when made to gulp his own words, this poor man's friend, this GREAT OVER-PRAISED finds it necessary to resort to the GREAT UNPAID, as exam. ples of immaculate local distributors of justice! They-it is all of a sudden discovered are such models of judges! Hear Lord Brougham's former opinion of this abused order, and say whether it is worth having on either side.

"There is the over-activity of the magistrate in an excessive degree. Over-activity is, usually, a very high magisterial crime; yet almost all the magistrates distinguished for over-activity, are clergymen, joined to the local hatings and likings," &c., &c. "This letter, which I entirely and implicitly believe, further declares, that many magistrates are actually in the commission only to support particular jobs; that they are known by the nicknames of 'brewers' hacks, justices of the pewter!' I knew an instance where a license was taken away from a house, because a magistrate, travelling in a cold night, was kept waiting for some time at the door of it!" ["The impartiality of these local magis trates has never been impeached! What man in either House of Parliament, would dream of throwing out even a suspicion, that the magistrates of England were not competent and disinterested, but the most competent, and the most disinterested that could be appointed!" Lord Brougham, July 9th, 1833.] "The same fault, and the same spirit, run pretty nearly through all the business that country magistrates do " !!! [Mr Brougham, February 7th, 1828.] We subscribe not to Lord Brougham's abuse of the justices, but his laudation, disinterested and consistent as it is. But who are these justices ? Men generally above all suspicion of improper motives; great noblemen, clergymen, scholars, men of a certain ascertained amount of landed property in the country;* men to whom it is essential to retain

a high and unimpeachable character; who have no trying temptations to diverge from the paths of uprightness. Besides, two at least must sit together to hear and determine cases,† mutually guiding and checking one another; they are liable to summary dismissal in case of misconduct; and there is a speedy appeal to the Sessions.

But consider a barrister-and such barristers as will be got to fill these situations-located in a county-associating, either with the great men, and so liable to taint from sycophancy, or with the lower classes, encouraging, perhaps, litigationfomenting bad feeling between them and the higher orders: possibly— fierce political partisans, to boot! He cannot, besides, be removed, but by address to the two Houses of Parliament; nor can even his registrar!-who is thus secured in his privileges to an extent that poor Baron Smith of Ireland lately knew the want of! This, however, will be a dernier resort-a process that none would venture to resort to, but in cases of the grossest misconduct. After all, however, the institution of Justices of the Peace, is liable-as none knows better than Lord Brougham and his friends-to divers inconveniences. But, surely the very fact of their existence-especially with such a character as he has last thought fit to give them—is of itself an answer to the alleged necessity of introducing Local Courts. Then the surveillance-the control of newspapers. And will they attend to all these courts? and if they do, how easy will it be for a Judge so minded, to commit gross injustice in such a manner as to elude their detection! All the Argus-eyed inquisition of the poor man's press might fail to observe the dexterous inclination of the scales of justice but a hair the wrong way; and yet that hair's inclination shall have the effect of grievously-irretrievably oppressing the poor suitor-who is

Burn's Justice, "Appeal.",

thus, in all his small matters-small possibly in the estimation of the public, but serious to himself-entirely at the mercy of an incompetent or corrupt local Judge. It may suit Lord Brougham to exhibit flourishing pictures of the possible excellences of Justices of the Peace -to pass over all the minor disturb ing forces. Will every local Judge be a Lord Wharncliffe, in known responsibility, talent, and learning? As for the legal fitness of the local Judge-Lord Lyndhurst triumphantly established, both by argument and authorities, the inevitable tendency of a local Judge to become indolent, and consequently ignorant of the principles of law. So much, then, for the Judge. Then for "cheap justice." These too are Lord Brougham's magic words. They are eternally on his lips-his crack slang-they are ever floating about his brain-but we do not think he has any definite meaning attached to them. Let him therefore learn a lesson on this subject from the wise and amiable Chief-Justice of the Common Pleas a Judge "ripe with the fairest uses of experience.'

'Indeed, law may be had too cheap," says Sir Nicholas, "and then it becomes an unmitigated evil." [He then supposes the revenue to become capable of affording justice gratuitously.] "Then every man's hand would be raised against his neighbour; no fancied grievance would be allowed to sink into oblivion; no paltry assault, no petty trespass would be either forgiven or forgotten, and the courts would be occupied with the endless quarrels of the peevish and the discontented. It therefore operates as a wholesome check on the spirit of litigation, that there should be in law a dearness commensurate with the exigency which requires an appeal to it a dearness which, while it does not check individuals in the pursuit of a real right, or impede them in gaining satisfaction for an injury inflicted, is much more beneficial to society, than a cheapness which places it within the reach of

every vindictive and malicious spirit!"*

But Lord Brougham will perchance say, that this is mere twaddle-theory -&c. Well-let us see whether there is any appeal to facts in support of it. Perhaps it will be found that they manage this "cheap law" better abroad! Hear, then, what our American friends have made of it!

"The principle of bringing justice home to every man's door, and of making the administration of it cheap, have had a full experience in America; and greater practical curses, I will venture to say, were never inflicted on any country! * * * The Pennsylvanians have done away with nearly all the technicalities of the law; there are no stamps, no special pleadings, and scarcely any one is so poor that he cannot go to law. The consequence is—a scene of litigation from morning to night. Lawyers of course abound everywhere, as no village containing about 200 or 300 inhabitants is without one or more of them. No person, be his situation or conduct in life what it may, is free from the never-ending pest of lawsuits. Servants, labourers, every one, in short, flies off on the first occasion to the neighbouring lawyer to commence an action. No compromise or accommodation is ever dreamt of; the law must decide every thing. The lawyer's fees are fixed at a low rate; but the passion for litigating a point increases with indulgence to such a degree, that these victims of cheap justice, or cheap law, seldom stop while they have a dollar left."+

Hear another witness to the same point:

"Litigation frequently arises here from the imaginary independence which each man has over others; to shew which, on the least slip, a suit is the certain result. It is bad for the people that law is cheap, as it keeps them constantly in strife with their neighbours, and annihilates that sociality of feeling which so strongly characterises the English."‡

Yet, with all these facts and arguments, these "wise saws and modern

Faux's Memorable Days in America.

instances" heaped up before himfor his attention was specially called to them by Lord Lyndhurst, in a most forcible strain of eloquence this Poor Man's Friend [" the Lord defend me from my friends!"] persists in his preposterous plan! He avoids the rock of reasoning-for he leaves the strongest points in Lord Lyndhurst's speech totally unanswered-and "gambols," grampuslike, along a foaming sea of declamation, about" cheap justice"-" denial of it to the poor man"-" got in the next street"-" bringing it home to the poor man's door"-aye, believe us, poor man, that it will "stand a very devil at thy door," who will not leave at thy bidding! Believe us, you ask for a fish, and your friend flings a scorpion among you-for a stinging scorpion ever was this "cheap justice" found, and will be! Think a little for yourselves, in a matter that so momentously concerns you. Suppose a man is in a sudden fit of fury towards another, would you rejoice that there lay a sharp knife within his reach? Now this sharp knife is the "cheap law" which your kind friend is cruelly sharpening against such time as your passions may be up to do desperate things! Or call this cheap law a firebrand, with which a great moral incendiary is lurking about your quiet homes, to consume your domestic peace! To set fire to all the bad spirit that may be among you! Yes-translate all the pompous designing fallacies of your "friend"-thus:

"Poor people! My sweet friends! I am your sincere, your strong, your only true Friend, and therefore wish to give to all of you the ready means of lawing and being lawed! If any poor brother of you is the other's debtor, don't pause to reflect, but hurry into the next street after your rights! Cast him instantly into prison, till he has paid you the uttermost farthing! Do not let your firmness be shaken by the shocking spectacle of his ruined or houseless wife and children! Have your rights, though your brother perish; and what does it matter, though you must be prepared, if even you should happen to become a debtor, to give

in like manner his rights to your rich creditor? For you must remember, dear friends, that the law, which is sharp, is sharp as a two-edged sword-sharp for you, and sharp for HIM! If you can by any means teaze, harass, and affront this your richer neighbour, by having the law of him,' do so, do so! Rely upon it, he will like your spirit! He will give you time to pay your rent! You will never hear of a distress-warrant! He will supply you with goods on longer credit! If trouble comes upon you, sickness or want, see if he do not fly to your assistance! Therefore, help me to get this cheap law for you, by sending petitions on peti tions into Parliament, or I can never succeed, for your Enemies are. strong!"

Ah, you False Friend! Verily, "you are guilty concerning this your poor brother!" You are selling him bound hand and foot to the Egyptians! Nay, you are betraying both your rich and poor brothers! You are deceiving each about the other, and making them hate one another; you set the rich against the poor, and then leave the poor totally at their mercy; hoping, perhaps, that out of all this family hubbub and dissension, you may run off with the mess of pottage!

This is no declamation or misrepresentation. We have one fact, pregnant with sad significance, yet to mention which clenches all we have been charging, of motive and design, upon our "Poor Man's Friend." As soon as he was defeated last session in the House of Lords,* a member of the House of Commons rose in his place the very same evening, to give notice of his intention to introduce there the Poor Man's Bill! Now, who was this member?-Daniel O'Connell-the IRISH Poor Man's Friend! coming to the assistance of the ENGLISH Poor Man's Friend! He who has done so much for "the finest peasantry under the sun," or rather made them do so much for him; he who is so apt a scholar at devising means for beggaring and demoralizing his own countrymen, sees instinctively in an instant the scope of the Local Courts Bill, as

perfectly capable of producing those disastrous effects on the peasantry of this country! Of all members of the House of Commons, the Big Beg garman of Ireland shouts his acquiescence and support into the delighted ear of the English Poor Man's Friend! Sir Robert Inglis, we recollect, once said, that the mere fact of O'Connell's supporting any measure, was a reason for his opposing it! Does not the fact of THIS man's advocacy of the Local Courts Bill startle you! Can you believe that there is a good wish in his heart-if heart he hastowards you?* Here are two disastrous stars in conjunction! Mr O'Connell and Lord Brougham are at issue about every thing except this one question-this giving to you cheap justice!" Here they run in a leash together!

"Sure such a pair were never seenSo justly form'd to meet by nature!" So much for the false pretensions of this bill, as being one for benefiting the Poor Man; a title which we are ready in charity to believe that Lord Brougham will not any longer contend for in the House of Lords, or attempt to find any one audacious and silly enough to introduce into the House of Commons. If this latter should come to pass, it will be met with a universal shout of laughter! We shall wait and see who steps forward to claim there, in advocacy of this bill, the title of the "Poor Man's Friend;" and let him not think we shall forget him!

We deeply regret being unable to follow this bill-this quintessence of quackery-into all its miserable details, and expose their grossness before an intelligent public, but our allotted space is already exceeded. Its other main object is palpably to destroy the certainty of the law, and the very existence of its professors.

66

He is blind and besotted indeed who cannot see the inestimable blessings of settled certainty in the law. Let him read the beautiful and convineing observations of Lord Lyndhurst on this point, in each of the two last debates on this question, and his obstinacy must yield to the force of demonstration, that this bill, if carried, instantly destroys it. Only imagine the effects of some sixty independent judges laying down their own notions of law! Are there to be reports of all their decisions? If

So,

"the world will not be able to contain them-no private purse can purchase them "-no head, however clear and experienced, be able to reconcile their conflicting contents; and if bad local law is to be corrected in every instance by the courts above-and if it is not, the consequences will be fearful-then all the new and costly machinery will have little other effect than to aggravate a thousandfold all the evils it pretends to remedy-to fling us back into the former state so well described by Sir Matthew Hale.

"This" [County Courts, &c.], " doubtless, bred great inconveniences; uncertainty, and variety in the law; first, by the ignorance of the judges, who, in process of time, neglected the study of the English law. Another was-that it also bred great variety of laws, especially in the several counties. For the decisions being made by divers Courts, and several independent judges and judicatories, who had no common interest among them in their several judicatories, thereby, in process of time, every several county would have several laws, customs, rules, and forms of proceedings-which is always the effect of several independent judicatories, administered by several judges."+

And into the modern state of con

fusion so sadly depicted by M. Roger Collard as existing in France

"Such is the deplorable system the Empire has bequeathed to the Restoration. The necessarily resulting evils have developed themselves and never, perhaps, has France possessed a more inefficient and less respected magistracy. It is now easy to understand the weakness of the Bar. The Courts have little taste for questions of law; their whole art consists in avoiding cassation. The consequence is, that the advocate studies only to present his case in such a manner as to conciliate the judges, and despises a science which would be rather prejudicial than useful to him. I repeat, learning is almost as rare at the Bar, as on the Bench."

Alas! are all the arguments of great and learned men-are all the fruits of experience, in ancient and in modern times, both at home and abroad -to be utterly disregarded, at the bidding of so rash and headstrong an innovator as Lord Brougham and Vaux? Is the science of the law to melt away before his glance? Is the Bar to be broken up into fragments,

and its members flung at random over the country at his bidding? Is the country to be deprived of its grand security in these its natural bulwarks, because Lord Brougham hates them? Where, hereafter, if this bill be carried-will the young lawyer be trained, in the school of independence and learning, to fight the battles of the poor and oppressed, nobly daring all the frowns and menaces of unconstitutional powers? What countervailing advantage is to supply the place of the present extensive body of eminent, experienced, and honourable solicitors-men above all taint or suspicion—the secret, incorruptible, and almost universal depositaries of confidence and property between man and man? Is a worse than the plague of lice to be brought upon us at the breathing of Lord Brougham in the shape of the scoundrel pettifogger-a reptile that now dare hardly creep into the light of day, but then would overrun the whole country in noisome and pestilential swarms? All these are to the country matters of grave importance; to Lord Brougham, possibly—of contempt and derision!