173 173

Deodands Abolition and

{MAY 7} Accidents Compensation Bill. 174

The LORD CHANCELLOR: My noble and learned Friend should not be quite so credulous in believing the rumours which have reached him. Perhaps they may have been circulated only for the purpose of teazing my noble and learned Friend.

body of Railway Bills had been commenced | curred in the measures which he proin that House, which was a novel proceed-posed. ing; many of them were now in progress through the House of Commons, and a considerable number had come up from the House of Commons, some of which were now before their Lordships' Committees. Last Session their Lordships had no Bills before them until a late period, yet they got through a larger amount of business than he had ever known before, and he feared that more railways were then sanctioned than would be advantageous. The present Motion was not made for the sake of the House, but for the sake of the parties themselves who had Railway Bills to promote; for they would know what chance they had of getting through that House when they knew the exact time up to which opposed Bills might go before Committee.

Resolution agreed to.

LORD DENMAN said, the Deodands Bill proposed to abolish a remnant of a barbarous and absurd law, and he therefore hoped the Bill would pass: and as deodands were the only security now against death being caused by reckless conduct, the abolition was a strong argument in favour of the other Bill. He thought his noble and learned Friend was far too sensitive; for he believed that when these measures came to be well considered, the other House would be convinced both of their merits and their necessity if they passed, infinitely more care would be taken for the preservation of the lives of Her

DEODANDS ABOLITION, AND DEATH BY Majesty's subjects than those who were

intrusted with them at present thought necessary.

ACCIDENTS COMPENSATION BILLS, LORD CAMPBELL moved the Third Reading of these two Bills. The noble and learned Lord said he was sorry to announce that a disastrous rumour had reached his ears, that when these Bills went elsewhere, although they had both been passed unanimously by their Lordships, they were likely to meet with the same fate they experienced last Session. He would only say that the principle of these Bills was approved of by the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Chief Justice, by all the law Lords, and by the Judges of England. All the law Lords in that House had most deliberately considered them, and he supposed they were quite competent to form a sound judgment. Notwithstanding all this, he was told they were immediately to be thrown out of the other House, that deodands were still to be continued, and that if deaths took place by gross negligence, there was to be no compensation. He could only invite the attention of Her Majesty's Government to the subject, and express his earnest desire that the noble Duke opposite (the Duke of Wellington) would draw the attention of Her Majesty's Ministers in the other House to these Bills, hoping it would be borne in mind that this was the only civilized country in the world where, under such circum-ceived in this House. stances, the law afforded no relief.

The DUKE of WELLINGTON said, his noble and learned Friend had spoken to him some time ago on the subject of these Bills, and for himself he fully con

LORD CAMPBELL: There is one objection to these Bills which I have heard. It has been said, "Suppose the Lord Chancellor were to meet with an untimely end by a railway accident, which we all pray may never occur, how would the Jury estimate the loss to his family? What would be considered as the value of the tenure of his office? [The LORD CHANCELLOR: Hear, hear!] What would be considered a fair compensation to be awarded to his family for their loss?" I have that regard for my noble and learned Friend that I hope his valuable life will never be exposed to any such peril. A railway company would be extremely sorry if my noble Friend were to have a limb broken through any negligence of theirs, because then he might bring an action and recover; but they would not care one farthing if his invaluable life were at once extinguished, because they would then say, "the law affords no remedy against us whatever." For the sake, therefore, of my noble and learned Friend, though I hope he will never require the security, I do trust these Bills will meet with that support in another place which they have so unanimously re

The LORD CHANCELLOR: There is a much more difficult case to estimate for compensation than the one which my noble and learned Friend has had the kindness to suggest. If my noble and learned Friend

{COMMONS} should unfortunately fall a sacrifice, how would any jury be able to estimate the value of his hopes?

Bills read 3a, and passed.

BURGHS (SCOTLAND) BILL. House in Committee on this Bill.

The DUKE of RICHMOND moved the insertion of a clause to the effect that none of the provisions of this Act should apply to the city of Glasgow, or to any guild, craft, or corporation established therein.

The DUKE of BUCCLEUCH opposed the clause. He said, that the trade corporations of Glasgow were very wealthy bodies, possessed of considerable funds, and he could see no reason why they should not be placed upon the same footing as the other corporations of Scotland. As an instance of the sums charged by them for admission into their guilds, he mentioned that the guild of bakers required a fee of 1007., and the number admitted were consequently very limited. These corporations would not be abolished by the Bill, but their exclusive powers would be put an end to. While the Bill was in the other

House of Parliament, no attempt had been made by the representatives of Glasgow, or any other hon. Members, to introduce a clause similar to that brought forward by

the noble Duke.

Laymen of the Parish of All Saints, Poplar, in the Borough of the Tower Hamlets, in favour of the Roman Catholic Relief Bill.-By Sir Stephen Glynne, from Clergy of the Deanery of Dursley, and Clergy, Churchwardens, and Parishioners of Mold, for preventing the Union of the Sees of St. Asaph and Bangor, and providing for the Immediate Appointment of a Bishop to the See of Manchester.-By Mr. Forbes, from Presbytery of Dumbarton, and Ministers and Elders of the Synod of Perth and Stirling, against the Abolition of Religious Tests in the Universities of Scotland.-By Lord Worsley, from Guardians of the Louth Union, for rating Owners of Small Tenements to the Poor Rates in lieu of Occupiers. -By Sir George Grey, from Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Committee for promoting the Establishment of Baths and Washhouses for the Labouring Classes, for the Adoption of Measures for promoting the Establishment of Baths and Washhouses.-By Mr. Morris, from Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses, and Inhabitants of the County of the Borough of Carmarthen, for Extension of Education in Wales.-By Mr. Brotherton, and Mr. S. Crawford, from Millowners, Spinners, and Manufacturers of Heywood and Rochdale, for Limiting the Hours of Labour in Factories to Ten in the Day for Five Days in the Week, and Eight Hours on the Saturday. By Mr. Evans, from Handloom Weavers of Tideswell, for the Adoption of Measures for the Regulation of their Trade. -By Colonel Wood, from Magistrates of Brecon, for Alteration of Highways Bill.

CHANNEL ISLANDS.

tion of the right hon. Baronet the Secretary MR. ROEBUCK begged to ask a quesof State for the Home Department, with regard to a subject that had before engrossed the attention of the House-the laws and the administration of justice in ronet had announced the intention of the the Channel Islands. The right hon. Ba

Government to issue a commission to in

quire into those matters, and he therefore

wished to know if such commission had

been issued, and if so, whether the right to lay the Report upon the Table of the hon. Gentleman would have any objection

House.

The DUKE of RICHMOND said, though the Bill did not abolish the corporations, it took away their revenues. He could only account for the fact alluded to by the noble Duke by the circumstance that no very strong Liberal would vote against Her Majesty's Government at present, or else that the representatives of Glasgow might be anxious to have these corporations destroyed. This Bill, introduced in 1846, had been founded on a Report made in 1833, and in that Report the Commissioners stated, in reference to the corporations of Glasgow, that on the whole their funds were fairly and properly applied, and that there was no instance of actual embezzle-right hon. Baronet would extend the field of the Commissioners so far as to include the Isle of Man ?

Iment laid before them.

Clause negatived; Bill passed through
Committee, and reported.
House adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS,

Thursday, May 7, 1846.

MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILLS.-Reported. Salmon Fisheries;
Election Notices (Ireland).
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By several hon. Members, from
various places, for the Better Observance of the Sabbath.
-By Sir William Clay, from Secular Clergymen and

SIR JAMES GRAHAM replied that he had in the course of his duty advised Her Majesty to issue such a commission. Two Commissioners had been accordingly appointed, and he should have no objection whatsoever to lay upon the Table of the House the letters received from them.

DR. BOWRING begged to know if the

SIR JAMES GRAHAM was not prepared to include the Isle of Man.

FEES IN COURTS OF LAW AND EQUITY. MR. WATSON rose to propose the Motion of which he had given notice

"That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the nature and extent of the taxation of Suitors by the collection of fees in the Courts of Law and Equity, and the application of such fees, and the compensations paid to retired officers of

son."

those Courts, and into the propriety of the continu- | turn any detailed account to the court. ance thereof; and particularly to inquire into the Some of the officers of courts of justice orders for compensation made by the Lord Chancellor to the persons filling the offices of Clerk of were paid entirely by fees a practice the Enrolments, Controllers of Hanaper, Riding which he regarded as open to the strongest Clerk, Six Clerks, Sworn Clerks, Waiting Clerks, objection. The inquiry was large and most and others, under the Act 5 and 6 Victoria, c. 103; important, for in all courts, Chancery and and to inquire into the nature, duties, and emolu- Common Law, in the Insolvent and in the ments of those officers before the passing of that Act, and their right to compensation during life, Bankruptcy Courts, fees were received and for seven years after the death of such per- to create funds to pay the officers. He would not go further into that branch The taxation of suitors in courts of justice of the case, as all he asked for in the first was a matter of the greatest importance to instance was the appointment of a Select the public at large; and although the sub-Committee to inquire into the circumject was a dull one, he hoped the House stances. The second branch of the queswould bear with him while he brought under tion was the large amount of money coltheir notice the general question of fees, lected by means of those fees. There was and also the enormous amount of compen- a great principle involved in this question, sation which had been given to certain and one that demanded serious consideraofficers of the courts on the abolition of tion-whether it was right to tax suitors at their offices. The first part of his Motion all in courts of justice? The reason adrelated to the taxation of suitors in the duced in support of their collection origicourts of law and equity, embracing the nally was, their effect in checking a spirit criminal courts and courts of quarter ses- of litigation. In short, it had been urged sions throughout the country, and the ap- that law had better not be made too cheap. plication of the fees so collected. The He could assure the House that no such first introduction of the system of taxing fear existed; for if all the fees of every suitors by fees in courts of justice was kind in courts of justice were abolished, of no great antiquity, tracing only a few enough of expense in the payment of lawcenturies back. Offices in courts were yers and other necessary payments, would granted in fee: hence sprung the term still remain to make litigation abundantly "fee" in legal taxation. At present, con- expensive. If taxation was to be resorted to, trary to all principles of justice, no suitor the dishonest suitor, plaintiff or defendant, could take a single step, either in the ought to be taxed, not the honest suitors Court of Chancery or any other court, who were driven to a court to assert or dewithout undergoing very heavy taxation fend their rights. A fund had been created by way of fees. The attention of the Le- in the Court of Chancery called the Suitors gislature had been attracted to the subject Fund, which yielded 97,000l. a year in some years since, when the stamps on the years 1843 and 1844-a fund which legal proceedings were removed; and Mr. ought never to have been received. That Canning had expressed his opinion on that 97,000l. was the interest of sums accumuoccasion that nothing could be more unjust lated in the Court of Chancery, and not than such a system. Measures had been claimed. It belonged of right to persons adopted for the abolition of payment of offi- in the country, if they could be discovered; cers by these fees. The House would be and from this fund the salaries and comsurprised to hear that there were between pensation of the officers of the court were 300 and 400 persons who collected fees defrayed. There was also another fund in in the superior courts of law and equity, Chancery called the Suitors Fee Fund, either paid over by them to the court, created by levying fees from the suitors or payable to the officers themselves. In amounting to 155,000l. a year. The fact, not a single step could be taken in a Court of Pleas of Lancaster, it appeared suit either at law or in equity without the by returns he had obtained, had also a payment of certain fees. And there arose fund, which yielded 3,000l. a year. There another evil of the matter. There was no were funds derived from fees, which altogecheck or control whatsoever upon the offi- ther amounted to between 300,000l. and cers who received those fees in courts of 400,000l., besides which, there were dejustice. In some cases, indeed, there was rived from the Consolidated Fund for payan oath taken by the officers to dischargement of Salaries, &c., 200,000l.; making their office faithfully, but in others there altogether upwards of 600,000l. for the was not even that restraint. And in no maintenance of our judicial system of case was it requisite that they should re- which 400,000l. were derived from taxa

tion of suitors, and the remainder was paid | ments, controller of the hanaper, the Six by the country at large. These sums were Clerks, Sworn Clerks, and Waiting Clerks monstrous; and the matter was made worse in the Court of Chancery, and provided that by their being collected by officers over compensation should be given to the perwhom there was neither check nor control. sons filling those offices. They had Another grievance in the courts of com- received an enormous amount of common law was, that the Judges had the pensation under that Act, and four of power some years back of fixing the fees; them at this moment enjoyed annuibut no power of reducing them; the conse- ties to the amount of 30,000. Those quence was, that after payment of all ex- clerks had always been considered a nuipenses the Court of Queen's Bench and sance they were not of the slightest Exchequer paid to the Consolidated Fund benefit. The offices were old, it was true, last year nearly 30,000l.; actually taxing but the principal duty of those who held the suitors to the general burden of the them consisted in exacting fees from the country. A great objection to this tax was, suitors; and he could not conceive on what that it was a poll tax, for the suitor for 11. ground the enormous compensation to paid the same as a suitor for 100,000l. which he was about to call the attention of Again, there had been vast sums of money the House had been awarded to them granted to individuals by way of compensa- under the Six Clerks Act. The offices of tion for deprivation of incomes derived from the Six Clerks of Chancery were very anfees. On looking over the Finance Accounts, cient; they were patent offices, and had exhe found one individual holding a sinecure isted for 300 or 400 years. Those Six Clerks office in the Court of Queen's Bench, whose had also Side Clerks, or Sworn Clerks, retired salary was 7,7001. Another had who had no official duties to perform, but 5,4961.; another 2,0897.; another 1,000l.; who merely enjoyed a monopoly of the buand so they went on one after another. In-siness in the Court of Chancery. Those deed, he might go through a long list of the names of persons who received large sums as the holders of offices to which merely nominal duties were attached. He thought that this monstrous system of establishing sinecures in courts of justice could not be too strongly condemned. In the Court of Lancaster the net fees for the years 1841, 1842, and 1843, averaged about 2,000l. a year. There was a person in that court who held a situation, and was styled the prothonotary. He had held the situation from the year 1791 down to the present moment. He now enjoyed a salary for life, by way of compensation, of 2,700l. a

year.

That was no less a person than the present Earl of Liverpool. He would now proceed to the last branch of his Motion, viz., the enormous compensations given on the abolishment of the Six Clerks. The Act for giving compensation to officers whose fees were abolished, was passed in 1842. He brought forward a Motion similar to the present as soon afterwards as he possibly could. In the year 1844 he brought forward his Motion upon the subject, and it was negatived by a small majority of six teen; and in 1845 he was prevented from bringing the matter forward by circumstances which would be in the recollection of his hon. and learned Friend opposite. The Statute of 5th and 6th Victoria, c. 103, known as the Six Clerks Act, abolished the offices of clerk of the enrol

persons had no patent office, or any office at all: they were admitted to practice as solicitors by the Master of the Rolls; their number was limited. The fees of these Sworn Clerks had been regulated from time to time. Their amount was regulated by an order of Lord Hardwicke; and subsequently an alteration was made in them by Lord Erskine, and again reduced by an order of Lord Lyndhurst in 1829. The fees of these persons depended on the number of solicitors by whom they were employed. A man might hold the office thirty or forty years without obtaining a shilling; but if he conciliated the solicitors he might realize a large income; and some of these Sworn Clerks had derived 5,000l. to 6,000l. a year from offices to which no duties were attached. Mr. Pemberton Leigh, a high authority on the subject of the Court of Chancery, in a speech published by himself in 1840, stated, that the duties of these clerks consisted merely in signing their names on the records, and in receiving and transmitting to the solicitors all notices given in the course of a suit. "The statement of these details," added Mr. Leigh, after alluding to the return of their fees, obtained after great difficulty by the hon. Member for Cockermouth (Mr. Aglionby), "" will show at once the enormity and iniquity of the tax which is thus levied on the suitor." A solicitor who was examined before Lord