Page images
PDF
EPUB

department. If, therefore, there was any obloquy in this matter, it ought to be saddled on the right horse.

SIR J. GRAHAM: The power of appointment of schoolmasters and schoolmistresses will remain in the board of guardians, as at present, subject always to the Poor Law Commissioners' consent. There was, in this estimate, a considerable increase in the salaries, more especially in the salaries of the schoolmasters; and the expectation was that, for the future, this would be an inducement to more competent and better educated persons than those who heretofore had filled the situations to accept these offices.

Vote agreed to. Several other votes having been agreed to, the House resumed, and adjourned at a quarter past One o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS,

Tuesday, July 14, 1846.

proceeded with while they were passing the temporary Bill.

The EARL of CLARENDON replied that it was absolutely necessary to propose a measure for the continuance of the present Sugar Duties for a short time, for the present Act would expire on Saturday fortnight. There would be ample time for the discussion of the other measure, and he could assure his noble Friend that not one single day's delay should arise in passing it.

THE SALARIES OF THE CHIEF JUSTICES.

LORD BROUGHAM said, he regretted the absence of the noble Marquess the Lord President of the Council (the Marquess of Lansdowne), inasmuch as he wished to call attention to a subject which he was sorry to be obliged to mention. He wished to give a general notice of his intention to submit to their Lordships' consideration an important question, which was now peculiarly pressed upon them on

MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILLS.-2 Spitalfields New Street; account of the acceptance (although he be

Juvenile Offenders.

PETITIONS PRESENTED. By the Earl of Powis, from Saint Asaph, and a great number of other places, against the

Union of St. Asaph and Bangor, but in favour of the

Appointment of a Bishop to the See of Manchester.-By the Bishop of Norwich, from the Mayor, Aldermen, and

Burgesses of Norwich, for the Employment and Reformation of Discharged Prisoners.

THE SUGAR DUTIES.

LORD BROUGHAM wished to ask his noble Friend the President of the Board of Trade a question upon a subject of great importance. He understood from the Votes of the other House of Parliament, that notice had been given by the First Minister of the Crown of his intention to introduce a short Bill for the continuance of the present Sugar Duties for a limited period. There could, of course, be no objection to this proceeding. But what he objected to was this that there should be any delay in bringing in a measure that would effect the final arrangements of these duties. He hoped that Her Majesty's Government would obtain good security while passing this temporary Bill through the House, that no unnecessary delay would be thrown in the way of the greater measure so as to keep it back for a late period. If the final measure were delayed so late as the 12th August, he was afraid that other questions than that of sugar would be engaging their Lordships' attention. He thought it ought to be understood that there would be no loss of time in bringing on this measure, so that it might even be

lieved the appointment was not as yet completed) by his learned Friend, Serjeant Wilde, of the Lord Chief Justiceship of

the Court of Common Pleas. One of the Acts which he deeply lamented he had ever permitted to pass their Lordships' House when he had the honour of holding the Great Seal, was that to which he was now about to refer. That most improper and wholly unconstitutional proceeding, however, did take place at the time he had the honour of holding office; and he did not mean but to say that he was in some degree responsible for that measure which allowed the salary of the Lord Chief Justice, to whom the Act of Parliament gave 10,0007. a year, and which Lord Tenterden was entitled to enjoy during his life, to be reduced to 8,000l. a year. Their Lordships permitted that arrangement to be made, though they should never have consented to it. His Lordship's executors-and if he were one of them he should feel bound to advise it-were entitled, he would show, to receive the 2,000l. a year which Lord Tenterden had abstained from taking. The Act was not a permissive Act, nor one giving power to the Treasury to make such a reduction; and it was wholly unconstitutional to make any learned judge dependent upon the mercy of the Treasury. The Acts of the 6th George IV., caps. 82 and 84 (the latter applying to the Common Pleas, to which his learned Friend Serjeant Wilde was appointed Lord Chief

Justice), gave 10,000l. a year to the one | learned Lord had called the attention of Chief Justice, and 8,000l. to the other, the House was one of great importance. payable by quarterly payments to them- He understood his noble and learned Friend selves, out of the Consolidated Fund of to complain that some arrangement had Great Britain. He must remind the House been made some years ago as to the salaof this fact, and observe how monstrous it ries of the Lords Chief Justices, which was would be because a Government was pleas- not in conformity with the law applying to ed to make a bargain with one Lord Chief that subject. Their Lordships would reJustice, by which he was to take less than collect that, in 1830, there was appointed he was really entitled to receive, and the a Committee of the other House of Parliaresidue to be paid into the Consolidated ment, by whom the salaries of all the great Fund-how monstrous it would be to con- officers of State were revised, and in many tinue the same course in respect to other instances reduced. All the principal offiChief Justices; and perhaps to go still cers of the Government had their salaries further, and say that they should have reduced; and, in respect to judicial officers, 6,000l. instead of 10,000l., and then to an arrangement was made that, prospecdole to them an increased 500l. a year, tively, those salaries also should be reduced. according as these learned judges behaved Afterwards, however, when a vacancy in to the satisfaction of the Crown. He hoped the office of Chief Justice of the King's and trusted that something would be done Bench (as it then was) arose, the proper to amend this defect in their proceedings. mode of carrying the intended reduction He had not seen any Act that had passed into effect was not adopted. He was very on this subject since the 6th Geo. IV., sorry that such was the case; but, if his although he had certainly an impression on noble and learned Friend thought it so his mind that some Act of the kind had objectionable, he greatly wondered that, passed their Lordships' House. He had at the time, he did not do that which was abstained from bringing this question be- so perfectly simple and easy to do that fore the House at an earlier period only is, pass an Act of Parliament to sanction because his noble and learned Friend the the arrangement which had been made, inLord Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's stead of letting it stand merely as a matter Bench had entreated him not to bring it of arrangement. In point of form, it would, forward, because of the pain which any no doubt, have been better that such an discussion on the point would cause him, Act had been passed; but, practically, and the motives to which a reference to it there being no difference between the two might be attributed. A judge more ut- modes of accomplishing the same thing, terly beyond all possibility of being in- no evil had been done. His noble and fluenced by such considerations than his learned Friend had paid a just compliment noble and learned Friend, had never existed; to the character of his noble and learned and a man caring less about money than Friend the Lord Chief Justice of the Court the present Lord Chief Justice, was not to of Queen's Bench; but, even if there had be found in the Queen's dominions. That, been a man of a different character to deal however, was no reason why he should now with, there could be no such abuse of power abstain from bringing this subject for- as the noble and learned Lord appeared to ward, when, perhaps, they would have a think possible: the actual payments aprepetition of the same traffic. Such a peared in the finance accounts; the transacproceeding, he thought, was greatly to be tion attracted the attention of the public; reprobated that when an Act of Parlia- and any practical abuse was therefore alment assigned to a particular office a certain together out of the question. He, however, salary, a lower salary, by an arrangement so far agreed with his noble and learned between those who were not entitled to Friend as to think that in these matters make the arrangement, should be given. form should be strictly adhered to. It At present no Act-and he could not find must be recollected, that his noble and one had passed to alter the former sta- learned Friend (Lord Brougham) was spetutes. The Act said distinctly that the cially intrusted with the conduct of the buLord Chief Justice should receive the sa-siness at the time it took place; it was his lary of 10,000l., whereas the financial accounts showed that he only received 8,000l. a year.

EARL GREY said, he could not deny that the subject to which the noble and

province to see that nothing was done wrongly; and certainly he, at the time, took no step in the matter.

LORD BROUGHAM: I didn't know anything about it.

LORD BROUGHAM: I never knew anything of it; I was never told of it.

EARL GREY: On my own personal authority, I can contradict that. My noble and learned Friend, I know, did know it.

LORD BROUGHAM: Never heard a word of it.

EARL GREY: I know as well as possible that my noble and learned Friend was informed of the arrangement.

LORD BROUGHAM: No doubt I was cognizant of the arrangement after it was made; it must have been communicated to

EARL GREY: My noble and learned | peared that this actual knowledge about Friend had charge of this business. which the noble Earl was so peremptory, had dwindled down to probable knowledge only. Now, the facts of the case were these: he (Lord Brougham) did not know of the proceeding until he received a communication from two learned Judges, the late Mr. Justice Bosanquet and Mr. Jus tice Patteson, remonstrating on the step that had been taken after the arrangement had taken place. The noble Earl had stated, that he ought to have done that under the circumstances which the noble Earl was himself unable to do, viz., pass an Act of Parliament under circumstances which it was impossible to do; that is, to pass an Act when he was, as the noble Earl was himself now, in a minority in that House. And what would have happened if he had brought in a Bill on the subject? Why, it would have been thrown out. But he should not have approved of any Bill of the kind; for he thought that 10,000l. a year was a fit and proper salary of the Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench. An appointment had just been made to the office of Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, and this induced him to bring forward the subject. The salaries of the Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench had been fixed at 10,000l. a year, and of the Common Pleas at 8,000l. a year, by Act of Parliament. The noble Earl, how

me.

EARL GREY said, that at that time the attention of the Government was particularly directed to the subject by the report of Lord Ashburton's Committee, and many salaries were reduced in consequence. The noble and learned Lord was Lord Chancellor at the time, and must have been aware of the proceeding, for it could not have taken place without his sanction. There could be no doubt then that the noble Lord was cognizant of and authorized what had taken place, for it was his business more than that of any other Member of the Government to look into the matter. In consequence of what had taken place, he could say, that he was sure that his noble Friend at the head of the Government would direct his attention to the subject; and, if it was deemed necessary, a Bill would be brought forward, so that a more regular form of proceeding might be adhered to.

ever, said that they were justified in going from this, not by a more recent Act of Parliament, nor by a report, or resolutions of both Houses, and sanctioned by the Crown, but by a report of a Committee of LORD BROUGHAM had not addressed the other House, without any Act having himself to the noble Earl, but to a noble passed. He was not learnt in this fashion Lord, who at the time held a much higher in the Constitution of England, that a Reoffice in the Government than the noble solution of a Committee of the House of Earl, and who would naturally know more Commons should be an equivalent for an about the matter. The noble Earl had taken Act of Parliament. The noble Earl, howupon himself to say, on his own personal ever, said that it was of no consequenceknowledge, that he (Lord Brougham) knew that it would not be abused; he added, that at the time which he on his honour however, that it might be better, as a matstated that he was ignorant of. He had ter of form, to have an Act, but still everyasked for information from the real head of body would be able to know what was rethe Government in that House, the noble ceived, so that no abuse would exist. This Marquess, whose absence he regretted; everybody would assent' meant anybody and he (Lord Brougham) stated, that he might do so. This everybody' was a was not aware of the circumstance at the most convenient person to enable any one time; but the noble Earl must get up and to escape from a difficulty, and to put contradict him, and say that he did know of forward when it was desirable that no it. When, however, the noble Earl pro- one should be responsible. When they ceeded, it appeared that he (Lord Broug- abolished the sale of offices of the courts ham) must know of it, because he was Lord by the Judges and up to that peChancellor at the time, therefore it was riod, the proceeding was perfectly legal that he probably knew of it. So that it ap--they increased the salary of the Lord

[ocr errors]

6

Chief Justice to 10,000l. a year. What he objected to was, that when the Act of Parliament said that the learned person filling that office should have 10,000l. a year, the Government made a private bargain, so that he should receive only 8,000l. If this proceeding was sanctioned, the greatest mischief might be produced, as the Government might be inclined to dole out what additional salaries it pleased to the Judges. But it was said that this would be seen in the Estimates; but this again was everybody's business, to look after which, after all, nobody might do. He had put to the Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas a question on this point -and no one could be more entitled to the full amount than that learned person, above all, considering the large professional emoluments he received-namely, as to whether he was aware of the cutting down of the salary of that officer from 8,000l. to 7,000l. a year, and he said no, and that he should think twice before he took it.

LORD CAMPBELL must agree entirely with his noble and learned Friend opposite, that things should not remain as they were; and that, if it were necessary, an Act of Parliament ought to be immediately brought in to remedy the defect. The saThe salaries of the Judges ought not to depend upon any arrangement between the Judges and the Government. Now, his noble Friend who sat near him had intimated no opinion on this subject-on the contrary, he had stated in the most distinct terms that the noble Lord now at the head of the Government would inquire into it, and that if it were necessary an Act of Parliament should be introduced for remedying the matter. There could be no

of the Legislature with perfect unanimity. His noble and learned Friend could not say that he disapproved of the arrangement, as he continued to hold the Great Seal; and he (Lord Campbell) knew his spirit and his courage too well to suppose that had he failed in carrying such a measure he would not have continued to hold office; he would not suffer his opinion on such a subject to be overruled. His noble and learned Friend threw great blame on himself for this proceeding, and appeared to feel that he had been greatly in the wrong; and in this he (Lord Brougham) reminded him of the Pope who, finding himself in error, exclaimed "Judice me cremari," "I condemn myself, and order myself to be burnt.

[ocr errors]

LORD BROUGHAM explained.

The LORD CHANCELLOR agreed with his noble and learned Friend that it was irregular to reduce the salaries of the Judges without an Act of Parliament; there ought to have been an Act of Parliament; and when his noble and learned Friend found out that the Lord Chief Justice's salary had been reduced, then he should have put it either into proper form, or the salary should have remained 10,000%. Either the salary ought to remain 10,0007., or there ought to be an Act of Parliament to make it 8,000l. His noble and learned Friend alluded to some supposed understanding with the present Lord Chief Justice; but he utterly disbelieved that anything of the kind had passed. He succeeded to the office, and of course succeeded to the office with all the emoluments belonging to it.

Subject at an end.

doubt that if there had been an Act of Par- THE THAMES EMBANKMENT BILL. liament passed, if Lord Denman or any VISCOUNT CANNING moved the Second of his executors chose to insist on their Reading of the Bill for embanking the river rights, they would be entitled to recover Thames at the northern side, between the balance of the whole of the specified Vauxhall-bridge and Battersea-bridge. It salary. His noble and learned Friend op- was also proposed that a new bridge should posite ought, if he felt that these matters be built across the river somewhere about required a remedy, to have brought in an Chelsea Hospital. The expense would be Act when he occupied the seat on the Wool-about 160,000l., which would not, howsack; he was the party that should have seen that all these things were right. His noble and learned Friend had said that he could not have carried such a Bill. He (Lord Campbell) knew that his noble and learned Friend had carried Bills despite of the large majorities with which his measures were threatened; and he also knew that if he had introduced a Bill on this subject, it would have passed both Houses VOL. LXXXVII. {Series} Third

ever, be charged to the public. The noble Marquess behind him (the Marquess of Westminster), and other owners of property in the locality, had dealt very liberally with reference to those improvements, and the whole amount of their contributions was estimated at something between 40,000l. and 50,000l. The tolls would not, he thought, be overestimated at something like 6,000l., which would

20

pay something more than 10 per cent of the cost of the bridge.

LORD KINNAIRD observed that the Report of the Metropolitan Termini Commissioners recommended that the mode of communication between the south and north sides of the river should be by a bridge somewhere in the direction referred to; and he (Lord Kinnaird) suggested that it would be worthy of consideration whether the bridge now proposed to be constructed would combine both purposes.

VISCOUNT CANNING, as a Member of the Committee to whose Report the noble Lord had referred, was of opinion that the bridge, to answer the purpose contemplated by them, should be very far westward of Chelsea Hospital.

Bill read 2a.
House adjourned.

[ocr errors]

HOUSE OF COMMONS,

Tuesday, July 14, 1846.

MINUTES.] NEW WRIT. For Sutherland, v. David Dun-
das, Esq., Solicitor General.
NEW MEMBERS SWORN. For Manchester, Right Hon.
Thomas Milner Gibson. - For Plymouth, Viscount
Ebrington.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Mr. Bannerman, from Mem-
bers of Free Union Church, Aberdeen, complaining of the
Refusal of Proprietors of Land to grant Sites for the

Erection of Free Churches (Scotland), and praying the
House to devise Means for enabling Congregations to
Rent or Purchase Ground on Reasonable Conditions.-
By Mr. Gaskell, from Rural Dean and the Clergy of the

Rural Deanery of Wenlock, in the Diocese of Hereford,
against the Union of St. Asaph and Bangor, but at the
same time providing for the Immediate Appointment of

a Bishop to the newly erected See of Manchester.- From

Inhabitants of the Districts of Muswell Brook and Merton, in the Colony of New South Wales, praying the House to admit Wheat, Maize, and Flour, the Produce of Australia, into the United Kingdom on the same Terms as Wheat, Maize, and Flour, the Produce of Canada.-By Sir William Codrington, from Farmers, Landowners, and others, in the Hamlet of Mangersbury, and from Church

wardens, Overseers, and Guardians of the Poor of Stow
on the Wold, for Rating Owners of Small Tenements to
the Poor Rates in lieu of Occupiers.-By Mr. Cobden,
from Market Gardeners and Growers of Fruit at Ealing,

Brentford, Hounslow, Isleworth, and the Vicinity, for
Alteration of Duty on Sugar.-By Mr. Cobden, from J.

Tobacco.-By Mr. Blackburne, from Inhabitants of War

on tobacco, with a view to the revision and alteration of the law upon that subject. The more he had examined the question, the more imperative seemed it upon him to direct the attention of Parliament to the frightful consequences of the present state of the law. During the last Session a Committee had sat and had made the most diligent and elaborate inquiries; and to the report presented certain valuable papers had been added on the Motion of the hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume). From these sources it appeared that the duty upon tobacco amounted to between 800 and 900 per cent upon the value of the raw commodity. The Committee would have come to a resolution for reducing the duty to ls., but for the vote of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who had charge. of the fiscal arrangement of the country, and who opposed himself to a change so materially affecting the revenue. Consequently, in spite of the irresistible evidence taken by the Committee, the law had been allowed to continue with all its unmitigated evils. He (Dr. Bowring) thought he could show to demonstration that other and higher considerations were involved than the mere amount of receipts at the Treasury. If the House were bound to look to the receipts at the Treasury, it was also bound to look at the amount of immorality, crime, and misery occasioned by those receipts. The amount of human guilt and wretchedness fostered and encouraged by the existing law, was, in truth, incalculable; and the whole system required prompt revision. The hon. Member then entered into a variety of details in support of his position, beginning with the number of convictions. In 1846 the convictions in our courts, for breach of the laws relating to tobacco, were no fewer than 538; while for breaches of the laws relating to spirits they were only 101; for tea, 11; for silk, 10; and 25 for all other articles. The rapid increase in the convictions before magistrates was another re

and F. Lloyd and Co., Manufacturers of Tobacco and Snuff in the City of London, for Reduction of Duty on rington, for Regulating the Trade of Fustian Cutting.-markable feature. In 1843, they were 430; By Guardians of the Gateshead Poor Law Union, and from Guardians, Churchwardens, Overseers of the Poor, and others, the Inhabitants of the Parish of Broadwater,

for Repeal or Alteration of Lunatics Act and Lunatic Asylums and Pauper Lunatics Act.-By Mr. Christopher, from Thomas Johnson, and others, for a Superannuation bitants of Bury, for the Abolition of the Punishment of

Fund for Poor Law Officers.-By Mr. Bury, from Inha

Death.

TOBACCO DUTIES.

DR. BOWRING rose for the purpose of bringing forward his Motion on the duty

1844, 583; 1845, 702; and in 1846, 872. The ratio in Ireland and in Scotland was even greater; for while in England they were 102 per cent, in Ireland they were 252 per cent, and in Scotland 451 per cent; but of 333 persons convicted last year of smuggling tobacco in quantities exceeding 100 lbs., only fifteen persons had paid any fines, and the aggregate amount of those fines was only 8051. The enormous charges that fell upon the pub

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »