were effectually prevented. Expense and delay, then, vanished with the removal of uncertainty. No doubt a variety of appeals was troublesome, but by this Bill they were so arranged as to be made almost immediate, so that little delay could result from them. He had thought it necessary to make this short statement to the House, in explanation of the progress of the measure, and of the reason of its being introduced there at that period of the Session. He had now only to hope that they should be allowed to go bonâ fide into the merits of each clause, and to continue the discussion in reference to the provisions of the Bill alone. Mr. Wrangham entirely concurred in the views which had been taken by the hon. and learned member for Boroughbridge, and should vote for the amendment which he had moved. grounds of admiration, might certainly ing of this measure, because he did not claim for himself the merit of having think it a very fair one. The only real kept his word well, as regarded the con- objection that he now heard from his hon. duct which he promised to pursue upon and learned friend was, that he thought this Bill. As long ago as that day the Commissioners would constitute a very fortnight, he stated his determination efficient tribunal. As to variety of apto interpose every objection that his in- peals he said, "You may avoid uncergenuity could suggest to the progress of tainty, but you will not save expense, nor the Bill. Doubtless he had fulfilled that prevent delay." Expense and delay were pledge, for he had this night for the third the offspring of uncertainty, and by protime advanced the very same argument-viding against the one evil, the two others for the third time indulged in the same series of extraneous and irrelevant raillery. Such conduct was hardly consistent with parliamentary fairness. His hon. and learned friend had said, that he was not aware that the Bill was to be pressed forward at this period. Perhaps he would allow him to state the history of its progress, and to explain why it had been delayed so long. On the 23rd of February last it was introduced into the House of Lords by his noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor. It was not founded upon any theory or fancy of the noble and learned Lord, but upon the combined opinions of many eminent persons. At the time of its introduction, its nature and its intended operation were fully explained. It was laid upon the Table of the House of Lords it was printed and circulated -it became matter of universal discussion, both at the Bar, and among mercantile and. commercial men in the City-its progress was delayed by the dissolution of Parliament. When the new Parliament assembled, it was again brought forward. It had been, maturely considered by the parties most interested in it. But again its progress was delayed -not as the hon. Gentleman opposite had presumed, for the sake of pushing it off to the end of the Session, then to be carried in haste, and without due consideration, but in consequence of the unavoidable absence of two noble and learned Lords who were anxious to take part in the discussion upon the third reading in the other House. Thus it was prevented from being carried through its final stage in the other House as early as it otherwise would have been. But had it now been but a very short time in the House? At least a fortnight had elasped since he first brought it forward, so that there really had been plenty of time to give it all the consideration that it could possibly require. He regretted the course which the hon. member for Bridport had taken in the discuss Mr. John Campbell begged leave to say a very few words upon the question of whether there should be four Judges, or only one Judge in this new Court. He was convinced, that the great advantage of the Court would be, that it consisted of four Judges, and not of one Judge. To come from Lord Bacon to Mr. Angelo Taylor he would observe that that hon. and learned Gentleman, who, during his Parliamentary career, devoted much of his time and attention to consider of measures for a reform of the Court of Chancery, always contended that three Judges should sit in equity. Even now, upon great occasions, the Lord Chancellor borrowed assistance from the Chief Justice of the Common Law Courts. The Insolvent Debtors' Court, too, which had only been recently established, had three or four Judges. Another advantage arising from this Court being constituted of four Judges would be, that while three were sitting and deciding questions of law, the other might be sitting with a Jury, to try questions of fact. This Appeal Court should not, therefore, be confined to a single Judge, as the decision of four Judges was likely to carry more authority with it than the decision of one Judge. In the case of a high and responsible officer, such as the Lord Chancellor, it might be expedient to have only one Judge; but the attempt was likely to fail in a case like the present. If there was to be a Court of Appeal immediately connected with the Bankruptcy Court, it was indispensably necessary that there should be more than one Judge. Dr. Paley made use of the expression, that in all Courts of Appeal there should be more than one Judge; and he added, that it appeared to him, that four was the most convenient number. For his part, he would much rather abolish the office of Vice-chancellor than consent to the change now proposed in the constitution of this new Court of Bankruptcy. Mr. George Bankes could not help feeling that this was a topic well worthy of consideration. He regretted that the House rejected the proposition for referring the whole matter to a Committee up-stairs, for then there would have been an opportunity afforded them of examining this and other important questions, which it was impossible to treat in a proper manner in the short time allowed by his Majesty's Government. He was surprised at the argument they had just heard from the hon. and learned member for Stafford; for, in point of fact, it would come to this that they ought to have three Lord Chancellors, except at the present time, when a "master-spirit" held that office. The hon. and learned Gentleman, however, admitted, in a subsequent part of his speech, that it was always possible to find a person adapted for the proper discharge of the duties of Lord Chancellor, but that at, the same time, it would be impossible to find another person who ought to be intrusted to sit by himself in this Court. The honourable and learned Gentleman had quoted authorities in favour of the views he had adopted, and, among others, he had referred to the opinions of Lord Bacon, and of Mr. Michael Angelo Taylor on the subject. He had met in the course of his perambulations that day, the latter of these eminent authorities, and they had entered into conversation on the merits of this Bill. And he had the authority of Mr. Michael Angelo Taylor to declare, that he had never been consulted on this measure, although he fully expected that he should have been, and that he approved of but a very small portion of it. So much for the approbation bestowed on the Bill by one of the hon. and learned Member's authorities. The hon. and learned Attorney General had not acted very fairly towards his hon. and learned friend, the member for Boroughbridge, in the course of these discussions, in refusing to enter into the discussion of topics of the highest importance in connexion with this subject. It was forgotten that the alterations involved in this measure were of the utmost consequence, and ought not heedlessly to be made. The hon. and learned Attorney General, in answer to what fell from the hon. member for Bridport, said, that this Bill would certainly attain one of the three objects which it was desirable to attain with reference to the Bankrupt-laws namely, the removal of the uncertainty attending the present proceedings. He said, that if the uncertainty attending the administration of the law was done away with, this would do away with most of the appeals. It was to be lamented that the learned Gentleman thought it necessary to go out of his way to make an attack of this sort upon the Commissioners, for his language implied that the gentlemen who held these offices were negligent in the discharge of their duty. The noble and learned Lord, the author of this Bill, would assuredly never lend himself to attacks of this nature. He was aware that the noble and learned Lord did in another place make some allusions to the Commissioners, but he would not countenance charges that had been insinuated against them. All those charges arose from the learned Gentleman labouring under a total misapprehension of the real state of the case, and from his being quite unacquainted with its real circumstances The allusions were rather founded on ignorance than upon any correct information upon the subject. It had been said, that all the opposition to this measure had originated in one quarter, and that it had been made, chiefly for the purpose of delay or for some other party purpose. He reprobated the idea as absolutely false and groundless; and he asserted, that only a sense of duty had influenced those who sat around him in opposing a Bill which proposed to reconstruct a Court of justice, when they had had no opportunity of inquiring either into the expediency of the change, or into the probable this Amendment merely from a motive of promoting delay, that such person was completely mistaken. Mr. Robert Grant observed, that the subject had occupied his attention for several years, and many eminent men had spent much time in investigating the best form of the tribunal for the decision of cases of this nature. From all the consideration he had been able to give this Bill, he was of opinion that many of the objections which now applied to the administration of the Bankrupt-laws, could not be urged if a Court like that now contem workings of the new Court. As for the assertion that all the opposition originated with those opposed to the Reform Bill, he would merely mention, that the hon. member for Bridport had taken the lead in the opposition. There was no ground for the charge of unfair dealing, and he would not be deterred from doing his duty by the throwing out of such imputations. He was one of the Commissioners of this Court for several years, and did not hesitate to say, from what he had seen in that Court, that he believed all of them were extremely anxious to discharge their duties. As for the charge of delay in their deci-plated were established. No one intended sions, he would refer to the authority of the hon. and learned Member behind him, who stated that, of the 600 bankrupt petitions brought under the consideration of the Lord Chancellor, within a certain period, only fourteen were appeals from their decisions. In the list to which he belonged for upwards of seven years, there was only one appeal to the Lord Chancellor, who confirmed their decision. The most unfair charges had been brought against the Commissioners, and imputations the most groundless had been made against them. Taking the system as it stood, it was impossible to perform the duties in a more exemplary manner than they were executed by the Commissioners. The hon. member for Malton said, that all those offices seemed filled up without reference to the peculiar qualifications of the person appointed. He did not know whether the hon. Gentleman alluded to the present Lord Chancellor or to his predecessors, Lord Lyndhurst, Lord Eldon, or Lord Erskine, in whose times all the present appointments had been made; but such a charge appeared to be utterly groundless; for in a Parliament where each of these noble and learned Lords would be liable to impeachment for such conduct, he did not think that any Lord Chancellor would act so disreputably, or perform his duties in so negligent a manner. With respect to the question more especially under the consideration of the House, it was, on all accounts, better, in a Court of Appeal, to have one Judge in preference to four; for, by this means the responsibility was increased, and persons were protected against being compelled to go into an important question of this nature, without having sufficiemt time allowed for the examination of it. He should only add, if any one supposed that he supported to cast any imputations on the character He Sir Charles Wetherell would, in the first place, allude to what had fallen from the hon. and learned member for Stafford. The hon. Member hoped that this Bill would pass in its present form. His wishes would probably be gratified; but it an they must be unoccupied, unless, indeed, their time should be filled up by being made Commissioners under a bill with which the Parliament was threatened from the Woolsack-for the Cardinal threatened the Peers as well as the Commons. Notwithstanding the dreadful condition in which he should put himself by presuming to oppose this sort of usurpation, and these kinds of threats, he should certainly divide the Committee on his Amendment, being resolved to have only one Judge, in the new Court, if he could effect the object. The Committee divided on the Amend was also probable that, in the course of next Session some measure would be submitted to Parliament for the purpose of altering and amending this sage scheme. There could be little doubt that this measure would become the law of the land, as an intimation had been given in a high place, that Parliament was to be kept sitting until it was passed. Such order which he understood was issued from the Woolsack no later than yesterday-had not been promulgated from the days of Wolsey to the present period of political freedom. He hoped that similar orders would not be issued on other sub-ment :-Ayes 19; Noes 71; Majority 52. jects, and that the master-mind would at least confine its attention to measures of this nature. In a newspaper, one of the organs of the Government - the Lord Chancellor was made to say, that the Bankrupt Bill shall pass. The Commons of England were to be mere automata, not to escape censure even for discussing this measure in transitu. The House of Commons had received orders from the Woolsack to pass the Bill without delay; he was certainly not inclined to obey such an order, and should, therefore, discuss it as long as he had anything to say against it. He was opposed, as an individual, to such a scheme; and a grosser judicial job or a grosser piece of judicial patronage, had not been effected than this Bill since the time of Cardinal and Chancellor Wolsey. Since the time of that clerical Lord Chancellor, they had not had the same person holding the Great Seal, and also the Archbishoprick of York, the bishopric of Durham, and the deanery of St. Paul's in commendam, but there was an instance of a lay successor of that eminent personage manufacturing a Court of Justice with salaries of 26,000l. a-year, without any ostensible reason. The resemblance between the eminent ecclesiastic and the eminent lay Lord, must instantly strike the mind of any man. The prudence and economy of the Government when some 401. or 50l. was saved by clipping and pruning was loudly boasted of, but when new establishments were to be formed, and when thousands were to be expended, so that Ministers might have new patronage, not a word was said of economy. In all our Equity Courts except the Court of Exchequer, there was only one Judge; and he should, therefore, like to see the Puisne Judges of this Court of Review struck out. Nine months of the year Clause agreed too, and House resumed. Committee to sit again the next day. SUGAR REFINING BILL.] Lord Althorp moved the Order of the Day for the House resolving itself into a Committee on the Sugar Refining Bill. Mr. Robert Gordon said, as they had just adjourned the Bankruptcy Law Bill on account of the lateness of the hour, surely this Bill ought not to be pressed forward; and he had hopes, if the business was delayed, that some arrangement might be made between the parties interested. Lord Althorp was not aware that any opposition was intended to the Bill. It had already been postponed to give time for some arrangement to be come to, but as none had taken place, it was necessary the House should settle the question; the Bill besides was extremely short, and they might easily get through it. Mr. Burge observed, several amendments were to be proposed which were likely to take up some time in discussing. There were hon. Gentlemen in the House who were prepared to object both to the principle and details of the measure. Mr. Poulett Thomson said, he feared that if the Bill was not forwarded one stage during the present evening, there was a great probability of its being entirely lost, as the advanced period prevented any further delay. As the House had already agreed to the principle of the Bill, he trusted they would not put an end to the hopes that had been accordingly raised. The Order of the Day was then read. Mr. Hughes Hughes said, solely on account of the lateness of the hour, and without any factious motives whatever, he begged to move "That this House do now Adjourn." On this Question the House divided; The Petition was read. when there appeared-Ayes 12; Noes 49 -Majority 37. [After the division, it was intimated by the opponents of the Bill, that they would persist in again moving the adjournment if the Original Motion were persisted in, and Lord Althorp consented to postpone the Committee.] Committee postponed. CHAIN CABLES.] Mr. James said, before the House adjourned, he wished to present a petition from certain manufacturers of iron, who had recently discovered an improved method of making Chain Cables. He wished to state to the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Admiralty, that the petitioners complained that they had made application to the Navy Board, and no attention had been paid to their suggestions. He (Mr. James) was given to understand, for some reason or other which he could not divine, that the Navy Board refused to use the best sort of material for the cables of the Royal Navy. The petitioners further declared, that the test used to try the cables was of too little weight; they were only tested to bear a strain of eighteen tons, whereas, if they were made of the best iron, they were equal to bear twenty-four tons. The subject appeared to him to deserve the utmost attention. Mr. James said, that notwithstanding what had been said by the right hon. Gentleman, he was still of opinion these cables ought to be introduced into the public service. A very strong argument in their favour was, that they were daily demanded for the use of private vessels. They were equally strong with others and had the advantage of being much lighter. Petition to lie on the Table. HOUSE OF LORDS, other stages, the Standing Order, being suspended; the Relief and Employment of the Poor, and the Barbadoes Importation; also the Galway Franchise; Arms (Ireland); Prescription. Committed; Valuation of Lands (Ireland); Military Accounts (Ireland). Read a second time; Hop Duties. Read a first time; Distillation (Ireland.) Petitions presented. In favour of Reform. By Viscount GODERICH, from Inhabitants of Havant and Aldborough: -By Earl GREY, from Stromness, Easter Ross, Salisbury, and Swanwick. By Lord KING, from the Political Society of Warwick, for the abolition of Slavery, and for the diffusion of Useful Knowledge. By Earl GREY, from the Royal Burghs of Scotland, praying for an alteration in the Scotch Reform Bill relating to the disfranchisement of the Fife district of Boroughs. By a NOBLE LORD, from the Rate Payers of St. Pancras, in favour of the Vestries Bill. BANKRUPTCY COURT BILL.] The Lord Chancellor.-My Lords, I hold in my hand a Petition from a professional gentleman named Richardson, pointing out several abuses in the present system of Bankrupt-laws, and calling on your Lordships to pass the Bill lately introduced to amend them. My Lords, in presenting the petition, I cannot avoid taking advantage of the opportunity it affords me to state, that I have heard with great concern that, owing to misapprehension, some imputations have been thrown upon me— no, I should not state that, for I hope I am above them-but that some cavils have been made out of this House-where I will not say-respecting my motives in bringing forward the Bill to amend and correct the law relating to bankruptcy, which has received your Lordships' approbation, and is now before the other House of Parliament. It has been said by men for whom I entertain the highest respect Sir James Graham said, he hoped his hon. friend remembered the petitioners were also constituents of his, and therefore he was anxious, of course, that every attention should be paid to their supposed improvements. So far from the subject being neglected, however, he could assure his hon. friend, that the Navy Board had directed one of their surveyors to visit all the iron foundries in the kingdom, and more especially at Fishguard, with reference expressly to the construction of cables, and after all the evidence they were able to obtain, the Navy Board came to the conclusion, that it was not expedient to recommend the introduction of strap iron cables into the Navy. He had been given to understand, that there was not a single instance of a chain cable, such as were at present used, having failed, although some of them had been in use for upwards of--and by one, in particular, whom I have three years; he had therefore come to the conclusion, from all the information he had been able to obtain on the subject, that the recommendation of the Navy Board was wise and proper, and that it ought to be followed, every reason to value on account of his professional and other acquirements-that I was establishing for myself the enormous patronage of 26,000l. a-year. Now, my Lords, it is from an utter ignorance of my disposition and nature, as well as from an |