Page images
PDF
EPUB
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

ENGLAND. Both Houses of Parliament meet, after adjournment for the
Christmas Recess, on the 10th of February-In the House of Lords the
Earl of Derby endeavours to elicit from the Prime Minister a statement
of his intended measures-The Earl of Aberdeen declines to afford any
further explanation of the intentions of Government- On the 14th the
Lord Chancellor makes a full statement respecting the Law Reforms about
to be introduced by him-Remarks of Lord St. Leonards and Lord
Campbell upon the intended measures-In the House of Commons, on the
10th of February, Lord John Russell states the principal measures
designed by the Government in the present Session. PERSECUTION OF
PROTESTANTS IN TUSCANY-Mr. Kinnaird, on the 17th of February,
moves an Address to the Crown on the Treatment of the Madiais-The
Motion is seconded by Lord Dudley Stuart-Speeches of Mr. Lucas,
Lord John Russell, Mr. Bouyer, Mr. Drummond, Sir R. H. Inglis,
Lord Palmerston, and other Members-The Motion is ultimately
withdrawn. RELATIONS WITH FRANCE-Mr. Disraeli calls the atten-
tion of the House of Commons to this subject in a speech in which he
comments with some severity on recent speeches of Cabinet Ministers-
He is answered by Lord John Russell-Speeches of Mr. Cobden, Sir J.
Graham, Mr. M. Gibson, Mr. Baillie, and Lord Dudley Stuart-On
the 4th of April, Lord Campbell alludes, in the House of Lords, to the
presentation of an Address from the City of London to the French
Emperor-A debate takes place, in which the Lord Chancellor and other
Peers take part. EDUCATION AT MAYNOOTH COLLEGE-Mr. Spooner
moves for an Inquiry into the System-Mr. Scholefield opposes the
Motion and moves an Amendment, which is seconded by Sir W. Clay—
VOL. XCV.

[B]

A long debate takes place, and is resumed upon adjournment, in which numerous Members take part―The original Motion being defeated by a division of 192 against 162, the debate is continued upon the Amendment, which is finally negatived by 262 to 68-In the House of Lords the same subject is brought under discussion by the Earl of Winchilṣea, who moves for a Committee of Inquiry-Lord Aberdeen opposes the Motion, proposing, by way of Amendment, the appointment of a Commission of Inquiry-A debate ensues, in which the Earls of Roden, Desart, Shaftesbury, and Derby, the Dukes of Leinster and Argyll, the Marquises of Clanricarde and Lansdowne, and other Peers take part-Upon a division the Motion is negatived. CANADIAN CLERGY RESERVES-On the 15th of February Mr. F. Peel moves for leave to bring in a Bill to enable the Legislature of Canada to make provision concerning the Clergy Reserves-He prefaces his statement by a history of the past and present state of the question - On the Motion for the Second Reading in the House of Commons, on the 4th of March, Sir J. Pakington moves that the Bill be read a second time that day six months-His speech—He is supported by Lord J. Manners, Mr. Napier, Sir R. Inglis and others-The Second Reading is advocated by Sir W. Molesworth, Mr. Adderly, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Mr. Vernon, and is carried by 275 to 192-Another debate arises on the Third Reading, which Mr. Walpole moves to postpone for six months-His Speech-He is supported by Mr. Drummond, Mr. Napier, Sir J. Pakington, and others-Mr. Peel, the Solicitor-General, Lord John Russell, and other members vindicate the measure, and the Third Reading is carried by 228 to 208-In the House of Lords the Second Reading is moved on the 22nd of April by the Duke of Newcastle-The Bishop of Exeter moves that the Bill be read a second time that day six months-A debate ensues in which Lords Lyttleton and St. Leonards, the Bishop of Norwich, and the Earls of Derby and Grey take part-On the suggestion of the Earl of Derby the Amendment is withdrawn, and the opposition reserved for the Committee-Upon the House going into Committee, on the 25th of April, a long debate arises on an Amendment proposed by the Earl of Derby to the first clause-His Speech-He is followed by the Duke of Newcastle, Lords Wicklow, Wharncliffe, Desart, and St. Leonards, the Duke of Argyll and Earl Grey, and the Bishops of St. David's, London, Oxford, and Exeter-The Amendment is rejected by 117 against 77, and the Bill is passed.

BOTH

OTH Houses of Parliament met on Thursday, the 10th of February, pursuant to the adjournment on the 31st of December. In the House of Lords the Earl of Derby urged Lord Aberdeen to lose no time in laying before the House a statement of the measures which the Government intended to introduce. For himself and his friends, he was quite prepared to

say, that a cordial co-operation would be given to any measures brought forward by the Government, if they were calculated to promote the public welfare.

The Earl of Aberdeen replied, that he had already informed the House as to the general principles on which the Government would be carried on; as for the particular measures which the Government

intended, most of them would be brought forward in the House of Commons, and under those circumstances he did not think it necessary to make any further

statement.

On Monday, February the 14th, the Lord Chancellor stated at great length the intentions of the Government with respect to Law Reform.

The noble and learned Lord commenced by referring to the Common Law Procedure Act, which had passed in the preceding Session, and he expressed his great satisfaction at having found, upon communications he had had with the Judges, that those learned persons expressed an universal concurrence as to the beneficial effects of that measure. He referred to some particular instances, in proof of the advantages derived by the public from this Act, especially in the saving of fees, and in the power of issuing writs against debtors residing abroad, of which no less than 114 had been issued between the beginning of November and that time. Another fact, which showed the public appreciation of this measure, was the large increase in the number of writs issued that had recently taken place. Another report of the Common Law Commissioners was almost ready for presentation, pending which, it would be premature to take any step in proposing legislative changes. The noble and learned Lord then referred to the course that had been taken in furtherance of reform in the Courts of Equity. The credit of originating these changes was due to Lord Truro, who had issued the Commission of Inquiry. Lord St. Leonards, during his term of office, had taken up the matter with a

zeal and vigour which could not have been exceeded, and had passed the two Bills for abolishing the Masters' Office, and for improving the jurisdiction in Equity. Hitherto there had not been sufficient time to judge fully of the effects of these changes, but, as far as he could learn from his own observation and from the opinions of others, he believed that they were working admirably well; under these circumstances, it would be unnecessary and inexpedient to attempt further legislation at pre sent, nor would it have been possible for him to have prepared, during the short time he had been in office, any measure for that purpose. The state of business in the Equity Courts generally, was at present satisfactory; there were no large arrears in the appellate branch of the Court, and in the other department of it there was no cause of complaint as to progress. Since he had been in office, he had received many letters urging him to throw overboard all that had been done, and to introduce a comprehensive measure for the fusion of law and equity. Such a measure, if proper to be undertaken at all, would require far more time and consideration than his short tenure of office hitherto had permitted. Another branch of legal procedure to which his attention had been directed, was the testamentary jurisdiction, which was at present in a state very discreditable to the country. The Lord Chancellor read passages from the report of a Commission appointed by Lord Lyndhurst, in reference to this subject, in which an extensive change of jurisdiction was recommended. He agreed with that report, but was not as yet prepared to bring forward a Bill for reform

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »