With respect to the county of Chester, it proposed to put an end to, and annihilate at one blow, all the judicial rights and privileges enjoyed by its inhabitants for eight centuries, and that without any complaint having been made, or one petition having been presented against their rights; while plenty of petitions had appeared in their favour. In the preamble of the Bill it was distinctly stated, that "whereas it is expedient to put an end to the separate judicature of the county of Chester." That was the preamble; but the Bill did not prove, nor had it been proved, that it would be expedient to put an end to that separate judicature; and he required something better to prove the expediency of that than the ipse dixit of the hon. and learned Gentleman. The inhabitants of the county of Chester (one of the first in commercial importance), amounting to near 400,000, did not consider it expedient to put an end to their ancient and present system of judicature. On the contrary they had petitioned against the Bill; and not only the county of Chester, but the great towns in the vicinity—Liverpool, Lancaster, and Warrington, containing nearly 300,000 inhabitants, had also petitioned against it. What was the system to be substituted? He wished to inform the House that this was a question of rights; not like the last—merely a question of expenditure of the public money, during the discussion of which, nearly every Member in the House was engaged in conversation. The system proposed to be substituted was that prevailing in England, which, on account of its delays and expenses, excited so much disgust. It was that system, the evils of which were so truly stated by the hon. and learned Gentleman, the member for Knaresborough, when he introduced the subject of legal reform, and pointed out his views of the remedy to be applied. His speech was received with approbation by every one who heard it; and the sentiments of which he had no doubt, would ere long be generally adopted. Before the hon. and learned Attorney General introduced this Bill to change the system of judicature in the county of Chester, he should have waited until the reforms proposed to be introduced in the law of England were carried into effect. The new system of law which he wished to introduce into the county of Chester, had not that which is the origin of all law—the consent and acquiescence of the people. In fact they were against it. He wished to know why the County Palatine of Chester had been selected for this experiment, or why the other Counties Palatine had been passed over? Why was not Durham included? Had the Bishop rights there, which could not be touched without difculty? but this reason did not apply to the County Palatine of Lancaster. The Bishop had nothing to do with that; and there was no reason, as it appeared to him, for leaving that county untouched. No reason had been stated why this Bill should spare the other Counties Palatine, and attack the county of Chester. The Bill was founded on the erroneous idea that Chester was assimilated to Wales, and had no analogy or resemblance to Lancashire in its institutions; whereas the direct converse was the fact, as had been proved to the Attorney General who, however, did not alter his Bill. As far as he understood that Bill, it did not introduce the slightest improvement; all the proposed changes were objectionable; and no grounds had been stated by the hon. and learned Gentleman for making them. It was merely sic volo, sic jubeo, stat pro ratione voluntas. So many of the enactments of the Bill were objectionable, that he was at a loss to know to which part of it. first to apply his objections. The facility and expedition with which writs are now obtained in actions for debt, in the county of Chester, would be lost by this Bill. Though he was no friend to the principle of Arrest for Debt, yet while the law sanctioned Arrests they ought to be executed with facility. It was of importance at all events, to the inhabitants of the county of Chester, that they should be able to obtain writs with as little difficulty as if they lived in the county of Middlesex. It was also most important, that when parties resorted to actions at law, many months should not elapse between the commencement of those actions and going to trial. That advantage was possessed by the inhabitants of Chester. The Courts there were always open; whilst proceedings in the Courts at Westminster were often impeded by long holi- days. The people of Chester were also exempted from the delays which took place under the English system, between the period of obtaining a verdict and issuing an execution; delays which enabled fraudulent defendants to assign over their property, and cheat their creditors. Then with respect to persons bailed by the law of the Counties Palatine, they were allowed to surrender in their own counties, instead of coming up to London at a great expense. These changes might seem to some persons of small importance; but the inhabitants of the county of Chester did not think them so, and he was therefore justified in objecting to them in detail. Amongst other matters the law of Ejectment was considerably altered. Under the present system if a tenant refused to quit his holding pursuant to notice,—say on 2nd of February,—he might be ejected in the month of April. By this Bill, however, he could not be ejected until the following November. That was a difference of six months, which would enable the tenant, if fraudulently disposed, to ruin the estate, carry the crops away, and run off himself, leaving no remedy to the landlord but an appeal to the Court of King's Bench, when the injury was done and could not be repaired. The landlord therefore might lose the produce of his land for one year. There was also a Court of Equity in the county of Chester, which this Bill proposed to abolish without any evidence of complaint having been made against it, unless such evidence could be found in the negative objection that it had not much business. Perhaps the people of Chester were not so litigious as the inhabitants of other parts of the kingdom: but at all events, when they found it necessary to resort to a Court of Equity, they were able to obtain justice at one-third the expense at which it was obtained in England, and in one third of the time. In the recovery of small debts, the people of Chester would find themselves in a much worse situation, for the Sheriffs Court was also to be abolished. Another objection was, that a gaol which cost the county 150,000l. and which was unfortunately not half large enough, might be placed under the superintendence of Welch Magistrates, which was neither very convenient nor very agreeable. Accommodation too must be provided for the Judges, at an expense of 10,000l. These matters might seem trivial to some Gentle- men, but pro tanto they were grievances, and deserving of consideration. The most galling circumstance of all, however to the people of Cheshire, was their being united with two Welch counties. He was sure that his hon. friends, the members for Denbigh and Flint, would not consider that anything disrespectful was meant towards their counties, for they were as little disposed to acquiesce in this unnatural union as the Cheshire people. The Sheriff according to this Bill, was to be Sheriff of three counties; and his responsibilities and his duties were to be increased in proportion. He thanked the House for the indulgence with which it had heard him, and concluded by moving as an Amendment, "that the Report be received that day six months."

meant to confine the few observations he was about to make entirely to the operation of the Bill on the county of Chester, with which he was particularly connected. The Bill went to alter the whole machinery connected with the Administration of Justice in that great commercial county. The Courts established there had, for many centuries, independent rights, and were not identified with the Courts of Westminster-hall. They possessed as ample a jurisdiction in the county of Chester as any of the Courts at Westminster in any part of England. Having existed so long, it was not surprising that they should want some little amendment; and his hon. friend, who had just addressed the House, must admit that they required reform in various particulars. In the course of time they had acquired various defects, like the other courts in the kingdom. He would not enter into a detail of those defects, but undoubtedly amongst the advantages of the system, some defects had blended themselves, and become parts of it. In some points therefore, reform was necessary; and he would not say that no advantage could be derived from the changes proposed by the Bill. He considered that it would be a great advantage to have the Judges from Westminster-hall to preside in the Courts of Cheshire. It was notorious that the Chief Justice of Chester had generally been appointed from different motives, and upon different principles from those acted upon in the appointment of other Judges. In this point of view, therefore, there would be a decided advantage to the county of Chester; but he was far from thinking that it would be advisable to annihilate its Courts altogether, and amalgamate the peculiar judicature of that county with the general system. The inhabitants of Cheshire had a right to ask for the retention of the peculiar advantages of which they were in possession. It might be said that if this system of judicature in the county of Chester had peculiar advantages, why not extend it to other counties? That was a point which the people of Chester had no power to press; but they considered that the law-officers of England should begin by making the English system of law more advantageous and intelligible, before they forced it upon other people. For his part he was not opposed to the principle of the measure, and perhaps it might be altered and remodelled, so as to render it less objectionable. He must, however, candidly confess, that the people of the county of Chester wished to retain their own peculiar institutions. If it were wished to conciliate them, it might be effected by modifying some of the most objectionable clauses. Under that hope, he would not presume to say with that understanding,—but with a hope grounded on the reasonableness of the request made by the inhabitants of Chester, he would not give any opposition to the measure in its present stage, as he agreed with the principle of the Bill. If he found at a future stage that the Bill destroyed the peculiar rights and privileges of the county of Chester, and that no alteration was made in it, if the objectionable clauses were retained, he should certainly vote against it. As to the proposition to unite Cheshire to the Welch counties, it was most objectionable. The reasons given against it were so good and so conclusive, that he should add nothing. The decided difference between the manners, habits, customs, and language of the people, formed in his opinion, an insuperable objection; and he trusted that the hon. and learned Gentleman, in opposition to the wishes of all parties, would not seek to put together those whom God and nature had separated.

said, that his object was to accomplish what he was persuaded would prove a great national benefit, with as little opposition as possible, and therefore his aim had been, to remove from the Bill, as far as possible, everything to which objection might be taken. In doing that, however, it was scarcely to be expected that he could conciliate every person, and at the same time be governed by those principles which he considered essential to the value of the measure, and calculated to promote its success. He certainly did not imagine, that by the unaided and native force of genius, he could accomplish all that the hon. Gentleman opposite seemed to suppose himself capable of effecting, and therefore he had endeavoured to avail himself of the suggestions of others as far as he possibly could, for he candidly confessed he did not, like some Gentlemen, entertain an exalted opinion of his own talents. As the Bill had been printed, and was in the hands of hon. Members, it would not be necessary for him to enter into minute explanations of its several clauses; but, once and for all, he begged the House to understand that the Bill was one combined measure; that the addition of the Welsh Circuit made the appointment of new Judges necessary in Westminster-hall, seeing that the business of the Principality was transferred to the Metropolis, and that new regulations were required by those alterations in the Courts. It was evident, therefore, that the whole was essentially one combined measure. The House, too, would see that no clauses were introduced except such as were necessary for carrying the objects contemplated into effect, or such as seemed naturally to grow out of them. He presumed, that were the principle of those alterations once conceded, there would be no doubt that the additional Judges were necessary; for not only would they be required for going Circuit, but it would be necessary also that one of them should always be in London. Those Judges would be necessary for the increased facility and despatch of business, which it was one of the objects of the measure to afford, and which, from the additional labour and increased impediments, would have been defeated but for that precaution. He should now advert to the clauses respecting arrest upon mesne process; he had fixed it at a sum of 100l. and he felt bound to declare thus early, that in principle he could not abandon those clauses. He was free to acknowledge that he should have had no objection to go further, but he had some respect for the opinions of others—he did not think his own powers all-sufficient—he attached some value to the labours and information of other men; but though he did so, he found it impos- sible to accommodate the clause to the views of every one. Some thought it went too far and some thought it did not go far enough—and he became, therefore, the more induced to adhere to his former views, finding that he could not reconcile all the difficulties which presented themselves. He was the more anxious to afford this explanation, as a deputation from the trades of London and Westminster had done him the honour to wait on him, and make representations upon the subject, to which he felt bound to pay attention, and in consequence of which he introduced the clause allowing of a distringas; and which had also induced him to adopt a course respecting another part of the Bill, which he hoped would meet with the approbation of the House. There were some of the clauses which he proposed to withdraw from the committee, intending to give them more mature consideration, and introduce them in the form of a separate bill, or else lay them before the House on the bringing up of the report, so as to make them the subject of a separate discussion, and not mix them up with the other clauses of the Bill. There were none of those clauses which he so intended to withdraw, respecting which he did not intend to reserve to himself the right of bringing them forward again, either in the manner he had mentioned, or next Session, in the form of a separate bill. The hon. and learned Gentleman then entered into the statement of the existing regulations and practice of the Welsh Courts, and contrasting their past state with what he anticipated their future condition would be. The Welsh Courts, he said, were cumbrous and expensive machines; they held ten sittings in each assize town—they hurried through causes with unseemly rapidity, allowing no chance either for compromise or accommodation, and, above all, they were different from the English Courts. Now the principal object he had in view by that Bill, was to put all the Courts in England and Wales on the same footing, and in drawing it up he had the assistance, the valuable assistance, of the hon. member for Rippon, (Mr. Spence.) He pressed upon the attention of the House the necessity of amalgamating the different Courts of the kingdom, and then proceeded to answer the objection made relative to defendants rendering in discharge of bail. To meet that objection he had altered one of the clauses, by which a defendant might be rendered at the gaol of the county in which he resided as readily as at any of the Courts at Westminster—thus the advantages enjoyed by Chester and by Wales would be continued to those districts, and extended to the rest of the country. Another objection had been get rid of by introducing a clause allowing execution to issue within seven days after obtaining a judgment, unless security were given; and he was happy to be able to say that in introducing that clause he had acted agreeably to the recommendations of the commissioners for inquiring into the law. The Bill, he contended, would give increased facilities for obtaining judgment, and issuing execution on application to a Judge. The learned and hon. Gentleman showed that it would be advantageous to landlords in the protection which it afforded against spoliation and waste; while creditors, from the advantages it gave them, would find themselves in a better situation than before. These were, he trusted, sufficient answers to those Gentlemen who opposed the Bill because it would injure the inhabitants of Chester. They would find that the ground of their objections was removed by the new clauses he had introduced. He then noticed the extreme horror which some of the Welsh counties seemed to entertain of being combined with others, pointing out at the same time the advantage which that combination would secure to them of enjoying the services of a more enlightened Jury and a more numerous and better-qualified bar. If it would be the means of preventing opposition (though he had no great hopes of that,) he should have no objection to introduce a clause to make it incumbent on the Judges to go to the different counties where the assizes were appointed to be held, and subsequently to meet at Chester. The hon. and learned Gentleman concluded by moving that the Speaker leave the Chair.

said, that the Bill, when he first saw it, was but the skeleton of a bill. It was now considerably altered; that was to say, limbs had been amputated, and features had been added, so as completely to change its appearance; and what with the additions which had been tagged on, and what with the parts which had been detruncated, it was quite something else from what it had originally been. It seemed to him to be chiefly divided into three parts—the appointment of new Judges in Westminster Hall; the raising the liability of arrest to 100l. and the abolition of the Welsh Judicature. In a great measure he thought the Bill objectionable; and he should therefore vote against it, till this great boon, which, he supposed, was what had been so pompously held out in the Speech from the Throne, at the commencement of the Session, was put into a somewhat more palatable shape, as far as the public was concerned. He thought that the proposed rise in the standard of arrest was so large, that instead of its being hurried on in this way, at the close of the Session, it ought to have been announced long previously, so as to afford an opportunity of collecting the sentiments of those most interested in the alteration. With respect to the appointment of new Judges, as the Judges themselves were of opinion that it ought to take place, and as the Welsh Judicature was to be done away with, that measure, perhaps, was the least objectionable of the three. He, however, could not understand the principle upon which Parliament was called upon to legislate on this subject. One hon. and learned Gentleman, who wanted to have the law of England altered, proposed to do it by consolidation, while the Attorney General, in altering the law of Wales, wanted to do it on the plan of division and subdivision. He would not take upon himself to pronounce which of the two was right; but this he would say, that one must be wrong. He objected to the arrangement of the counties being left to the King in Council; that arrangement ought to be definitively settled by the provisions of the Bill itself. As proposed at present, there was to be a power in the Crown to consolidate the counties, and a power in the Crown, pro hâc vice, to appoint the Sheriff. If it was proposed to join Carmarthen to the nearest English county, and so on, he should be able to understand it; but as now managed, a man was never to know to what country he belonged. The whole of this arrangement of counties appeared to him to be so anomalous, that he did not hesitate to say that it was directly unconstitutional. It was not even fixed when the change should take place; but the whole appeared to be left to the hand of chance, or to the good providence of God knows who. This arrangement might be altered at pleasure too; and the consequence would be, that he who was an Englishman one day might be a Cambrian the next, and the individual himself would be quite puzzled to say "to what country he belonged."

Colchus an Assyrius, Thebis nutritus an Argis.

There was another part of the Bill which was still more objectionable—the alteration in the Courts of Equity in Wales. He had often heard the Welsh Judges abused in that House; but he might observe that the Welsh Courts of Equity had never been found fault with; and in all his experience as a lawyer, he had never known but two cases brought from those Courts on Appeal to the House of Lords. He could not sec what necessity there was for bringing up all the business of Wales to the Court of Exchequer. He should be sorry, however, to oppose any alteration, if something like an intelligible bill could be introduced. This Bill, certainly, was not of that description; and, unless some more efficient and unobjectionable plan should be proposed, he could not give it his support. He pledged himself to watch those sham changes in the law, which were calculated to do any thing but promote the ends of justice; and unless the Bill were completely altered in the committee, he should resist it in all its stages.

opposed the Bill. The great complaint against the law of this country was its expense; and it appeared to him that the present measure was rather calculated to increase than diminish that.

wished to say a few words on this occasion, chiefly because he had been intrusted with the presentation of a Petition against the measure now under consideration, from a most important town in the county of Chester, the populous town of Macclesfield. He intended to present that petition this evening, but had not an opportunity of doing so; he therefore begged to state that the inhabitants of Macclesfield were decidedly against the measure, and no parties were more deeply interested in its progress. Their petition ought to be attended to; and on such a subject the humblest petition which came from the county, or the smallest remonstrance which it sent forth, on a subject of vital consequence to its interests, ought to receive the most serious consideration. All the large towns in the great and wealthy county of Chester were opposed to the Bill. It was not to be supposed for one moment, that the well- informed, and well-disposed inhabitants of that county, could be mistaken on a matter so nearly affecting their interest. They wanted naturally enough to know what they were to receive, before they consented to an alteration in their ancient system. It would be presumption for him to go minutely into the discussion of the measure, since the subject had been so ably handled by the hon. and learned Gentleman near him. But he begged to make a few remarks with respect to those individuals whose petition he had not yet presented. They knew their own interests, and they felt that, under the general administration of justice in this country, those interests were safe; 'but when he found that the Grand Jury and Magistrates of the county had petitioned against the Bill, that the large town of Macclesfield, one of the most important places in the county of Chester, rejected this measure—when he observed that the voice of the people was decidedly against receiving a boon of this sort, the House ought to look with great suspicion at the measure. Let it take care, lest by its negligence it committed an injustice, when it intended to confer a benefit. He heard, with surprise, his Majesty's Attorney-General speak, not of individual prejudices, but of county prejudices. How many counties were there in this kingdom? and where were their prejudices to be seen? The parties who would be affected by this measure, spoke of those alterations without that feeling of animosity which the hon. and learned Gentleman supposed to exist. In his opinion, the amalgamations which the hon. and learned Gentleman proposed, ought to be clearly and distinctly pointed out. Nothing should be left to doubt or conjecture, and for the House to allow the alteration to be made by his Majesty's Ministers was not consistent with the constitution of this country, and the feelings of the people. It was placing far too much confidence in the administration. The whole of the hon. and learned Gentleman's intentions ought to be plainly and distinctly stated. The country ought to understand his proposition thoroughly. Something very convincing might perhaps have been said in favour of this Bill before he came into the House; but he had heard very little to induce him to support it. The people wished for cheap and expeditious justice—they wished to have it carried to their doors, these were the main points to which they looked. They did not ask for the increase of law-officers; it was not to serve a purpose of that kind that an alteration in our system should be attempted, but solely for the purpose of satisfying the country at large. When the population of. the rich and extensive county of Chester arrayed themselves against this measure, there were strong grounds why Parliament should ponder long before it gave this Bill the force of law. The hon. and learned Gentleman observed, that some part of the local jurisdiction of the county Palatine of Lancaster ought to be reformed. Why then did he not proceed to reform the palatinate jurisdiction of that county? That which he wished to alter, was the oldest palatinate jurisdiction in this country. It had lasted for the greater part of a thousand years. If the hon. and learned Gentleman dealt with one, let him also deal with all. Let him reform the jurisdiction of Durham and of Lancaster, as well as of Chester. This would be fair, especially at the moment when an attempt was made to assimilate the general law of the land. There was no reason why a particular favour should be conceded to the palatinate jurisdiction in those counties, merely on account of its being so ancient (and certainly they had no other claim), while, in the case of Chester, that species of claim was set aside. There were other parts of the Bill to which he entertained serious constitutional objections. He thought that a whole and entire system, reformed and improved throughout, ought to be introduced, in order that those whose peculiar customs were to be sacrificed should know what they were to receive in return; that those whose long-exercised and deeply-cherished rights were to be set aside by these projected alterations, should be made perfectly acquainted with the situation in which they were hereafter to stand. As to that portion of the measure which related to the law of arrest, he objected strongly to it. Though far from advocating harsh or cruel proceedings, in cases of this nature, still he wished that the honest creditor should receive proper protection. But how did this new provision effect that? It gave the great and rich creditor an advantage, while it took from the small and poor creditor his chief protection. He to whom a thousand pounds were due might arrest his debtor; but the poor creditor, to whom a debtor owed less than a hundred pounds, could not reach him. He had less remedy than the rich man, though the smaller sum was probably of greater importance to him than the larger was to the wealthy man. It was wrong, that the poor man should be placed in such a situation, and it would appear especially so when it was recollected that the rich man was less liable to give credit, or be seriously injured by losses. He was of opinion, that a very narrow and contracted view had been taken of the whole subject. The Petition which he meant to lay on the table spoke the unanimous opinion of one of the most important towns in the kingdom, the inhabitants of which had honoured him by intrusting it to his hands; and he called on the House to recollect, that it was dealing with ancient rights, with rights long exercised, and still deeply cherished, and which the petitioners earnestly prayed they might be allowed to retain. The Bill gave to the petitioners nothing which they regarded as an equivalent for these rights. Such too was his opinion, and it was out of respect to that opinion that the petitioners had done him the heartfelt honour of intrusting him with their petition.

said, that the Welsh Administration of Justice required amendment, but he objected to taking away the whole Welsh jurisdiction. That, the Welsh regarded as one of their greatest privileges, to which nothing offered by that or any other bill could possibly be an equivalent.

said, he believed that the feelings of the great majority of the inhabitants of Chester were, as the hon. Member who had already spoken, said, decidedly hostile to the measure. He was happy to hear that some of the points recommended to the consideration of the Attorney General were likely to meet his favourable consideration, and he hoped they might do something to make the Bill more palatable to the people of that county. He hoped that the hon. and learned Gentleman would not unite the large and populous county of Chester, containing 100,000 inhabitants, with the small counties in its neighbourhood. On the whole, he was glad that the Bill had been amended, but he could not yet give it more than a very languid support.

expressed his regret that there was not time to enter into a full discussion of the measure then before the House, which he considered very important, both from its general principles, and from the local advantages it proposed to confer. He was surprised to hear the objections made by the hon. Member for Newark, more particularly as the Bill went to take from Ministers a greater quantity of patronage, which, (greatly to their credit, they gave up,) than had been resigned by any Ministers of the Crown since the Revolution. They abandoned that source of patronage, the appointing of the Welsh Judges. As he understood also there was a measure in progress which went to abolish eighteen or twenty places in Scotland, causing a great saving (though in this he was not so sanguine) to the public. He could not agree with those Gentlemen who had attacked the Bill, towards which he felt himself attracted. With regard to introducing additional Judges into the English system, he thought the state of the country, when twelve Judges were first appointed, justified that. Six hundred years ago there were twelve Judges, and now there were one hundred times as much business as at that time. At present it was impossible, with all the skill of the Judges, to keep down business in the Court of King's Bench. To force parties into another Court, as was sometimes proposed, would be as unfair and unjust, as to make them toss up for a decision. No Legislative Act could remedy this, but it might be remedied without an Act of Parliament. If his hon. and learned friend would only go into another Court,. he would carry the business with him, but a law could not carry it. The public would go to those Barristers in whom they had confidence. The Courts of Equity might be curtailed of their business by taking some of it to the Courts of Common Law. There were conflicting systems of law, and within ten minutes walk of each other in Westminster Hall. A mortgage which was not paid would, at Common Law, be foreclosed, and the estate would be forfeited; when, in Chancery, the party might have the estate reconveyed to him, and the foreclosure set aside. A Court of Common Law might, in this case, perform the function of a Court of Equity. He recommended giving to the Common Law Courts an equitable jurisdiction in such cases, instead of sending them, when they had been already heard in a Court of Common Law, to remain undecided in a Court of Equity. With reference to local alter- ations he recommended that Liverpool, Manchester, and Warrington, should have their Courts at Chester, within a few miles, instead of going sixty miles; hut the county of Chester ought to have the advantage of the Lancaster Court of Common Pleas. On the whole he supported the measure, expecting from it great improvement and great advantage to the country.

complained of the manner in which the Bill had been brought in, and thought that it was such a mixture of different things that it must be divided into three Bills. He objected also, as there were no petitions praying for such an alteration for Wales, to taking away the local jurisdictions from that country. He was of opinion that the Bill could not well he passed this Session, and he hoped the Ministers would reconsider the measure.

said, that it was usually considered the most painful duty of a government to oppose reform;—but here, the greatest difficulty the Government lay under was, when they attempted to effect improvement. The object was to render law cheap and expeditious; and for such an object local distinctions ought to be sacrificed. Hon. Gentlemen, on this occasion, had altogether omitted the principle, although this was the stage for discussing it, and had involved themselves in details which would be properly considered in committee. He appealed to the House whether there were not alterations needed in the Courts here, so as to equalise the business; and if three additional Judges were necessary, what objection could the people of Wales have to the presence of these three Judges to despatch their business, instead of the present number of eight, who were gentlemen practising at the bar, and perhaps Members of that House. It should be recollected that the people of Wales had often complained that their Judges had not salaries adequate to make them independent; and this, if there were no other reason, ought to satisfy them with the appointment of independent Judges, whose time would be altogether directed to the administration of justice. He would not go into the details of the Bill, but repeated his wish that it might be allowed to go into committee.

declared himself hostile to the measure, in principle and in detail. He should betray his duty to the county which sent him to Parliament if he did not oppose the Bill to the utmost of his power.

had many objections to the details of the Bill, but would vote for going into a committee.

concurred with the Home Secretary, and thought that no Member had a right to oppose the Speaker's leaving the chair on the ground of objection to details instead of principle. He asked, was there any one who was satisfied with the present number of Judges or with the present state of the Welsh Judges? Was there any one who wished that these Judges, practising at the bar, and influenced, perhaps, by political motives, should be not of the same class, of a different stamp, and of another character, from the other Judges who were to administer the laws of the land? There was a great cry throughout the land for a reform of the law, but directly the Government tried to carry any reform into execution, one Member cried out "dont touch this," anoother cried out "dont touch that;" one cautioned the Government against meddling with the ancient jurisdiction of a Principality, and another talked of the rights of a county palatinate, and if they were to go on so, all reform would turn out to be idle declamation. Hon. Members made various objections to the measure, but at all events they ought to go into the committee.

opposed the measure, and especially the union of Welsh and English counties. It would be better for Government to remedy the abuses of the Court of Chancery than meddle with the Welsh Judicature, which was well administered.

hoped that the Attorney General would not press that stage at present. After a conversation in which Mr. Cutlar Ferguson, Mr. C. Wynn, Mr. D. W. Harvey, and Mr. Jones, took part, the House went into Committee. Some amendments were agreed to, and the further consideration appointed for Thursday next.