for, or less worthy the attention of the House. Mr. Brougham said, that country bankers were by law bound to pay their notes on demand, and this petitioner knew it, because he said in this petition, that after applying for legal advice, he found he had no remedy but an action at law. If any other act was to be passed, that could only give a remedy by an action at law. The hon. gentleman who spoke last had said, that perhaps time ought to be given to bankers to send to London in case of a run. Surely he could not mean seriously to say that a banker had a right to wait till he sent to London for cash. The banker was bound to pay every farthing at his own risk. If there was a run, he must do what he could to meet it. To pass an act, giving bankers a time, within which to pay what by law they were bound to pay instanter, would be injurious to every rank in the country, and grossly insulting to the legislature which passed such an act. Mr. J. Smith, in explanation, observed, that in point of fact, the law to which he alluded was an ancient. law, by which it was enacted, that if a country banker did not pay in three days, he might be compelled to pay by a summary proceeding before a magistrate. He repeated, that no country banker did or could keep by him gold sufficient to satisfy all the notes he might have in circulation. Mr. Hart Davis could not help think ing there was some mistake which might be explained. Mr. Hume said, that when the petition was put into his hands, he had inquired why the individuals complained of had not been arrested, and he was informed that an interpretation had been given to the act which precluded them from immediate arrest. jured would have a claim for damages upon all who assisted in circulating the obnoxious matter. Mr. Hume said, he had reason to believe that the petitioner was correct in his statements; for it had been delivered to him by persons in whom he could repose confidence. He did not know the parties against whom the petition complained, but had taken up the case upon a general principle, and upon the belief that the petitioner was deprived of his remedy at law. Mr. T. Wilson said, the petitioner might be some mischievous individual who wished to injure the name and character of the parties referred to. Unless the hon. member knew the individual, he ought to withdraw the petition rather than let it lie on the table. Mr. Hume consented to withdraw the petition until he had made further inquiries concerning the facts, and the parties concerned. Mr. Secretary Canning said, that the circumstances had been referred to the commissioners of inquiry sent out to the Cape of Good Hope. Leave of absence had also been forwarded to lord C. Somerset, that he might, if he thought fit, return to meet the charges made against him. But, whether his lordship came home or not, the commissioners would prosecute their inquiry at the Cape. Certain it was, that the office had not sufficient means of information to warrant the House to undertake the investigation at present. Neither would it be consistent with fairness and justice, since the govern Mr. Huskisson said, there could be no doubt that every banker who issued bank notes, payable on demand, was liable to pay them the same as he was before the bank restriction, and in the same manner as the Bank of England was bound to payment had sent out a leave of absence, all its notes. to proceed, until it was seen whether or not lord C. Somerset would avail himself of it Sir J. Wrottesley hoped that the hon. member for Aberdeen had inquired well into the character of the petitioner from whom he had received the petition; other wise, as the contents of the petition had a tendency to affect the credit of a mercantile establishment in a very important point, by a recent decision, the parties in Mr. Wilmot Horton took that oppor tunity, in reply to a question put to him the other day, to state, that Edwards was an escaped felon from New South Wales, and was at the Cape, but had had no concern in these transactions. Lord E. Somerset said, that feeling interested in the character and reputation of his noble relative, against whom such serious charges had been brought, he was naturally anxious to take the earliest opportunity to assure the House, that the noble lord, so far from shrinking from an inquiry into his conduct, was desirous of submitting his whole proceedings to the fullest and most complete investigation. A commission was now engaged in inquiries into all the measures of his noble relation, and it was the object of that noble lord to give every facility to the proceedings of that commission. The more the conduct of his noble relative was inquired into, the more satisfactory would that conduct appear to the world, and the more completely would he be rescued from those abuses and attacks to which he had been lately exposed. Anonymous publications had been circulated against his noble relation, and the utmost pains had been taken to diffuse such slander throughout the Cape. Some of these charges were of the most atrocious nature; but at the same time, their inconsistencies with each other destroyed the credibility of the whole of them. He conjured the House to suspend its judgment until the report of the commissioners had arrived, and until his noble relative should return to England, if he thought it necessary, to avail himself of the leave of absence which had been offered to him. Mr. Brougham said, he had never read one line against lord C. Somerset, except the petition of Mr. Burnett, and a case relating to his professional duties at the bar. He was totally unprejudiced against lord Charles, but nevertheless he thought that the charges against him ought to be investigated. Of all men on earth lord Charles, if he were innocent, ought to be the most desirous for that investigation. One charge was, that the noble lord had fixed the criminality of a publication upon Mr. Burnett, whereas the real culprit was the notorious Oliver, the spy. NEWSPAPERS BILL.] The report of this bill being brought up, Mr. Hume entreated the chancellor of the Exchequer to listen to his proposal for reducing the duties on newspapers, which he might do without injury to the revenue. The doing away the restriction as to the size of the paper was good; so was the reduction of the stamp on sup plements to two-pence, provided that they contained nothing but advertisements. What he proposed was, to reduce the stamp to two-pence on all newspapers. The reduction as it stood would do no good to those establishments who most needed it. The duty was increased Id. in 1814, but the increase in the revenue did not correspond. The increase from 1806 to 1814 in newspaper revenue was 326,000l. In the nine years following, with the addition of 1d. on the stamp, the increase was only 4,000l. whereas it ought, if it had followed the proportion, to have produced 100,000. Philadelphia was ten times less than Liverpool in commercial consequence; yet six times as many papers circulated at Philadelphia as at Liverpool, and there was seventy times as many advertisements published, the price for insertion being about 6d. the price of the newspaper itself, 14d. Reduce the duty on advertisements to Is. and the stamp so that the paper might sell at 3d. and more newspapers would be circulated and more revenue collected. He would guarantee the right hon. gentleman against loss. So anxious was he, that he would almost become personally responsible, if, at the end of a year, any loss should accrue. He entreated the right hon. gentleman to make trial of it for one year, and concluded by moving to leave out the word "supplement," for the purpose of reducing the stamp on all newspapers to 2d. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that if he were about to sell an estate, he should not for a moment object to the hon. member's guarantee; but where half a million of public revenue was at stake, he must excuse him if he looked for some greater security. Besides, the newspapers were satisfied with the benefits they were to derive from the proposed regulation. The hon. member objected, that lessening the duty on supplements would benefit only a few, and was an injustice to the other papers. To this he answered, that he lessened a particular duty upon those who were obliged to pay it, and this surely could be no hardship upon persons not subject to that duty. When he considered the variety of taxes they had dealt with during the session, and the number of reductions which had been made; he could not consent to any further reductions. The Amendment was negatived, and the original resolutions agreed to. NAVIGATION LAWS-BRITISH SHIPPING BILL.] On the order of the day for the third reading, our commercial policy, had wished to devise a project the most hostile to the future welfare of our trade, he could not have hit upon one more entirely calculated to effect such a purpose than that which he had been pursuing. He had been forcibly impressed with this truth the other night, on hearing the speech made by the right hon. gentleman in relation to the Customs' bounties bill. For what appeared from that speech? Why, that we imported from the Baltic, flax, hemp, and timber; and the two first we empowered our manufacturers to convert into canvass and cordage. We allowed them a bounty on the exportation of that cordage and canvass to foreign ports, where they would be used for the rigging and equipment of foreign ships. But, upon the same ma Mr. Robertson begged to call the attention of the House to the great decrease of shipping in this country, and its increase in other countries, from which the right hon. gentleman near him had lately removed the operation of our old Navigation Laws. From papers which were before the House, it appeared that the increase of foreign shipping engaged in the Baltic trade with us, since the removal of those restraints which formerly existed upon it, was no less than 150,000 tons; and the decrease of British shipping trading to the ports of those vessels was 28,000 tons. The whole foreign commerce that was carried on by this country, and which, during the prevalence of our old navigation laws, was con-nufactures, if employed for the use of fined almost exclusively to British bottoms, our own shipping, we actually levied a was now transacted, the major part of it certain duty. The same inconsistency at least, in foreign vessels. The pro- was observable in respect of the timber portion between the two descriptions of trade. The government had imposed a shipping might be very shortly stated thus heavy duty upon the importation of the -the foreign trade of Great Britain em- timber of which our ships were built; ployed of British shipping 660,000 tons; while in our own ports, to foreign vessels of foreign ditto, 680,000. He did, there- built with timber that had paid no such fore, earnestly exhort the House to con- duties, they gave equal advantages and an sider well the inevitable consequences to equal footing with our own; thereby which the measures lately pursued by putting British vessels in a worse situation ministers must tend. Twelve years ago than the others. He would ask, whether only, what would have been thought of there was any possibility of our being a statement that such was the condition able to compete with them under these of our trade? How would gentlemen circumstances? The fatal effects of the have been alarmed, if it had been stated new order of things might not, perhaps, that our foreign commerce was carried on be much felt for some years to come; but, by vessels of other nations than our own? supposing this increase in foreign shipIt was true that our coasting trade was ping and decrease in our own to continue, very flourishing, and, including that of and the trade of the United States with Ireland, employed a tonnage of near France, for example, to go on enlarging 1,000,000 tons. The trade with the itself, what was to become of us in the United States, however, like our foreign event of a war? Our greatness depended commerce, exhibited the same alarming on the greatness of our navy; and in the appearances; for it employed British decay of its strength was involved the shipping to the amount of 42,000 tons failure of our own. In the same spirit only; but shipping of the United States the right hon. gentleman had said, on a to the amount of 126,000 tons. He must former evening, that if our seamen chose call such a condition of things most to enter into such combinations as some alarming. Let it be remembered that of them had engaged in recently, we must America possessed about an equal share employ foreigners; and that if the shipwith ourselves of the trade with the wrights persevered in similar connexions, continent; and that a very large coasting it would be necessary for our merchants trade was carried on in her own vessels to take up foreign shipping. From proupon her own coasts. The natural ten-positions like these, fraught with so much dency of that trade to increase, presented danger, he earnestly entreated the House to his mind the prospect of additional to withhold its sanction. changes to our own trade hereafter. If the right hon. gentleman who had so warmly advocated the fatal alterations in The bill was read a third time. PARTNERSHIPS SOCIETIES (SCOT LAND) BILL.] On the order of the day for the third reading, Mr. J. P. Grant said, that the bill had been brought in without due consideration. Its preamble recited that to be true which was manifestly false; and declared that to be law which the decision of the House of Lords, in a recent case, had declared not to be law. If this bill should pass, it would hold up this House to absolute ridicule. The bill set forth, that, by the law of Scotland, partnerships, or commercial associations of individuals, might sue and be sued in respect of debts, bonds,&c.: but, so far from this being the case, deci sions of the courts of session in Scotland had repeatedly held, that such partner ships could neither sue nor be sued. The Lord Advocate contended, that, by the law of Scotland, as it had existed for upwards of a hundred years, partnerships might sue and be sued. Authority, too, was given by the same law to record bills of exchange, in further extension of the principle that partnerships might sue and be sued. The records of parliament would show innumerable instances of appeals carried on in the names of such joint partnerships. He would further observe, that this was not a declaratory but a prospective bill. The measure was one of the utmost importance to the commercial interests of Scotland; and he might say, that they would be excessively alarmed if they heard that the question had been made matter of doubt. Mr.T. Wilson supported the bill, and was so convinced of its beneficial tendency, that he should be glad to see a similar measure introduced into our own commercial law. Mr. Scarlett would be sorry to see any such thing introduced into the law of England. It would lead in its operation to a great deal of fraud; for if all partners in a partnership were able to sue or to be sued, what would be the condition of a defendant, who having been proceeded against: by all of them, should have judgment in his favour? What would he do, in very many cases, for his costs? How would he be able to recover them? It was to be hoped, therefore, that no such measure would be engrafted upon the law of England. As to the bill itself, it was clearly declaratory. Mr. Baring said, that the learned lord had intimated, that in Scotland the bill was absolutely necessary; a learned friend of his had just declared, that he should be sorry to have it introduced into the law of England, because it would be productive of fraud; and that observation had been cheered by the Attorney-general. Now if, as he himself believed, this would be a beneficial measure for one part of the empire, why would it not be also for another? This was another instance in which lawyers had shown that they were not the best judges of what laws would be most beneficial for merchants. In Ireland an old law existed, authorizing individuals to form partnerships with a limited responsibility; but in England the matter remained in a state of doubt and difficulty, which he had no doubt the lawyers considered to be the perfection of all law; because hon. and learned gentlemen had never taken any objection to it. Against the present bill, however, he was disposed to vote, seeing that it did not apply to all parts of the united kingdom. The Attorney General said, it had been considered by those who introduced this bill, that they were proceeding upon what was law, and had been considered to be law in Scotland for a hundred years and upwards. At the suggestion of some commercial men, he himself had lately entertained some thoughts of proposing a similar measure in respect to England; but when he came to look more carefully at its necessary operation in this country, and to consider how wide a difference the very existence of such a court as the court of Chancery made between the two kingdoms in respect of the expediency of such a law (which court Scotland did not possess), he was convinced that it was not advisable to introduce any such measure into the law of England. The present bill did not establish any new principle; but was only brought in for the purpose of removing any doubts about that which was already law in Scotland. The bill was read a third time and passed. HOUSE OF LORDS. JUDGES' SALARIES BILL.] The Earl of Liverpool, in rising to move the second reading of this bill, said it was one of several bills relating to the same subject, and which he would move should be read separately. The first bill which he should notice was one for abolishing the sale of offices in the court of King's-bench, it being thought more advisable that a regulated object seemed to be, to make them entirely dependent on the government, or on salary should be given in lieu of all emoluments whatever. At the same time, the bill made provision for existing vested in-parliamentary influence; than which noterests, while it abolished not only all sale of offices, but all sinecures prospectively. The main object was, to do away with fees altogether, and to give salaries to the judges suited to the duties they had to perform. The chief justice of the King'sbench was to have 10,000l. a-year; the chief justice of the Common Pleas 8,000l.; the chief baron of the Exchequer 7,000l.; the master of the Rolls 7,000l.; and the Vice-chancellor 6,000l. With respect to the puispe judges, it was obvious that they ought to be remunerated according to the rank they had to sustain, and therefore 5,500l. a-year was deemed an adequate provision. It was necessary to look for persons to fill the situation of judges who had a respectable business at the bar, and who were not too far advanced in years to discharge the important duties that devolved upon them. thing could be more improper. The salaries they received were low, and their numbers were large, while the individuals themselves were always left open to political temptation. He did not know why, when a general system of assimilation was pursued in the collection of the Customs and Excise, and in all regulations for trade, that the same principle should not be extended to the judicature in Wales. It could not be advisable, that justice in the remote provinces should be different from justice in the capital. The bill passed last session, for regulating the Welch judicature, had been completely inefficient. More than one-half of the business at Carmarthen at the last assizes had been left undone for want of efficient means for executing it. This was an additional reason why their lordships should take the state of the judicature in Wales into their consideration. The Marquis of Lansdown said, he approved of the bill, as it did away the sale of Lord Ellenborough thought this bill aloffices, which, as a mode of paying the judges, together inefficacious for the ends prohe thought very objectionable. It tended posed. With respect to fees, those in the to affect the situations of those eminent office he held, which was the highest in officers, and the better plan certainly was, the court of King's-bench, were as small to give them a simple salary. Another now, if not smaller, than they were two great object provided for by this bill was, hundred years ago. He denied that this to raise the salaries of the puisne judges bill provided an adequate remuneration for to an amount adequate to the rank they the chief justice of the court of King'sheld. But, upon this point, he had heard bench. The higher offices in that court different opinions expressed; for it was had never been sold; though, as there thought by many, that by this bill the sa- was no objection to the sale of an advowlaries were somewhat too low, and the re- son to a living, there ought not, in his tired allowances were somewhat too high. opinion, to be any objection to the sale of A principal consideration should be, to a ministerial office. There could be no induce the most distinguished lawyers to reason for lowering, as this bill did, the accept those situations freely, by render-proportion which the salary of the chief ing it worth their while to do so. At the same time, it was not proper that any office should be over-paid; for, in that case, it became an object of political solicitation; the effect of which was to degrade the office, instead of raising it in the public estimation. He found it asserted in a work, published some time ago by M. Cottu, a French writer, that the government of this country were inexorable in demanding the most precise political opinions from those who were appointed as judges. If this was so, it was a great misfortune; and though no such subserviency was observable in the conduct of the judges, yet their lordships must see, that to hold out high inducements tended to it. With respect to the Welch judges, the VOL. XIII. justice had previously borne to the salaries of the puisne judges. It was desirable, in many instances, that the chief justice of the court of King's-bench should be a member of that House; but no man could in prudence accept a peerage who had only a salary of 10,000l. a-year to depend upon, independently of what he might have saved, which could not be very considerable. The remuneration of the chief justice, according to the existing system, was in proportion to the business done in his court; but, by the new arrangement, there was no inducement to exertion; and though he was far from supposing that this consideration would operate with the present distinguished head of that court, it might have its effect upon his successors; the 4 N |