Two 12. List of the AYES. Aldam, W. Lascelles, hon. W. S. Macaulay, rt. hn. T. B. M'Taggart, Sir J. Mangles, R. D. Marsland, H. Monahan, J. H. O'Brien, C. O'Brien, T. O'Ferrall, R. M. Ogle, S. C. H. England and Scotland, having only a 51. | The House divided on the question that franchise? He did not think hon. Gentle- the word " now" stand part of the Quesmen opposite, who remembered the decla- tion :-Ayes 108; Noes 120: Majority ration of the right hon. Baronet the late Prime Minister at the end of last Session, would concur in throwing out this Bill. That right hon. Gentleman said "He would extend to Ireland all the rights enjoyed by England; all the civil, political, and municipal rights of England.' The EARL of LINCOLN thought it necessary for the House to reflect whether, by passing the measure before them, they would be assimilating the law of Ireland with that of England. By the English Municipal Corporation Act, boards for sewerage and drainage might, if they thought fit, hand over their powers and functions to the town-councils; but it was not compulsory upon them to do so. years ago, when preparing his Bill on the health of towns, he made some inquiries as to how far this voluntary amalgamation had taken place. He found that in few cases had the local boards made over their powers to the town-councils. In almost all the large towns in England the functions sought to be intrusted to the corporation of Dublin, were exercised by paving and local boards. If the House thought it right to give these powers to the corporations of Ireland, let them do so, but not by a private Bill. He had shown that this Bill proposed, not an assimilation between the practice in England and in Ireland, but a wide deviation from it, when it gave to the corporation of Dublin compulsory powers which the noble Lord opposite not thought it right to confer upon towncouncils in England. He thought that, considering the feeling existing in Dublin respecting this Bill, it ought to be withdrawn. Let the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Labouchere) bring the opposing parties together, and then produce a Bill next Session on the part of the Government which should be free from the objections felt to this measure by the ratepayers of Dublin. very had MR. DILLON BROWNE observed, that this was a subject deeply affecting the rights of the Irish people; for the question was, whether the same municipal institutions which were enjoyed by the people of this country were to be extended to them. If they were anxious to maintain the union between the two countries, they would give the people of Ireland similar municipal institutions to those which had been established in this country. Plumridge, Capt. Earl of Russell, Lord J. Scrope, G. P. Smith, rt. hon. R. V. Thornely, T. Trelawny, J. S. Tufnell, H. Watson, W. II. Winnington, Sir T. E. TELLERS. O'Connell, M. J. Browne, R. D. the NOES. Bankes, G. Bentinck, Lord G. Bentinck, Lord H. Blackburne, J. I. Boldero, H. G. Bramston, T. W. Brisco, M. Brooke, Lord Bruce, C. L. C. Buck, L. W. Lawson, A. Lincoln, Earl of Newry, Visct. O'Brien, A. S. Duckworth, Sir J. T. B. Packe, C. W. Pakington, Sir J. Seymer, H. K. The hon. Gentleman said, the matter was of immense importance; for delays and cers. Lennox, Lord G. H. G. expense gave a great advantage to dis- Shaw, rt. hon. F. TELLERS. Gregory, H. W. Second reading put off for six months. FEES IN COURTS OF LAW. MR. WATSON moved for "A Select Committee to inquire into and report to the House on the Taxation of Suitors in the Courts of Law and Equity by the collection of Fees, and the amount thereof, and the mode of collection; and the appropriation of Fees in the Courts of Law and Equity, and in all inferior Courts, and in the Courts of Special and General Sessions in England and Wales; and as to the Salaries and Fees received by officers of those Courts; and whether any and what means could be adopted, with a view of superintending and regulating the collection and appropriation there of." In being taken that no improper suits were in- | him from bringing the subject so prominentstituted. Upon that question, however, he ly before the House as his sense of its imporwould not enter upon that occasion. He had tance would have otherwise induced him ; understood that objections had been taken but he would say, that he deemed it essento that part of his Motion which related to tial to the right administration of justice the compensation allowances which were and to the progress of safe, salutary, paid to certain officers; and rather than en- and progressive reform in the law itself, danger the other branch of the inquiry he that a Minister, unconnected with its would consent to the exclusion of the part administration, should be appointed to which related to such compensations, re- superintend the working of every court serving to himself, however, the right of of justice throughout the country. This bringing forward that subject upon some arrangement would supersede the necesfuture occasion, should he deem it proper sity of issuing commissions of inquiry; to do so. the results of which were too frequently the accumulation of a mass of crude suggestions, which for the most part could not be converted into anything practically useful. In regard to fees, the present state of the Court of Chancery was as bad as it could be. There was no check upon the officers who collected the fees. They were merely required to swear by affidavit that the return was correct; and he did not think it right that so strong a temptation to make a dishonest return as existed at present should be allowed to remain. The fact was notorious-still he did not choose to mention names-that the successor of one of the officers who had died, had, without any visible increase having taken place in the business of the court, paid a half more fees to the Consolidated Fund than had been paid by his predecessor. This circumstance could not fail to give rise to the gravest apprehensions as to the kind of returns which were made. MR. ROMILLY seconded the Motion. The proposed inquiry was intimately connected with the great question of law reform, one of the essential characteristics of which was that law should be made as cheap and expeditious as possible. It was commonly said that a person who embarked in a suit ought to bear the expense of putting and keeping the machinery of the law in motion; but this, he thought, was a mistaken view of the question, as it was the public who actually derived the benefit of the administration of justice. It appeared to him to be as wrong to compel a person to pay for obtaining justice in a court of law as it would be to compel a person who had his house robbed or his person assaulted to pay for the expense of the police. He hoped the ultimate result of the inquiry sought for by his hon. and learned Friend would be the establishment of the principle that, instead of taxing suitors to the extent of 100,000l. a year for the benefit The ATTORNEY GENERAL said, of the country, the converse should be the that when a similar Motion was made at case, and that the country should bear the the time the right hon. Baronet the Memwhole expense of upholding the administra- ber for Tamworth was in office, that right tion of justice. He hoped that another hon. Gentleman stated he had no objection object to be gained by the appointment of to the inquiry, in so far as the question of a Committee would be the convincing of fees was concerned; and when his right the House and the Government of the im- hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the portance of the subject to which he called Home Department was asked the same attention at the close of the last Session of question, he stated he should have no obParliament the absolute necessity which jection to the inquiry to the extent apexisted for having a department of the proved of by the head of the late GovernGovernment devoted to the superintendence ment. Under these circumstances it was of the administration of justice. That not his (the Attorney General's) intention duty was now discharged by the Home to offer any objection to the Motion, the Office and the Lord Chancellor; but these words relating to the compensation allowdepartments were absolutely overburdened ances being omitted. Still he did not wish with work already, and to throw additional it to be understood that he adopted much work upon them was merely to increase of what had been said in connexion with the amount of business which would re- the Motion, as to the manner in which main undone. The dislike which he felt to the fees ought to be applied. That questhe bringing forward of any abstract ques- tion would more properly be disposed of tion, and not having had sufficient time to by the House after the inquiry had te miprepare a Bill on the subject, had prevented nated. MR. O. GORE, in nominating the Members to constitute the Select Committee on Bouverie, hon. E. P. Humphery, Ald. Strickland, Sir G. Thornely, T. TELLERS. Hume, J. House adjourned at a quarter before Eight o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Wednesday, May 5, 1847. land). Smithfield Market, apologized for the delay which had taken place, and assured the House that it had arisen from a desire to secure a full, a searching, and, above all things, an impartial inquiry. Since giving notice of the names of the Committee, he had received an intimation from the Government that it would be desirable to place the names of two Members, one connected with the city, and the other with a metropolitan county, on the list; and he, therefore, proposed to substitute Lord Robert Grosvenor for Mr. Baring, and Mr. Lyall for Mr. Burroughes. In connexion PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Sir J. Packington, from Newwith this change, the hon. Member spoke of having the Committee so constituted as to prevent its decision from being biassed by considerations arising out of the anticipated general election. He knew of one body of men who had considerable influence at elections, who were strongly opposed to the removal of the alleged nuisance; but he did not think that the feelings and interests of these men should be allowed to stand in the way of the public good. COLONEL T. WOOD thought that in a matter which affected the supplies and convenience of 2,000,000 of persons, it was only fair that at least one-third of the Committee should be composed of Members more immediately connected with those persons as representing them in Parliament. As to the bias spoken of by the hon. Member, he did not see how it could exist on so broad a question. He would move that Lord Robert Grosvenor be sub stituted for Lord Mahon. MR. O. GORE: Lord Robert Grosvenor is nominated already. On the question that Viscount Mahon be one of the Members of the Committee, the House divided:-Ayes 25; Noes 6: Majority 19. 20 Registration of Voters. castle-under-Lyme, for Alteration of the Law of Marriage. -By Mr. S. Wortley, from Rothesay, against the Marriage (Scotland) Bill.-By Mr. Brotherton, from Westminster, and Mr. T. Duncombe, from Finsbury, for Inquiry respecting the Rajah of Sattara.-By Mr. Brotherton, from Chatteris Temperance Society, against the Use of Grain in Breweries and Distilleries.-By Mr. M. Gibson, from Solicitors of Her Majesty's High Court of Chancery, for Inquiry.-By Mr. S. O'Brien, from Great Gidding, against the proposed Plan of Education.-By Sir J. Packington, from Droitwich, in favour of the Health of Towns Bill.-By Mr. M. Gibson and other hon. Members, from several places, for and against the Hosiery Manufacture Bill.-By several hon. Members, from a great many places, in favour of the Medical Registration and Medical Law Amendment Bill.-By Sir C. Knightley, from Syresham and Brackley, for Repeal or Alteration of the Foor Removal Act.-By Mr. S. Wortley, from the Presbytery of Meigle and the Kirk Session of Cumbray, against the Registering Births, &c. (Scotland) Bill; and Marriage (Scotland) Bill.-From Farmers and Graziers of Northamptonshire, against the Removal of Smithfield Market. MEDICAL REGISTRATION BILL. SIR W. JOLLIFFE: I wish to put two questions to the right hon. Gentleman (Sir G. Grey) on a subject of great interest to an important class of the community. First, whether any application has been made by the presidents of the Councils of the Colleges of Surgeons, Physicians, and Apothecaries, for the purpose of ascertaining what course the Government intended to take as to the Bill (Medical Registra 0 tion) now on the Table, introduced by the willing to lend him a hand of assistance in hon. Member for Finsbury. The second the improvement of his property, but quite question is, whether the right hon. Gentle- the contrary. He had expended 1,0007. man (Sir G. Grey) is ready to abate any of in improving a single drain on his prothe grievances to which the body of sur-perty, without receiving a single shilling geons conceive they will be subjected, if a by way of assistance from any party. But charter such as that contemplated under this Bill proposed to grant powers to Comthe Bill of the hon. Member for Finsbury missioners, with regard to drainage, whose is granted. fees would of course be a great expense to the parties concerned. They had the power of adjourning from day to day, and therefore the time when the improvements contemplated under the Bill would commence was indefinite. He was requested to ask the noble Lord, whether he had any objection to introduce a clause that would give security of compensation to copyholders for the large improvements which they might effect in the drainage of their lands. Under the present law the benefits of all those improvements would revert to the lords of the manors, without any compensation by law being made to the copyholders. As a lord of the manor, he should be ashamed to take any such advantage of his copyhold tenants; but he thought that the House would act unfairly and unjustly to copyholders, if they allowed it to pass without inserting a clause which would give the security to which he alluded. He felt it to be a duty which he owed to himself and the country at large, to prevent as much as possible the great inroads on private property contemplated by this Bill. SIR G. GREY: In answer to the first question, I beg to state that I received yesterday a communication from the president of the College of Physicians, requesting that an opportunity might be afforded to a deputation from the college to state the nature of their objections to the Bill of the hon. Member for Finsbury. I also yesterday received communications from the Council of the Royal College of Surgeons, and from the National Institution of General Practitioners, expressing a similar desire. Under these circumstances had the hon. Member for Finsbury been in his place, I should have asked him to postpone his Bill to some future day, so as to allow these different bodies to state the nature of their objections to it. With regard to the second question, I have only to say that a representation has been made to me by the College of Surgeons, in answer to which I am not as yet able to give any distinct assurance, as the subject is still under the consideration of Government. DRAINAGE OF LANDS BILL. The EARL of LINCOLN, in moving the Order of the Day for the House to resolve itself into Committee on the Drainage of Lands Bill, said, that as a similar Bill had since the second reading of this Bill been introduced for Scotland exclusively, he should move in Committee that this Bill be limited in its operation to England and Wales, and that all words having reference to Scotland should be expunged. COLONEL SIBTHORP rose to oppose the further progress of this Bill. He had objected, and always would object, to it, because it proposed to interfere with the private property of individuals. He was for letting every man drain his land in any way he liked, without being subjected to the interference of other parties. He believed he might safely say, that no one individual had expended more than he had in draining his lands. He thought that the duty which he owed to his tenants and the country at large required him to drain his lands effectively; but he found no individual ready to assist him, he found no one The EARL of LINCOLN said, the objection which he had to the introduction of the clause proposed by the hon. and gallant Gentleman was this: that whereas this Bill merely professed one mode of improving landed property in England, it would be a manifest injustice to introduce any provision in this Bill which should be applicable to that species of improvement and to no others. He was by no means inclined to dispute with the hon. and gallant Gentleman that it was desirable that the protection of which he had spoken should be afforded to copyholders; and the best way of affording that protection, he believed, would be by introducing a Bill for that especial purpose. The whole laws relating to copyholders certainly required amendment. With regard to the objection raised by the hon. and gallant Gentleman to the Commissioners, he (the Earl of Lincoln) wished to observe that that objection could not be maintained, inasmuch as the duties of the Commissioners would be performed by the present Inclosure Commissioners without any increase being made to their salaries. |