to try all actions of tort-as assault and as applied to the chance which the bill battery-libel, and seduction, malicious had of receiving the sanction of their arrest-suing out commissions of bank- Lordships; but, with all the advantages ruptcy, and, in fact, of all personal ac- of his noble and learned Friend, which his tions, provided the damages sought to be great powers of mind brought to bear recovered did not exceed 50%. There was against the measure, and which even those another and most important part of the powers would have found unavailing withmeasure which he valued if possible still out the additional advantage of having had more, namely, that the judges of the county a majority acting with him, it was some courts should have a voluntary jurisdiction consolation to him (Lord Brougham), in actions to any amount and of any de- that after a full discussion of its merits, in scription where the consent of both parties a by no means thin attendance, there were was given in writing. Thus parties who eighty-one noble Lords divided on one side, consented might have justice administered and eighty-one or eighty-two, he could not in actions to any amount and respecting recollect which, divided on the other. That rights of any kind real, personal, or was, there were so many noble Lords premixed, at, he might say, their own sent who heard the discussion; but the predoor. There was a part of the former ponderance against the bill arose out of bill which he would also propose to that inherent and exclusive privilege which retain he meant the courts of recon- their Lordships only, of all other bodies in cilement, which had been productive of the kingdom, possessed, of voting by so much advantage in preventing litiga- proxy. By the exercise of that privilege, tion wherever they had been tried. He which enabled any of their Lordships to might mention that in one country, not record their votes for or against any meathat in which it had been first applied, sure, which they never heard discussed, but one in which it had worked the and to the merits of which possibly they best, the kingdom of Denmark, its effects might never have given a thought, his bill had been so salutary, that out of 31,000 had been defeated-defeated by the proxy causes entered for hearing, 21,000 had votes of some twelve or thirteen noble Lords, been settled by this court of reconcile- who had decided on a cause which they ment; thus saving the parties a great deal had not heard. Though he admitted of vexatious litigation and a vast amount that in this there was something discouof expense. This branch of the measure raging to him in again laying on the he would retain in his present bill, and, in Table the same bill, still there was also fact, he did not propose to make any something to encourage him to proceedmaterial alteration, save in the 19th sec- that was, the hope that, after the experience tion, which related to courts of requests. of nine years, their Lordships would not He had saved their jurisdiction by a clause be content with a less improvement of the in the bill of 1833; he proposed now to local administration of justice than that abolish it. The bill gave the local courts to which they had so nearly consented on full jurisdiction in bankruptcy, and in the former occasion, surely, they never aid of the Court of Chancery, both as could now rest satisfied with a smaller to examination of evidence and various measure. Besides this almost sanction other matters now done, expensively of their Lordships, let him add that the and badly, by commissioners as in the bill had the full approbation of the ComMaster's-office. With these few intro- missioners of Common Law Inquiry, to ductory remarks, he would now lay the whom it had been referred. It had also bill on their Lordships' Table. He did had the sanction of his noble Friends who not say then, since the time when he then sat on that (the Ministerial), but who had first introduced this measure, their now sat on this (the Opposition) side of Lordships were going forward with respect the House. He hoped that neither the to judicial improvements; but he hoped lapse of time, nor the change of circumhe might say they were not going back- stances, would be found to have altered ward. Their Lordships were at one time their opinion on it. He reckoned at least very near" consenting to this bill, such on their support. They (the present Opas he had described it. He could easily position) had in 1833, given his larger imagine the feeling of triumph with which plan of Law Reform their hearty, strenuhis noble and learned Friend on the wool-ous and united support. He might cersack would hear the words "very near," tainly rely upon their giving the same

plan the same steady and unhesitating support now, which they had lent it when in office.

The Lord Chancellor said, that his noble and learned Friend was quite right in saying, that the numbers who voted in the House on his bill were equal, and that there were thirteen proxies; but he would not then enter into any discussion as to how far the merits of the case were touched by that circumstance. He would now only add, that it was his intention to lay on the Table in a few days, a bill having the same object as that of his noble and learned Friend. There would be then three bills on the same subject before the House, including that of his noble and learned Friend (Lord Cottenham). It would be for their Lordships to decide which of those they should adopt, or whether they would frame a measure by amalgamating all three.

Lord Campbell expressed a hope that, before the present session closed, some measure might be passed for establishing improved local courts. We were the only

country in Europe which was without such courts. It was true we had county courts and manorial and borough courts, but they had for the most part fallen into disuse from the want of efficient judges to preside over them.

Bill read a first time.

HOUSE OF COMMONS,

Monday, February 28, 1842.

MINUTES.] BILLS. Public.-20. Railways.

Private.-20. Granton Pier; Cwm Celyn Iron Co.; Cam-
brian Iron Co.; St. Philip's (Bristol) Bridge; Bristol
Boundary; Staleybridge Gas; Clee Inclosure; Southwark

Improvement (No. 1); Cottenham Inclosure; Cottenham
Drainage.

Considered.-Marriages (Ireland); Corn Importation.

Reported.-Van Dieman's Land; Apprentices Regulation. ford Chamber of Commerce, Colonel Acton, from the county of Wicklow, and Sir D. Roche, from the Limerick ties.-By Mr. W. Evans, from Chesterfield, Dr. Bowring,

PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Mr. Christmas, from Water

Chamber of Commerce, against the proposed Corn Du

from Traders in Manchester, and other places, Sir W.

Clay, from Hackney, and other places, Lord Duncan, Mr.
MacTaggart, Mr. Vernon Smith, and Mr. D. Barclay,

from Sunderland, and several other places, for the Total

Repeal of the Corn-laws.-By Colonel Conolly, Sir W. Bateson, Sir C. Hayes, Mr. Emerson Tennent, and Colonel Verner, from Presbyterian Congregations in various places (Ireland), for Legalizing certain Marriages by Dissenting Ministers.-By Mr. Brotherton, from Oldof Females in Coal Mines.-By Sir H. Douglas, from Liverpool and Manchester Railway Company, and Grand

ham, and from William Binney, against the Employment

Junction Railway Company, against the Railways Bill.-
By Mr. Burroughes, from Millers of Norwich, Viscount
Sandon, from Millers in the neighbourhood of London,

kenny, for Protection for the Manufacture of Flour.-By Mr. R. Ferguson, from Londonderry, and Mr. Arkwright, from Sutton, and Duckmanton, in favour of the Ministerial Plan for Altering the Corn-laws.-By an hon. Member, from St. Saviour's, Southwark, and St. Mary-leStrand, for the Redemption of Tolls on the Metropolitan Bridges. By an hon. Member, from Kilcolman, and three other places, for an Alteration in the system of Education (Ireland).-By Sir C. Wilmot, from the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, against the Exportation of Hill Coolies.-From Hay and Reeth Unions, for Alteration of Poor-law Amendment Act.-From James Surrey, for Grinding Bonded Corn for Exportation.From Gateshead, for Better Observance of Lord's Day.

THE POOR OF BOLTON.] Dr. Bowring asked whether the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Home Department would have any objection to lay on the Table a memorial addressed to the Government, praying for relief to the poor of Bolton, with the correspondence thereupon.

Sir James Graham remembered such an

application as that referred to by the hon.

Gentleman, and the answer was, that there He had no objection to produce the mewere no funds disposable for the purpose.

morial and the answer.

LORD ELLENBOROUGH'S SALARY.] Mr. Hutt begged to ask whether Lord Ellenborough would continue to receive the compensation for the office formerly held by him, at the same time that he received his salary as Governor-general of India.

Sir R. Peel said, he apprehended there was no doubt whatever, that the compensation which Lord Ellenborough received for the office to which he was appointed by his father, then Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench, must, under the law, be continued. But a question might arise whether, under the act, which passed at the time of granting the new charter to the East India Company, a corresponding reduction ought not to be made in the salary of Lord Ellenborough, as Governor-general of India. That, however, would be a question between the East India Company and the Governor-general. If it was decided that the compensation paid to his noble Friend was within the scope of the act of Parliament, a corresponding reduction would be made in the salary; but the benefit would be, not to the consolidated fund, but to the revenue of the East India Company. The subject was at present under the consideration of the East India Company. When he proposed to his noble Friend, then a Cabinet Minister and President of the Board of Control, for this

and an hon. Member, from Millers on King's River Kil-appointment, his noble Friend pointed out

1178 to his notice the act of Parliament, and Sir R. Peel had no objection to give said it would be hard in the performance that information also. of a public duty, in accepting the office which he offered him as the person best qualified to succeed Lord Auckland, that his compensation, together with his office as President of the Board of Control, should be given up. But his noble Friend said, that as he accepted office from a sense of public duty, even though the office which he held fell within the provisions of that act, still it would not prevent him from accepting the office of Governorgeneral. It was now entirely a question for the decision of the East India Company. He looked at the act, and he apprehended the Treasury could not stop the compensation.

CONVEYANCE OF CORN FROM AMERICA.] Sir C. Napier asked whether the right hon. Baronet the First Lord of the Treasury had any objection to give a "return of vessels that arrived at Liverpool from America, loaded with corn, from the 1st day of January, 1841, to the first day of January, 1842, specifying the number of days they were on the passage," of which he had given notice.

Sir Robert Peel did not know that there were means of giving the information required. In reference to a statement made by him on a former evening, that an order had been sent from Liverpool to New York, and a cargo returned within six weeks, he wished to state that he did not adduce that as an instance of the average duration of the passage between the two ports, but simply as a fact showing the time within which corn could be brought from America.

Sir C. Napier said, there was an officer whose duty it was to ascertain when each vessel arrived, and the length of her voyage, amongst other particulars.

Sir R. Peel said, if the information could be procured, and given consistently with the usages of Parliament, he should have no objection to give it.

Capt. Fitzroy hoped that, if there were the means of supplying the information asked for by the hon. and gallant Member for Marylebone, the Government would give it. He hoped they would go further. He would ask if the right hon. Baronet would also grant a return of the quantity of flour brought over by American vessels to Liverpool, with the number of days such vessels were on their passage.

Mr. Thornely wished to put a question to the right hon. Baronet, relative to his statement of the time it had taken, in one instance, to get a cargo of flour from America. The right hon. Baronet had stated that an order had been sent to America for flour, which flour had been received in Liverpool in six weeks. He begged to say that he had received a letter from Liverpool, stating that it was fiftyone days from the sending out of the order to the arrival of the flour in Liverpool. The right hon. Baronet had just stated that the flour was received on the 13th September; his informant stated it to be the 24th. He begged to ask the right hon. Baronet whether he had any objection to lay on the Table of the House a copy of the statement he had referred to.

Sir Robert Peel: I read a letter to the House in the handwriting of the person who imported the flour, and if I made any mistake, I am sorry for it. My information stated that the flour was ordered on the 1st of August, and received on the 13th of September. I feel quite sure that this was the statement I received, but I will refer to it again, and give the hon. Member the information he wishes.

ENGLISH REGISTRATION.] In answer to Mr. Elphinstone, Sir R. Peel said, as soon as they had made some progress with the important measure now occupying the House, the next bill to which he should call their attention would be one relating to English registration. He would rather not lay any other bill on the Table till the present measure had made some progress.

FEES TO SHERIFFS (SCOTLAND).] Mr. F. Maule begged to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Home Department a question, to which his attention had recently been drawn, relative to a practice in Scotland, which had been adopted by certain sheriffs. In the case of railways requiring more land, they were frequently in the habit of taking any land contiguous to the railway of which they were in need; and questions not unfrequently arose between the railway company and the former proprietors, as to the amount of compensation to be received by the latter for the land thus taken. In these cases the sheriffs, when called upon to interfere, considering that they were

acting in an extra-judicial duty, believed | business of importance was to be brought themselves entitled to remuneration for on pending the discussion on the Corntheir services. His object in referring to laws. He did not complain, however, of this matter was, that it might be made proceeding with the railway, but respecting known, as he was sure the right hon. the next bill on the orders-namely, the Gentleman would not refuse to call the Colonial Passengers Bill-he wished to attention of the Government to it, and he put a question to the noble Lord the Sewas content, therefore, to leave the matter cretary for the Colonies. Believing it to in the hands of the Government. be precisely the same in principle, though perhaps not in all details, with the bill before the House last year, he (Mr. Hawes) meant to give it his most strenuous opposition. Therefore, he begged to ask the noble Lord, whether he meant to move the second reading of his bill that evening. If so, it would be necessary for him to take the sense of the House on the question. On the other hand, if the noble Lord did not mean to proceed to-night, he trusted he would fix some day when the House would have have an opportu nity of going into a discussion on the second reading. The bill had been only delivered to Members that morning.

Sir J. Graham confessed that, until last week his attention had not been drawn to this subject when he was directed by a paragraph in a newspaper. On general principles, he thought that great inconvenience would arise from officers who received salaries for their official duties, looking for other compensation for their services. If their salaries were not sufficient remuneration for all their duties, they should be increased. But he did not understand that in the case to which the right hon. Gentleman had referred the fees were all paid by one party. He believed that the questions decided were questions of arbitration, and that both parties paid fees to the sheriff. He thought that if that were the case, it would materially alter the complexion of such transactions. However, the subject should not be lost sight of,

Subject at an end.

RAILWAYS.] Mr. Gladstone moved the second reading of the Railway Bill.

Viscount Sandon said, he did not wish to delay the bill passing through a second reading, but he hoped that a pledge would be given by his right hon. Friend, that ample time would be given for going into the consideration of a law affecting this great branch of enterprise in order that communications, if necessary, might be had with parties interested.

Mr. Gladstone said, he believed that no very great time would be required to proceed with this bill; the parties interested were quite alive to its provisions. They had been in communication with the Board of Trade, and would have full time to consider it. He could readily give a pledge that no attempt would be made to interfere with the interests of parties connected with the subject without giving ample time to those parties to make any communication they might think proper.

Bill read a second time.

COLONIAL PASSENGERS.] Mr. Hawes thought it had been understood that no

Lord Stanley had not expected that the bill would receive any opposition. It was true that it had been put in the hands of hon. Members that morning; but it was entirely founded on the report of the commission which hon, Members had had for a fortnight. Looking to the period of the year coming on, he was very anxious for the bill to come into operation during the present year; but if the hon. Member meant to take the sense of the House on the second reading, he should not move it that night, but fix it for some day when it could be discussed.

Second reading deferred.

MARRIAGES (IRELAND).] Lord Eliot moved the Order of the Day for going into Committee on the Marriages (Ireland) Bill,

Mr. G. H. Vernon said, he had in the first instance looked at the measure with some jealousy. He was anxious that a partial measure of this kind should not give any additional effect to what had been understood to be the law. At the same time he was not prepared to say that after close attention to it he had any objection to offer to the general principle of the bill. It was impossible to deny that some colourable construction might be given to the idea which he understood prevailed, that mixed marriages by Presbyterian ministers were invalid, and that contracts might be entered into as if such