MR. WALPOLE: Instead of announcing what I shall do with the clause relating to the accumulative penalty, I would rather reserve my opinion until Monday. I would rather reserve my opinions on all the Amendments until we again go into Committee. House resumed. Committee report progress; to sit again on Monday next. CUSTOMS BILL. have some doubts about it; for, I think, | That is quite sufficient, and I shall oppose in the first place, there is more ambi- any accumulative penalties whatever. guity contained in that clause than in the other two; and there might be some difficulty in enforcing that prohibition. Then, as to the prosecutor's clause, I will state my views more fully on Monday. But it may be convenient now to state that I intend to adopt the suggestion of my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Abingdon. In answer to the observation of the hon. and learned Member for Athlone, with reference to a proviso that no prosecution should be had under the first clause without the consent of the Attorney General, that is the principle of the suggestion made by the hon. and learned Member for Abingdon, and I think the proviso of the hon. and learned Member for Athlone might be incorporated in the proviso of the hon. and learned Member for Abingdon. As to the first and second paragraphs in the preamble, I wish very strongly to press them upon the attention of the House. The result then is, that I intend to press the first two paragraphs in the Amendments to clause No. 2. I intend to adopt the suggestion of the hon. and learned Member for Abingdon, and I intend to take the sense of the House on the two paragraphs of the preamble to which I have now called the attention of the Committee. I do not think that I could well be expected to give them up. LORD JOHN RUSSELL: I am much obliged to the hon. and learned Gentleman for giving me notice of his intentions. As he has stated them, I may say, that I cannot consent, on my part, to any of the Amendments he has stated. There is one Amendment, however, to which I take, perhaps, a stronger objection than to any which he has now stated, and which, I think, still stands on the printed paper. It is the accumulative penalty for a second offence; and finally inflicting the punishment of transportation of the persons assuming those titles [An Hon. MEMBER: The deportation]-but if the person returns, I think that there is notice given that the clause applicable to the Jesuits in the Roman Catholic Emancipation Act shall be applied, which is not deportation, but transportation. I must say I think the penalty in the Roman Catholic Relief Act of 1007. is sufficient. It is a matter that is punishable by no very heavy penalty, but it gives notice to all men that they cannot infringe the law with impunity. Mr. Walpole Order for Second Reading read. MR. DISRAELI said, that at the time when a change of policy took place on the part of the Government, he intimated that in consequence of that great change it was necessary to reconsider the financial arrangements, and that the measures brought forward would not be allowed to proceed without considerable discussion. He therefore hoped the second reading of the Customs Bill would not be pressed at that late hour. The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER had not understood that there was any intention to offer opposition on these subjects, though some discussion was anticipated. Intimation had been made as regarded the repeal of the window tax, that it was not intended to interfere with the measure. MR. DISRAELI said, that he certainly had said it was not intended to interfere in any way as regarded the window tax; but that was before the Resolution had been adopted to vote the income tax for one year only. It was in consequence of that Resolution having been adopted, that he said he thought after that Vote that they were perfectly free on his side of the House to consider the effect of the propositions of the Government with reference to that important vote. Considering the effect of that Vote in his estimation on the finance of the country, and also on public credit, he hoped the Motion would not be pressed then. MR. MITCHELL trusted those interested in the timber trade, and others, would not be left much longer in a state of uncertainty. The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, under present circumstances, and considering the period of the night (half-past Eleven o'clock), he would not press the Motion. He would, however, remind the hon. Gentleman that the Reso lutions had been passed without opposition; and it would be for the convenience of parties interested that a decision should be come to as speedily as possible. MR. DISRAELI felt that an explanation was demanded by the remark of the right hon. Gentleman, who seemed to intimate that after the Resolutions which had been adopted, the House was bound to a certain line. But they had arrived at a different state of affairs. The Budget of the Government was formed on the idea that the income tax would be renewed for three years; therefore he protested against the conclusion suggested by the right hon. Gentleman's observation. Order for Second Reading was deferred till Monday next, as was also the Second Reading of the Inhabited House Duty Bill. a though I beg to guard myself against the supposition that I am favourable to the proposition; but I don't see a single argument in favour of the present Bill, which confirms the propriety of insisting on qualification; but extends it in such a manner as to render it nearly impracticable to ascertain its reality or existence. I think, Sir, likewise, that these alterations in the law would be better considered whenever the question of Parliamentary Reform is raised, as we have learned it is to be in the next Session. We have several Bills now before the House affecting the franchise indirectly, such as the Inhabited House Duty," which is to exempt persons from the house tax whose rent is under 207. a year, while they are still to enjoy the privilege of the franchise, which is based upon the principle of the payment of rates and taxes. This is frittering away impor COLONIAL PROPERTY QUALIFICATION tant general principles, and tampering BILL. Order for Second Reading read. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a Second Time." MR. STANFORD: Sir, I shall very briefly state the reasons why I feel it right to oppose the second reading of this Bill. I do not think it possible to provide any adequate means of testing the correctness of the qualification which it is here proposed to create; for instance, a gentleman gives in to the clerk of this House a declaration that he possesses 600l. a year in Ceylon or in the Punjab. How is the accuracy of this declaration to be tested? Would the House be satisfied with the certificate of some Government official in the colony? I apprehend not. The alternative is to send out a Commission to inquire and report. This is clearly out of the question from the delay and expense. If this Bill passed, the result would be that the House must be satisfied to take entirely upon trust the allegation of the party that he possesses the qualification required by law. Now, Sir, this appears to me inexpedient. So long as the Legislature think it right to require the possession of a certain annual income as a condition of a person sitting in this assembly, so long, I think, it ought to be such as there are means of ascertaining its existence. If the hon. Member had proposed to abolish a property qualification altogether as a condition of sitting and voting in this House, I admit that there is a great deal to be urged in behalf of that course, with legislation in a way I cannot help thinking highly inexpedient; and for these reasons, Sir, I beg leave to move that the Bill be read this day six months. Amendment proposed, "To leave out the word 'now,' and at the end of the Question to add the words upon this day six months.'" MR. HUTT said, that he intended to introduce some clauses which would, he thought, remove the objections of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Reading. MR. SCHOLEFIELD said, that he was opposed to all property qualification, and, therefore, he should give his cordial support to the Motion of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Reading. Question proposed, That the word now' stand part of the Question." Question put. The House divided :-Ayes 72; Noes 21: Majority 51. Main Question put, and agreed to. SEQUESTRATION OF BENEFICES BILL. Order for Second Reading, read. MR. FREWEN, in moving the Second Reading of this Bill, said, that its object was to increase the annual sum which the bishop was by the present law authorised to grant out of the incomes of livings under sequestration for the payment of curates. He knew one living which had been under sequestration for several years, to which five hamlets were attached, and in which there were seven full services each Sunday; and yet the bishop, according to the exist ing law, could only grant 2001. out of the almost unanimous upon the matter, and income for the payment of curates. He having received a deputation of Irish soliknew many cases in which livings of from citors urging him to deal with the subject, 1,000l. to 2,000l. per annum were under he had prepared a Bill which he now sequestration, and yet no larger sum than begged the House to allow him to bring he had mentioned could be granted for this in. purpose. SIR GEORGE GREY hoped that the hon. Member would not press the second reading at that hour of the evening. The whole principle of sequestrations required consideration, and he thought it was doubtful whether it would be advisable to agree to the present measure, which seriously interfered with the rights of creditors, while it did not deal at all with the principle of sequestration. DR. NICHOLL said, that he thought it was well worthy the consideration of the House whether it would not be of the greatest advantage to the Church and the parishioners that sequestration for debt should be entirely abolished; and that, at the same time, some arrangement should be made for spreading the payment of first fruits and fifths by clergymen over several years. The present mode of payment often involved them in a load of debt, which was a continued source of embarrassment. Second Reading deferred till Tuesday next. LAND CLAUSES CONSOLIDATION BILL. MR. LABOUCHERE moved for leave to bring in a Bill to alter and amend certain provisions of the Land Clauses Consolidation Act of 1845 in Ireland. He said, that there were great and peculiar difficulties in Ireland, not existing in England and Wales, with regard to the valuation of land for compensation taken by railway companies. These chiefly arose from the complicated tenure existing in Ireland, and consequently railway companies were put to great and unnecessary expense, and the extension of the railway system in Ireland, which he held to be of the greatest consequence for the development of the resources of that country, was thereby materially impeded. Hence there had been an attempt made to substitute arbitration for jury system; special clauses had been introduced with that view into some Irish Railway Bills last year, and there were similar clauses in Bills of this year. But it had been thought that if this was to be done at all, it should be by some general Bill for Ireland; and, quite agreeing with that view, and finding the Irish Members COLONEL DUNNE was in favour of allowing arbitration where the proprietors of the district wished for it, but could not think it was advisable that there should be a general Act empowering a company to take land at a price fixed by an arbitrator appointed by the Government. Leave given. Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. Labouchere, Sir William Somerville, and Mr. Attorney General for Ireland. The House adjourned at a quarter before One o'clock, till Monday next. HOUSE OF LORDS, Monday, June 2, 1851. MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILLS.-1a Charitable Trusts; Bridges (Ireland). 2 Compound Householders; Arrest of Absconding Debtors; Highways (South Wales). Reported.-Duchy of Lancaster (High Peak Mining Customs and Mineral Courts). CHANCERY REFORM. LORD LYNDHURST said, it appeared by the Votes and Proceedings of the other House of Parliament, that the noble Lord at the head of Her Majesty's Government had given notice of his intention to move for leave to bring in a Bill to improve the Administration of Justice in the Court of Chancery. But it would be in their Lordships' recollection that a similar Motion was made several weeks ago; and he (Lord Lyndhurst) presumed, therefore, that it was the intention of the Government to abandon its former Bill as unsatisfactory, for the purpose of finding a substitute in some other measure. He could only express a hope that his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack had had more hand in preparing the intended Bill, than he had in the preparation of the former one. His (Lord Lyndhurst's) principal object in rising, however, was to direct the attention of his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack to what he considered a matter of great interest and importance as connected with this subject. In the last Session of Parliament a Bill was introduced by the present Master of the Rolls, with a view to a reform of the proceedings in the Court of Chancery in Ireland. That Bill passed the other House of Parliament and their Lord- was that not one single application had ships' House with little or no discussion. been made on the part of the defendant to He (Lord Lyndhurst) was now very de- compel the plaintiff to proceed by bill insirous of knowing what had been the effect stead of by petition. That was conclusive, of that Act. The object of it was ceras far as the defendants were concerned, tainly a very desirable one. It was to that they were satisfied with that mode of facilitate the progress of the proceedings proceeding. With respect to another part of the Court of Chancery in Ireland, and of the subject, their Lordships would pro-what was even more desirable-greatly bably be desirous of knowing what was to diminish the expense of those proceed- the opinion of the supreme Judge of the ings; and accordingly, some days ago, he Court. The supreme Judge of the Court had moved for certain returns connected had the power, without any application on with the proceedings of the Irish Court of the part either of the plaintiff or defendant, Chancery, for the purpose of coming to to direct, if from the nature of the cause some satisfactory conclusion on the sub- he so thought fit, that the proceedings ject. He had found it impossible as yet should be by bill instead of petition. How to obtain those returns; but at the same many times did their Lordships suppose the time he had undertaken to inquire in the supreme Judge had interposed for that highest quarters what had been the result purpose? Not in one single instance. of that Act. He was able to say that the Their Lordships would therefore see that result had been most satisfactory; and he the plaintiffs, the defendants, and the high would very shortly state two or three facts Judge of that Court were equally well which had been communicated to him, satisfied with the new mode of procedure. which would satisfy their Lordships that Now, these were grave considerations, dewhat he had stated was correct. The observing much examination and reflection ject of the Act of last Session was to sub- on the part of his noble and learned Friend stitute summary proceeding by petition, instead of the ordinary cumbrous proceeding by bill and answer, in a suit of Chancery. He had ascertained what number of petitions had been presented to the Court since that Act of Parliament passed. That Act came into operation in August last, and up to the 1st of May of the present year he was informed, upon the highest authority, that 694 causes had been instituted in the Irish Court of Chancery by petition alone. That was a pretty satisfactory conclusion. But their Lordships would be desirous of knowing what were the number of suits instituted by bill and answer in the same time. Perhaps their Lordships would be gratified to know that those suits by bill amounted to the small number of twenty-nine, out of about 700 causes. That was a pretty safe conclusion that the operation of the Act had been satisfactory to plaintiffs, seeing that they might have proceeded by bill and answer, or by petition, just as they chose. Their Lordships might be desirous of knowing how it had operated with respect to the defendants also. In that Act there was a clause by which the defendant was entitled to apply to the Lord Chancellor for an order to direct the plaintiff to carry on the proceedings in the ordinary mode by bill. He had inquired how many such applications had been made to the Lord Chancellor; and the answer he had got with reference to the Bill now in preparation. He (Lord Lyndhurst) had been desirous of obtaining the number of decrees which had been pronounced on those petitions in the suits so instituted. He had mentioned that the number of petitions amounted to 694. Nearly 400 decrees, or orders in the nature of decrees, had been pronounced on those petitions; and had it not been for the circumstance that there was a great arrear of heavy causes before the Court of Chancery when this Bill came into operation, he was assured there would not have been a single petition in which a decree would not have been pronounced. Now, these were facts of the greatest importance. His noble and learned Friend well knew that a summary proceeding by petition lessened in an enormous degree the cost of proceeding, and expedited the suit in an extraordinary manner. He submitted, those matters were well worthy their Lordships' consideration, and in particular the consideration of his noble and learned Friend (the Lord Chancellor). He (Lord Lyndhurst) made no comment on them, but he asked his noble and learned Friend to take them into his consideration at his leisure in connexion with the Bill about to be brought into the other House of Parliament, with a view to a reformation of the course of proceeding in the Court of Chancery. He would leave the matter in the hands of his noble and learned Friend, satisfied he would give every attention to so important a subject. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, his noble and learned Friend had presented their Lordships with important information bearing on the recent alterations in the Court of Chancery in Ireland; but he (the Lord Chancellor) was not precisely aware what his noble and learned Friend's object was in bringing this subject under their Lordships' notice. As his noble and learned Friend had stated, the noble Lord at the head of the Government had given notice elsewhere of his intention to ask for leave to bring in a Bill to reform the proceedings in the Court of Chancery. He would not now enter into the provisions of that Bill; but he could state that every labour had been bestowed upon it, and he hoped their Lordships would consider it satisfactory when it came before them. He confessed that those statements, coming on him on a sudden, and without notice, with regard to the whole course of proceedings in the Irish Court of Chancery, were somewhat embarrassing; but he did not apprehend that their Lordships would expect that he should go into the details brought under their notice by his noble and learned Friend. He could very readily understand that the form of proceeding by bill might be conveniently exchanged for that of petition. If the statement handed to his noble and learned Friend was correct, that 400 orders had been made by one Judge in the Court of Chancery in Ireland since last August, it would be a happy result in this country if counsel would exhibit the same saving of time in their speeches, be they made either upon bill or petition. Their Lordships would find on inquiring that they had had many hundreds of causes commenced by petition in the Court of Chancery during the last year, arising under the Railways Winding-up Act; and he could assure his noble and learned Friend that what he had just stated should be made matter for instant inquiry, and that too with a wish to adopt some similar measure in this country. He should certainly feel much obliged to his noble and learned Friend if he would give him the opportunity of making inquiry before he again directed their Lordships' attention to this subject, if such should be, his noble and learned Friend's intention. He (the Lord Chancellor) did not know what the proceedings had been under the new Act in Ireland, but he thought the statements that had been received should be adopted with some caution; for he could not think an experience lasting only from the month of August last to the present time could be sufficient to warrant the adoption of a definite conclusion. He would, he repeated, make inquiry into its correctness, and then, with the able assistance of his noble and learned Friend, or without it, would adopt such proceedings as would tend to render the transaction of business in the Courts of Chancery more expeditious and less expensive. He hoped that the Bill which would be introduced shortly into the House of Commons would meet the approbation of his noble and learned Friend. In conclusion, he thanked his noble and learned Friend for having called his attention to this matter, and assured him that he should at all times be most happy to receive from him communications in private on a subject which he (Lord Lyndhurst) so well understood as the administration of justice in the Court of Chancery. THE CRIMINAL LAW. LORD LYNDHURST said, he felt obliged for the very courteous manner in which his noble and learned Friend had expressed his readiness to direct his attention to the subject which he (Lord Lyndhurst) had felt it his duty to bring under his notice. He had felt it necessary to make the remarks he had addressed to their Lordships before the Bill was introduced, in preference to waiting for the returns for which he had moved, on account of the short interval which was likely to elapse before the introduction of the new measure. He had now to put a question to his noble and learned Friend on a very important subject-he meant with reference to the Criminal Law. Their Lordships were aware that in 1838 a Commission had been appointed to frame a Digest, or Criminal Code. Those Commissioners had performed their duty with great zeal, industry, and ability. Many thousand pounds had been expended under that Commission. A Digest was prepared by them, and a Bill was brought in, which was read a second time in their Lordships' House, and afterwards referred to a Select Committee. The question he wished now to ask his noble and learned Friend (the Lord Chancellor) was, whether or not it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government to pass over altogether the labours of that Commission, and, if not, to what extent it was meant to adopt or |