On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    this debate can be resumed . My noble friend ( lord John Bussell ) was compelled to leave the house , as he is sufferinff-under some degree-of indisposition ; but when he was loavinff , he stated that , in the present state of public business , he coujd not consent to give a day . It is all very ' well for the honourable member , for Cambridgeshire ( Mr . Ji . Ball ) to say his motion is of great importance .- I do _ not undervalue its importance ; but it is not a matter that presses , and he can take some other Tuesday—there ; will be no lack of Tuesdays —( roars of laughter ) -upon which he can bring it forward . I think next Tuesday would be a very fitting day for the resumption of the debate . ( . No . ) be )

    At all events , let the debate now adjourned . ( No , no . Conversation of a most desultory kind followed , in which Sir John Pakington tried to explain why he had voted against his own motion for adjournment , and Mr . Hildyard mentioned that early in the evening he had requested Mr . Keating not to bring on the debate , as it could not be properly treated at a late hour ; therefore Mr . Keating could not complain of the present proceedings . Another division then took place , but the adjournment of the delate was again rejected by 98 to 64 . This increased the confusion . Mr . C . Berkeley moved as an amendment " that the

    Mercantile Marine Bill be now read . " Sir William Jolliffe implored the house to divide on the main question . Lord Palsiekston suggested that the debate should be taken at the morning sitting that day . ( It was now half-past three . ) Mr . Disraeli said lie would accept an adjournment of the house as negativing the motion : Mr . Keating of course being free to raise it again . The adjournment of the house was then carried by 100 to 59 .

    THE INDIAN BILL IN COMMITTEE . Last night the House went into committee on the Indian Bill . Matters went on very quietly . On the motion for going into committee , Mr . Blackett said that after the division on the second reading there was no hope that the decision of the House on this subject would be reversed . But he remarked upon the existing uncertainty whether the

    East India Company would , after the passing of the Bill , consent to retain their commercial character as regarded India , inasmuch as any information before the House showed that "the Company entirely dissented from this measure . He also complained that the present Bill , from the way in which it was framed , revived all the acts which had been passed on the subjecb of India , including that of 1833 , all of which ought to have been consolidated .

    Sir Charles Wood stated that there was no reason to suppose that the East India Company would not be prepared to undertake the administration of Tndia under any measure which it might seem good to Parliament to pass , and in reference to the revival of the act of 1833 , he remarked that almost all the provisions of that act were of a permanent character . As for the consolidation of the laws relating to India , desirable as it might be , the task was too gigantic to afford any reasonable prospect of its accomplishment .

    Mr . Brioht urged that the very difficulty of consolidation was a reason for its being attempted , and its not being done was another proof of the unstatesmanlike way in which the bill was being passed . Mr . John Piijxlimoke said that legislation for 150 millions of people was being performed in a way utterly unworthy of u civilized country . Mr . Hume at some length urged that it would bo far better to delay legislation .

    In Committee various amendments wore proposed , but they wero all defeated by Ministers , and only two camo to a division . First , on clause one , attempts were inado to limit the bill to ten years , and place India under the government of the Crown . These wcro Mr . Piiinn ' b propositions . Ho withdrew tho ibrmor , but took a division on tho latter ; when his amendment wi » h rejected by 127 to 34 . Then , on clause two , a groat diversity of opinion prevailed an to what number of persons the Court of Directors . should consist of ; and parties wcro quito broken up in discussing tho clause .

    Lord . FoouiiVN moved , as an amendment , to substitute 24 for 18 , and that t . he quorum ( should bo 13 instead of . 10 . Ho thought that tho retaining Iho pro-. sent number would make tho body morn efficient " iibr riiHciiNsing important questions . ( Strangely enough tho Indian reformers , Mr . BitiViirr , Mr . Piut / umorio , and Lord Stani / k y , championed tho Government against the Kusfc India Company , whoso representatives , liko Mr . Manoi / kh and Mr . Bauinu , opposed , the clause Tho amendment wan rejected by 180 to 85 , and tho cIiuiho agreed to . Tho chairman then , on the motion of Sir Cuaklkh Wood , reported progress .

    flirO ( VKRHTON DUTY 1 ) 11 , 1 ,. DlscuHHion on tho clauses of this bill was resumed on Mouthy . Mr . Wau » oi ; k objected to tho duuso wlutih tliHuUowH incmnbrnncoM creatfld by ilin successor nuuBuU , arguing that it wna unfair to tax a man on tho

    nominal value of a property , reduced as it might be by those incumbrances . On a division , Mr . Walpole ' s proposed amendment was rejected by 124 to 116 . But Mr . Gladstone afterwards partly conceded the point , by inserting words allowing tho successor for any iinonies laid out in permanently improving the estate . To the clause making trustees responsible hi the first instance for the tax , Mr . Waxpole strongly objected . Trustees would not be found to act with such liability hanging over them . After a short debate , the clause was altered so as to make the trustees answerable only for the money passing through their hands . The clause , imposing a penalty on concealment of the value of succession , was opposed by Sir John Pakington and Sir Fitzrox Kelly , but carried on

    a division by 161 to 139 . The clause compelling the production of title deeds , settlements , &c ., that the value of a man ' s interest might be ascertained , was sturdily combated by Mr . Mitllings and many others ,, as giving an opportunity of exposing chance flaws in titles to those who would contest the owner ' s claim . Mr . Gladstone pointed out that without this power , the tax could not be assessed ; that the inspection of the title deeds would be select and secret , and that lie would insert a pi-oviso making it necessary to get the order of a Judge in

    Chambers for the production of the deeds . But the Opposition were not satisfied : they divided and were beaten by the narrow majority of 6 , the numbers being—For the clause , 78 ; Against it , 7 2 . Sir William Jollifeg then attempted to confine the documents that should be produced to such documents as leases , plaus , court and rent rolls , but after much pertinacious protests by the Opposition , the clause was carried by 101 to 94 ; the only part struck out being that which allowed officers to take extracts and copies of title deeds—this concession by Mr . Gladstone being received with " loud cheers " by the Opposition .

    Mr . Walpole moved that the tax should be enacted for " five years . " It was so vexatious and annoying that the country would not bear it any longer . Mr . Gladstone explained that this tax in its early years would be unproductive , and that it would take five years before any single estate would have paid the whole amount of duty . Mr . Diseaeli and Lord Galway suggested that as this tax was avowedly intended as a compensation for the inequalities of tho Incometax , it should be co-extensive with the Income-tax , and expire like it in 1860 . This amendment was rejected by 195 to 125 .

    A proviso to prevent legacy duty being levied on the landlord , on the determination of leases on lives on his estate , was introduced by Mr . Gladstone . It was also provided that monies paid on tho death of a third party , in fulfilment of a bond , should not be considered

    a su . In lieu of tho clauso taxing timber , ( thrown out by Sir John Trollop *} and the Opposition , ) some weeks ago , Mr . Gladstone brought forward a clause , taxing the landholder only for the monies received on the sale of timber . Sir John Trollope again objected to this , as raising a perpetual running account ; and Mr . Vernon Smith pointed out how annoying it would bo to a landlord , to keep an account of small portions of timber , hedge-rows , for instance , cut down to relieve a farm . Mr . Gladstone said that a minimum could bo fixed , beneath which the tax should not go . The new clause was carried by 195 to 179 .

    The remaining clauses wero thon agreed to , and tho bill was reported , amid cheers from tho Government benches .

    ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS . Mr . Collier , shortly re-statod tho evils of tho Ecclesiastical Courts , and introduced a Bill to redress thorn . Their jurisdiction is usurped . There is an immense number of them , archicpiscopa ] , episcopal , archidiaconal , diuconnl , and peculiar—372 in all , tho limits of whoso jurisdiction it in often vory difficult to ascorlain . By tho law of hoiid nolabilUt it is necessary to go through probates in two courts , sometimes more . Tho courts decido on written depositions without vlv / i vocc examination or tho intervention of a jury , and it is necessary to employ a proctor as well am an attorney . Tlicro are enormous sinecures nTworbing a vast amount

    of money in loos , sometimes hold by superannuated old men , and in other canes by women and children , who perform tho duties by deputies and deputy-deputies ; and notwithstanding the great cost ; to tho public , there is no proper registration of wills or fit places for their custody . Litigation respecting wills is carried on simultaneously in the courts of common law , courts of equity , and ecelesiiiHticul courts . With r-espeefc to tho jurisdiction of those courts over divorces , church-rates , brawling in churches , defamation , and other matters of such kind , nothing but u total abolition of tho courts can settle tho question . But tho proponed , bill deals with tho chief jurisdiction pf thceo

    courts—the testamentary jurisdiction . It transfers the decision on all undisputed wills , and on wills involving property under the value of 300 J . to the County Courts , making the districts of these courts districts also for testamentary judicature . Every person who dies within the district" shall have his will proved there . The law of bond notabilia is abolished , a simple system of registration is established , and the treatment of real and personal property is assimilated . All cases of testamentary property over the value of 300 / . would be tried in the superior Courts of Common Law—wTiere the judges have now much time on their hands , owing to

    the operations of the County Court . An argument in favour of this change is , that the Courts of Common Law visit * the provinces , and thus parties could get their cases tried at home . The Courts of Common Lawwould decide regarding the proof of the will , the Court of Chancery would , as at present , decide equitable questions arising out of it . His proposal then is , that the Common Law Courts have power in cases above 300 / ., and in appeal cases , that a clerk of probates should be attached to each court ; that the metropolitan County Court should be consolidated into one court of probate , and proctors are to have the power of practising as attorneys in any court in the county .

    " It may be said that this is a somewhat sweeping measure , but the time has come when sweeping measures of law reform are absolutely necessary . Hitherto all our efforts in the cause of law reform have been little better than patchwork . I know that the country do not take the same interest in matters connected with the administration of justice as in the grant to Maynooth . ( Hear , hear . ) The cause of law reform has never had its Covent-gardens or Exeter-halls , but it would be creditable to the Legislature to deal "with these questions without any pressure from without . Law reform haa been left almost entirely in the hands of lawyers ; and though it cannot be said that they have disregarded it , I am afraid

    that the legal mind generally labours under a malady which I may describe as an undue preponderance of the Conservative element—too great an attachment to forms and precedents ; and the consequence of this is that the machinery by which the administration of the law in thia country is carried on , has often become inconvenient and cumbrous , and clogged by the accumulation of the useless dust of ages . ( Hear , hear . ) The suitor in equity is often compelled to resort to a courf ^ of common law—th © suitor in common law is often compelled to resort to a court of equity—and here there is a third syste ' m—that of the ecclesiastical—which possesses none of the advantages or recommendations either of a court of equity or of a court of common law . ( Hear , hear . )"

    Lord Palmebston , speaking for the Government , cordially consented to the introduction of the bill . The ends of justice in this court , though attained in most cases , are still arrived at by circuitous and thorny paths , through sloughs and quagmires which some never pass . The Government are by no means indifferent to the subject , but the pressure of other topics on the House has put it out of their power to introduce a bill of their own . Next session they will bring in a measure calculated to remove the evils alluded to by Mr . Collier . Mr . Hadmeld censured the present Lord Chancellor for his obstruction of law reform . Sir BENJAMIN

    Hall blamed the Government for not having introduced such a bill as that proposed by Mr . Collier , and instanced a late case , raised by Archdeacon Denison , where a question of vital importance to tho Church could not bo decided in tho Ecclesiastical Courts , on account of tho great expenso of their proceedings . Sir Bonjamin quoted lato returns , showing the perversion of Church property . The llev . 11 . Moore , whose caao has excited so much disgust , is in tho annual receipt in the province of Canterbury of 10 , 894 ? . 6 s . 6 d ., and having held the office 53 years ho has received no less for a sineeuro office than the sum of 577 , 399 / . 4 s . 6 d .

    ( Hear , hear , hear . ) Tho llev . It . Watson , son of the Bishop of Llandaff , was appointed to the office of registrar at tho ago of 5 years , and having held it 59 years , had received tho sum of 40 , 303 / . Is . 8 ^ d ., although he nover set foot in tho dioceso for forty years . Not content with that appointment , the right i-ov . prclato got him appointed to a' sinecure receivership at 8 years of age , and having held that office for 56 years , ho has received the sum of 27 , 720 / . for doing

    nothing . ( Hear , hear . ) In tho diocese of Norwich there are some appointments well worthy of attention . The Itcv . II . A . Bathurst , who was appointed registrar of tho court at 0 years of ago , has held tho olfico 17 yours , during which ho has received the sum of 13 ( 50 / . The Rev . E . Bathurfit , who was appointed at 10 years of aigo , has held tho office 27 years , and recoived 38 , 540 / . Captain Bathurst , who was appointed receiver at 3 years of age , has hold tho offico 28 years , ami recoived . 1 . 680 / . The total amount recoived by tho present possessors of sineeuro offices connected with tho ecclesiastical

    courts is 1 , 146 , 128 / . 14 . v . 9 | r / . After n promise from tho Attorney-General , that tho Government would attend to tho question of further roiforma in the Ecclesiastical Courts , leavo was given to bring in tho bill .

    Untitled Article

    652 THE LEADER . [ Saturday ,

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), July 9, 1853, page 652, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1994/page/4/