solved upon holding a meeting, for the purpose of go back to a period which I should have imagined taking into consideration certain specified charges the most fastidious duty or sense of propriety could against Mr. Ward, and of removing him from his hardly have compelled persons to resort to. Part of office, in the events of certain conclusions upon these these charges, made in the year 1846, go back as far charges, or some of them. It has been contended as the year 1832, and must have ended in the year that this could not be done without the previous ap- 1837. These are investigated in 1846, this indiprobation of the other three colleagues, or a previous vidual having exercised the office of schoolmaster all consultation with them upon the subject. Now, I the intermediate time. Let me not be misunderstood have considered that argument since the matter or mistaken in what I have said, or in what I am was before me, and which, necessarily and pro- about to say. I do not impute any motive of any perly, occupied much time, and I am of opinion kind to any person; I am bound to suppose that all that such a proceeding was not necessary. I am persons intended to do their duty. I can only deal of opinion that it was competent for the four of with the facts as they occur, without reference to any their own authority, and without consulting either motive. The first charge is, "that you have not, of the other three, to appoint a time and place for during all the time that you have been master of the taking into consideration the charges against the endowed school at Fremington aforesaid, diligently master which, if established, might end in his dis- and carefully attended to the instruction of the scho. missal. Of course, that observation supposes a lars of the said school, and that the scholars are reasonable time to be fixed, a reasonable place to be deficient in their education by reason of your inappointed, and a reasonable notice to be given; it attention." The finding of that charge is "not supposes that no objection was made, or capable of guilty." The second charge is, "that the school being reasonably made, against the appointment in is in a much lower state of reputation than it either of these respects. Was, then, the notice that was in the time of your predecessor." The finding on was given unreasonable? was the place unreason that is "not guilty." The third charge is," that able? or was the time that was fixed unreasonable? during all the time you have been master of the said If any objection in either of these respects was school you have not borne the character of an able, capable of being reasonably made upon any particular learned, and religious schoolmaster, for the better or special ground, that should have been taken; but teaching and educating the children and youth of the it was not done. Was there notice given in sufficient town and township of Fremington, and the rest of time to each of the electors of an intention to hold the parish of Grinton." The finding upon that charge these meetings? It most clearly was so in the case is as follows:-"We find, that taking into consiof Mr. Kendall and Mr. Metcalfe. That has not deration not merely his teaching, but his character, been questioned. As to the Dean of Middleham, it conduct, and example to his scholars, the said Wilwas left at his ordinary place of residence, a benefice liam Ward has not, during all the time he has been he held in Norfolk, within a reasonable time. It master of the said school, borne the character of an happened that he was away from home; and I believe able, learned, and religious schoolmaster, for the betthe letter did not follow him, so that he did not ter teaching," and so on. Now whether the charge actually receive the letter within a convenient time to or the finding is bad, or either, this appears without enable him to attend. But as the letter was sent and any meaning from which any practicable result could left in proper time at his ordinary place of residence, be arrived at. The word "character" must be underin a benefice which he held, that, I think, must be stood as meaning, in one of its ordinary senses, deemed to have been sufficient warning to the Dean,"reputation." The charge is not of certain acts or and there is no default in that respect. If, therefore, conduct, but the charge is of reputation. The findthere were no other objection to the assembling of ing is not that during all the time he has been master these four gentlemen for the purpose, I think this of the said school he has not been an able, learned, was no objection. It cannot reasonably be attributed and religious schoolmaster, but that he has not borne to them that neither of the three absent gentlemen the character of an able, learned, and religious attended; but I think, without any notion of dis- schoolmaster. A character with whom? A repurespect towards any person, it must, for several rea- tation amongst whom? I must consider the charge sons, be greatly regretted that neither of these three as amounting to nothing, and the finding as amountgentlemen did attend; for if it had been found ing to nothing, for this is not a cause for which, in to have been impossible or difficult to attend, it is to my judgment, he was arbitrarily removeable; for be regretted that some suggestion was not made as to although, according to a case cited, the existence of some other persons. It was particularly unfortunate, a rumour might form a reason, however it might be if the Dean could have attended, that his letter did regretted upon the part of those who were called not follow him; for according to the ordinary calcula- upon to act, for removal, rumour would not form a tion, one would have supposed that it might have fol- ground for this proceeding in this case. I think this lowed him. Then comes the consideration whether charge must stand as if it never had been made, and it was competent to these gentlemen, inasmuch as as, if made, amounting to nothing, and the finding neither of their colleagues could or would sit with upon it equally amounting to nothing. The fourth them, to hold a sitting for this purpose, considering charge is that which, in fact, has led to the all that had taken place-considering that Mr. whole of the present proceedings, but which has not Tardy, one of them, ad expressed an opinion of the created the desire of removing him, because it is plain guilt of Mr. Ward before he had heard either him from the evidence that long before any thing of the upon the subject or any witness for him, and espe- kind was imputed or suspected, there had been an cially considering that Mr. Orde, Mr. Surtees, and avowed and active desire to remove Mr. Ward, posMr. Wyvill, after hearing Mr. Ward, came to a con- sibly from the best motives. I have nothing to do clusion of his guilt; and who, moreover, previously, with their motives-I impute none but good motives; and without hearing Mr. Ward, and the examination of but so is the fact. The fourth charge is "that you his witnesses, had come to a conclusion of the same did, between the first day of October and the 30th day kind. I have considered that point, also, and am of of December, 1812, at your dwelling-house, situate opinion that, however painful it may have been to at Fremington aforesaid, indecently expose your these gentlemen, and however unacceptable to Mr. naked person to your daughter Matilda Mary Ward." Ward, these four gentlemen, placed as they were, On this charge they found him " guilty." Now with might alone have sat for the purpose they did; they reference to this particular charge, I must make a were not incompetent, if they were willing, to sit. general observation, for which I ought to apologise, as It appears that, notwithstanding the painfulness of it is almost, if not entirely, a repetition of what I their position, they were willing to sit; and if their said upon the former occasion, namely in June last, minds were impressed with a belief that the case as that I do not consider that the office of the Court is to the worst features of it made against Mr. Ward to decide whether the electors ought or ought not to was true, or probably true, it might reasonably be sup- have believed or disbelieved certain evidence. It is posed that they conscientiously thought it their duty not for this Court to be satisfied, it is not for the to sit, to whatever remarks it might prima facie make electors to be satisfied, and, if upon legitimate matethem liable, or however their conduct might be mis- rials which might possibly have satisfied a reasonable construed. Undoubtedly it placed them in a position man desirous of doing justice, they came to a certain of considerable difficulty. If Mr. Ward was unfit to conclusion in point of fact, my opinion remains that it remain in the school-if he was a mischievous and is not the office of the Court to interfere with it. pernicious instructor of youth, and their colleagues But supposing the materials are legitimate, yet supwould not sit with them, what were they to do? I posing them not to be such materials as, according to think, therefore, that the jurisdiction, or tribunal, if the universal or general rules of justice, ought to be I may use such a phrase, was properly constituted. considered for the purpose of arriving at a conclusion We come next to consider the charges which were against the rights or interests of a man,-supposing brought before this domestic and private judicature, that they are not such materials, or supposing there thus constituted. Now, the charges are eighteen in is nothing from which a reasonable man, who might number, and it is impossible to see their number, be supposed desirous of doing justice could arrive at their nature, and their variety, without feeling very such a conclusion, then the case would be different; great regret for more reasons than one. If they be otherwise he would be administering justice with no lieved that Mr. Ward was guilty, or was probably materials at all. If this case had turned upon guilty, of the indescribable conduct towards his the evidence of Miss Ward alone, and she had daughter which is imputed to him, it was incumbent answered all the questions which had been put upon them to proceed with that investigation. Why to her, whatever notions I may have of my it should have been deemed necessary or proper to add to that charge seventeen other charges, I cannot conceive, especially when I see that some of them are vague, some of them are worded in a manner which cannot be observed without regret, and some of them own, or whatever doubts I may have entertained upon the subject, I think I could not have disturbed or interfered with such a finding. But with reference to the charge, hearsay evidence has been admitted on the part of more than one witness bearing directly upon that charge. It was with reference to the probable effect of that upon the minds of the judges in this case, that I gave an opportunity of making the affidavits which have been last made. Perhaps the effect of these affidavits may be that they shew that these gentlemen did not, in any respect, rely upon the hearsay evidence. That, however, is not all, for she was allowed not to answer certain questions; that is, certain questions which were put to her were overruled, of which at least one was a question which, in my opinion, ought to have been answered, the result of which, if it had been answered, it is not reasonably possible to foresee. My opinion therefore is, that I cannot consider this person as having been duly or properly convicted upon this charge. My own opinion upon it is of little or no moment. It may not, however, be entirely beside the purpose to say that upon the first occasion when the matter was before me, I was not satisfied of the guilt of the man upon this charge; so in my mind I am not now satisfied of his guilt upon it. I do not say that I am satisfied of his innocence. Beyond all question I am not satis. fied of his guilt. That, however, is a point perfectly immaterial. I do not proceed upon this ground. The fifth charge is "that during the time you have been master of the said school you have been guilty of abusing and illtreating Mary Ward, your wife, viz. previous to your separation from your said wife.” Now that first separation was in the year 1832, and this charge is brought forward in 1846. Upon that charge the finding is this," That it is proved to the satisfaction of the electors." With however great regret one may see a charge of this description brought forward at such a length of time, it is difficult to say that it was improper for them to take it into their consideration. Upon the other hand, there is some difficulty in saying that the mere circumstance that a man beats his wife, or abuses or ill treats her, is of necessity that which is to incapaci tate him from being a schoolmaster. If he does it in public, if he is of evil example, if his conduct has been brought under general observation in that respect, the case may be different; but I am not prepared to say that the mere circumstance of ill-treatment of a man's wife, in the sense in which the term is used here, provided it were done in private, is a ground upon which he ought to be removed from an office of this description. I would rather not at present pronounce any opinion upon it. But providel the charge is relevant and material, I am of opinion, upon the grounds which I have already stated, that it is a finding with which I cannot interfere. I think there is evidence upon it, with regard to which a reasonable man might come to such a conclusion. I do not say that it is my opinion. I say that it is evidence upon which a man in his senses, and desirous of doing justice, might come to such a conclusion. The next charge is one which I shall pass over for the present, with only this observation, that I regret it should have been made. The charge is that of adulterous intercourse. The woman had died-the husband had died; the woman had left the place for years. Time had run upon it, and against it, for most purposes. However, it was thought proper to bring it forward, and the finding is that he was guilty. Upon this charge much the same observations occurred to my mind, as on the charge of abusing and ill-treating his wife in or before 1833. I think there is evidence in support of it upon which a man in his senses desirous of doing justice might come to that conclusion; although I do not say it is my opinion. But the finding goes beyond the charge. The next charge is, that in or about the months of August, September, and November, 1834, you carried on a criminal intercourse with" a young lady whose name and relationship is mentioned; but upon this, as I understand, there is no finding, either affirmative or negative. The next charge is, "that during the whole of the time you have been schoolmaster you have been in the habit of frequenting public-houses, both on Sundays and other days, and staying at such publichouses, and playing at cards there until a late hour." It will be observed that the word Sunday is used here, but the finding is without that word, and I doubt whether it is any finding of a criminatory or incul patory nature. I can conceive that a schoolmaster may frequent public houses with perfect innocence, may stay there playing cards until a late hour with perfect innocence; such habits may go to such a length, or be of such a nature, as to become indecent or indecorous. Then as to the charge "that you have frequently, and on divers occasions, during the time you have been master of the said school, spoken disrespectfully of all revealed religion, and expressed your opinion that the books of Moses as to the creation are entirely fabulous, and expressed yourself in such a manner as to lead the persons to whom you expressed yourself to the belief that you were"what? "an atheist or a deist;" that is, black or white,-in truth, that charge amounted to nothing, and he has been acquitted on it. How such a charge could have found its way into this inquiry, I cannot understand. The next charge is, "that during all the time he has been master of the said school, he has not conducted and demeaned himself as an able, learned, and religious schoolmaster ought to have done." The sixteenth is not contained in the petition, namely, that all the time that he has been master he has not led a moral or religious life according to the intention of the founder of the said school. These charges are vague in their nature; but I am not sure that, considering the nature of the office and the particular functions which these electors had to exercise, the charges are necessarily bad upon that ground, especially as Mr. Ward had a month's time to prepare himself to answer. The evidence was given in August, and as he did not apply for further time to produce testimony, and as upon these two charges there is some evidence upon which (to repeat a phrase I have several times used) a reasonable man, desirous of doing justice, might, in my judgment, come to a particular conclusion, I am not at present prepared to say that I ought to treat the conclusion as to these charges as nothing. The seventeenth charge is," that during all the time that you have been master of the said school, you have been guilty of neglect, misbehaviour, and other irregularities in the performance and exercise of your duties as schoolmaster of the said school." I doubt whether any attention ought to be given to this. The whole time of his office is not used with reference to negatives, it is mentioned in respect to affirmatives; and the affirmative is, that during all the time that he has been master of the school-that is, ever since some time in 1823-he has been guilty of neglect, misbehaviour, or other irregularities. I doubt whether such a finding ought to receive judicial sanction. The last charge is, "that from the month of August 1844, you have not attended the Established Church, but have attended the Methodist meeting-house." Upon this charge he is convicted, and the fact is proved and admitted. The just conclusion, from the will and the circumstance of the case, is, in my judgment, that this was intended to be a school upon the religious principles and according to the religious doctrines of the Established Church of England. Being So, nor sporting with the law and its administration, The Bankruptcy Bill is honoured by Government This is the usual course with measures of a legal character. Reforms of the law have commonly been hurried through Parliament, sometimes without even the formality of an explanation, almost always with out a full discussion. There are perhaps cases where such a course is unavoidable, as in the instance of mere technical changes; but where any principle of importance is involved, there is no reason why it should not enjoy the benefit of a patient inquiry. I cannot, upon the footing of example, treat it as a light matter that, during the twenty-two or twenty-three consecutive months, the master of the school has neither attended the parish church any other place of worship belonging to the Established Church of the country. The reason he gives is, that his opinion of Mr. Tardy's conduct was such that he could not, with comfort and satisfaction to himself, attend a place of worship of which he was the Officiating minister. Some allowance ought to It is our firm conviction that the whole machinery be made for his conduct. I mean to pronounce no of the bankrupt and insolvent laws is out of order. opinion, either of personal censure or personal com. The short debate of Monday night, if it proved mendation upon that line of conduct. But he had nothing more, demonstrated this at least. Look at not merely his own feelings to consult-he had an the very title to the Bill in question-what does it example to shew to others; and I cannot hold it to purport to be? "An Act to abolish the Court of be consistent with his duty as the master of a school Review in bankruptcy, and to make alterations in the in a certain place in which he lived, that he should, jurisdiction of the Courts of Bankruptcy and Court during such a time, have wholly abstained, without for Relief of Insolvent Debtors." And yet the triany other reason, from attending any place of worship bunal which is now found useless was only established belonging to the Established Church. Upon the about fourteen years ago, and the jurisdiction which whole, with great regret, and after dwelling upon the requires alteration was given so recently that it is case du ring the various days it has occupied, both on hardly yet understood. Thus it appears that modern the last and on the present occasion, I find myself reforms have turned out utter failures, and all we can obliged to come to a conclusion that I cannot interfere do at this day is to retrace our steps. So much for to prevent the consequences following upon the con- rash and experimental legislation, for tacking on clusion to which the four electors have come. laws one to the other, like riders to a Bill in comsorry for it. But with regard to so much of the for-mittee, until the statute-book is an incomprehensible mer petition as respects the costs up to the hearing of it, and the order of June last, I am of opinion that it is a case in which the four electors must pay all the petitioner's costs up to that time, and that from that time there must be no costs on either side. THE LEGISLATOR. Summary. I am mass without principle or order. to order. To how great a pitch this disorder and confusion have already risen, few perhaps are competent ledge of the subject, we hope that some are of suffisay; but of those who have the necessary knowcient weight and standing in the world to arrest the progress of this idle habit of piecemeal legislation. subscribing himself " A Creditor," states some A correspondent of the Morning Herald, facts which may help to throw light upon the secret history of this favoured Bill:— SIR,-If the Legislature, instead of abolishing the Court of Review, would abolish the office of secretary of bankrupts, it would confer a great boon upon the mercantile world. The expense that office occasions, directly and indirectly, to unfortunate creditors, is not easily to be calculated, but it amounts to many thousands a year. First, there are the salaries of the secretary, two clerks, a housekeeper, and messenger, coals, candles, &c. about 3,000l. a year. Then there is a schedule of fees, the surplus of which the secretary of bankrupts has for his own use, and of which no public account is given, supposed to be about 600l. a year. Then there are charges in every bill against a bankrupt's estate, for steps taken in the secretary's office, which are perfectly useless. because the real business begins when the parties get before the commissioners. These charges are, "searching if prior docket struck and paid, 7s. 8d.; drawing affidavit of debt, 6s. 8d.; attending to get same sworn, 6s. 8d.; attending to strike docket, 6s. 8d.; drawing petition for fiat, 103.; attesting signature of petitioner, 6s. 8d.; attending to bespeak fiat, 6s. 8d. If from the country, additional charges for letters, 7s. If the debtor files a declaration of insolvency, there are then these additional charges:-Drawing declaration of insolvency, 6s. 8d.; attesting debtor's signature, 6s. Sd.; attending to file, 6s. 8d. Sometimes the solicitor who went with the bankrupt to the secretary's office is required to attend again before the commissioner, and then there are his charges for his time and journeys, sometimes as much as 101. The average of all these charges is at least 41. each case. Supposing them to be 41. and that there are 1,000 bankruptcies a year, these expenses alone amount to 4,000l. a year, so that the secretary's office operates as a tax on creditors to an amount certainly not less than 8,000l. a year. But besides this, there is the loss of time which these useless proceedings occasion, and time is often more important than money. The office originated when the principal jurisdiction was in the Chancellor, and the ordinary business was intrusted by him, through the secretary, to lists of commissioners. It should have been abolished when regular courts were established, but patronage is never abandoned without a struggle. As Lord Eldon said in 1801 (see 6 Vesey, p. 1), "There is no mercy to the estate." So it might be said now. In 1840 commissioners were appointed by her Majesty to inquire into bankruptcy. By their report, page 18, they said, "There being now a permanent court for the prosecution of bankruptcies in London, and our intention being to propose the extension of such court to the country, we see no advantage in requiring the authority of the Lord Chancellor through the medium of a fiat for the prosecution of complaints in a court established for the express We have not much fault to find with this Bill purpose of hearing such complaints. It appears to as far as it goes. Our chief complaint is that it us, therefore, that the affidavit, the bond, and the does not go far enough. If we understand the first fiat, with the practice attending them, are now usethree clauses, they are not obnoxious to Sir J. Gra- less, and that parties grieved should make their comham's objections. Sir G. Grey seems to have appre- plaint direct to the Court." Still these useless forms hended them rightly when he said, that they would have not been abandoned, though seven years have "not transfer to the Greal Seal the business of the elapsed since the commissioners reported. On the Court of Review, but would merely commit the dis- contrary, it is now proposed, by again involving charge of the duties to the Vice-Chancellor." In Bankruptcy in Chancery, to furnish an excuse for be worked under another name. fact, the old machinery will be preserved, only it will continuing them, and that under colour of retrenchEven the indentity ment! In 1840, the then secretary was examined of the judge is unchanged, for Sir James Knight before the commission as to the necessity for his of Bruce will retain the jurisdiction he has hitherto ex-fice, and his evidence furnishes these reasons-"The office of secretary is useful to the Lord Chancellor, quite independently of the immediate duties connected with his particular department."-Appendix to Report, page 293. Again" The secretary of bankrupts constitutes part of the state of the Chancellor, and as long as the existing state is to be kept up, such an officer may be necessary."-p. 295. Will legislature? They surely will not satisfy the House these reasons satisfy the commercial members of the of Commons. Will the Commons, to use your correspondent's phrase, in a letter which you recently published, plunge creditors again in the mire of Chancery?" Will they consent that poor plundered creditors shall be taxed to support the "Chancellor's state?" tion ought perhaps to be, whether or not it is expe- By a miserable majority of seven, of whom three-fourths were Government officials, the Bankruptcy Bill is carried in the Commons. Opposed by the representatives of the mercan-ercised. Under these circumstances the true questile interest, by all the Lawyers, (with the exception of the placemen or expectant placemen), by the independence and common sense of the House, the measure is forced on with a It is, however, scarcely worth while to criticise sort of bravado, as if its authors were seeking, very minutely a measure which, even should it be under this paltry piece of make-shift legisla- the next session. Being but a piece of reform most carried now, will not in all probability live through tion, to cover their pusillanimous abandonment incomplete in itself, and in one point extremely of measures of great moment. Thus, then, hazardous; being also little better than the mere the matter stands. By universal admission sifting of another bill of a more comprehensive chanext session there must be an entire revision of racter, it can hardly escape being absorbed in some the Law of Bankruptcy and Insolvency; the larger project at no distant period. We confess to an absolute dread and abhorrence of any additional legisvery statute now passed must be repealed, and lation on this subject. We shall with difficulty bring in the meanwhile there is to be imposed upon ourselves to approve any scheme of reform which does Parliament is to be prorogued on Thursday the Profession and the public the study of a not involve the repeal of all, or nearly all, existing next, and will be dissolved on the following new law, whose provisions they will scarcely statutes, and the substitution of one single code for day. have learned before they will be abolished. all cases of insolvency. Short of this, no amendment Anything more calculated to bring the law into we fear, will be found sufficient, or can be final. The contempt, and to shake confidence in the wisdom of our law-makers, than this childish danger therefore is, with all partial and particular New Zealand, No. 2 Militia Pay Trustees Relief. Tuesday, July 13. Bishoprick of Manchester Commons Inclosure, No. 3. Fever Hospitals Wednesday, July 14. BILLS READ A THIRD TIME AND PASSED, Friday, July 9. Naturalisation of Aliens. Compensation for Damages, Ireland Polling at Elections, Ireland. Saturday, July 10. Monday, July 12. Tuesday, July 13. Recovery of Public Moneys, Ireland Poor Removal Act Amendment. Wednesday, July 14. Constabulary Force, Ireland New Zealand, No. 2 Canal Companies Militia Pay Trustees Relief. Thursday, July 15. away the next, they might depend upon it their utility MONDAY, July 12.-The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in moving that this Bill be committed, stated that the objects of the measure were to abolish the Court of Review, and the jurisdiction dependent upon that court; to transfer its powers to one of the ViceChancellors; and to save the country between 16,000l. and 17,000l. per annum, by abolishing the circuits of the insolvent commissioners, and placing the business of these circuits in the hands of the judges of the local county courts. The hon. and learned gentleman denied that the Bill gave any additional patronage to the Lord Chancellor. It, on the contrary, diminished his patronage. The measure did not at all alter the law of bankruptcy. The hon. and learned gentleman concluded by expressing a hope that the measure, as explained by him, would meet the concurrence of the House.-Sir J. GRAHAM concurred in the eulogium passed on the latter part of the Bill, and he was prepared to admit that he was very far from charging the Lord Chancellor with a desire to accumulate patronage. But with respect to the three first clauses of the Bill, which went to undo all that had been recently done, and, above all, to restore and transfer back to the great seal the affairs of the Court of Bankruptcy, it was asserted that two ex-chancellors were in favour of the measure; but it was a question which concerned the creditors of the country more than the ex-chancellors. There had been a commission appointed to inquire into and report on the subject of the Bankruptcy Court, and amongst the trading members of that commission were Mr. Horsley Palmer, Mr. Wynn On clause 2 being proposed, Ellis, and the hon. member for Lambeth, the under Lord J. MANNERS urged upon the Government the secretary for the colonies. That hon. member's sig- propriety of withdrawing the Bill for the present sesnature to the report of the commission recommended sion, and thereby giving the probability of successful that bankruptcy should be severed from the great legislation on this important question in the new parseal, and also that the Court of Review should be liament.-Sir. G. GREY said he could only repeat kept up, the reason assigned for the latter recom- that from communications he had received from permendation being that it offered a stimulus to the sons most conversant with the subject, it was most Court of Bankruptcy, as the commissioners were desirable that the Bill, with these three first clauses, promoted to judgeships in the Court of Review. should be passed into a law.-Mr. WAKLEY said, Upon the representation of that commission the that after the close division which had just taken existing law was framed, and it was now proposed by place, a division in which the majority of forty-four the Bill before the House to reverse that law. But comprised not less than twenty members of the go. there was more than a mere change of name effected vernment, he must entreat the Government not to by the Bill, notwithstanning the hon. and learned proceed further with the Bill this session. The Bill gentleman had asserted that nothing else was done by had been brought in too late to be deliberately disit. The Bill, moreover, discovered a desire to retain cussed; and, with respect to it, there were out of old and useless offices, and the endeavour to bring doors some very unpleasant rumours in circulation. back bankruptcy under the great seal was a proof of It was denounced as a job, and not intended for the this. He saw no necessity at all for proceeding with benefit of the public at large. Sir J. HOBHOUSE: the measure at the present state of the session, and, By whom?-Mr. WAKLEY said he had not facts to though he was unwilling to interfere with the govern- supply to the right hon. baronet, he merely stated ment proceedings, he could not consent to the clauses the rumour which had reached him. He thought, which he had pointed out, which would have for their own credit and reputation, the Government the effect of marring an excellent Bill. If, ought not to press forward this Bill at a time when however, he stood alone, he should divide the it could not be considered with that care and attencommittee upon retaining the clauses. (Hear.)tion which its importance demanded.-After a short The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the clauses discussion, the committee dividedwould not have the effect supposed by the right hon. For the clause baronet, which he would shew when they were dis- Against it cussed in committee.-Mr. STUART said that the importance of the measure was so great as to render it impossible to give it that degree of attention at the present period of the session which it deserved, and 614. Bills-Thames Conservancy, as amended on Second indeed demanded. He had heard the right hon. Re-commitment Vexatious Actions, amended by the Lords Passengers' Act Amendment, Amendments made ments made by the Lords Commons Inclosure, No. 3 627. 630. Militia Pay 652. 646. 622. 639. 639. 641. 642. 644. 645. Destitute Persons, Ireland, No. 3. Right of Voting Trust Moneys Investment Bankruptcy and Insolvency, No. 3, amended The clause was then agreed to. On clause 13 being proposed, the ATTORNEY-GENERAL proposed an alteration, giving power to the Secretary of State, with the consent of the Lords of the Treasury, to baronet's speech with pleasure. He implored the regulate the fees to be received. The clause as Government not to go on with so serious a Bill when amended was agreed to, as were the remaining clauses. they were within ten days of the close of the session. The House then resumed, and the report was ordered He was opposed to the abolition of the Court of Re-to be brought up on Wednesday next. view, which was calculated to be very useful. He approved of the establishment of local courts, which, he thought, would prove highly beneficial, but, as yet, they had little experience of their working; and, therefore, he thought to transfer the revising power as regarded those courts, from the Court of Review to the Vice-Chancellor's, and thence to shuffle it from one jurisdiction to another, was extremely hasty and ill-considered legislation. To make those courts efficient, their jurisdiction should be permanent, and if they gave them a jurisdiction one year and took it BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY BILL. WEDNESDAY, July 14.-On the motion that the report on this bill be received, Mr. G. A. HAMILTON moved a clause to the effect that the terms "barrister" and "attorney," when used in the Bill, should mean either English or Irish barristers and attorneys.-The ATTORNEY-GENERAL opposed the clause, which deserved more extended consideration and discussion than could be given to it at the present moment. The question was, whether Irish barristers and attorneys should fill the offices of judges and clerks of the county courts?-Mr. HAMILTON did not wish to press the clause against the sense of the House. ELIGIBILITY OF JUDGES OF COUNTY COURTS TO Sir J. GRAHAM wished to ask a question of the Attorney-General, respecting which he would have given the hon. and learned gentleman notice, but the matter to which it referred had only become known to him within the last twenty-four hours. He had heard that one of the judges appointed to one of the County courts was now a candidate for a seat in that House during the next session. Now, so far as he was concerned, he by no means contemplated any such eligibility on the part of any of these judges. He supposed that their time would be too fully occupied SEATS IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS. The object of the present Bill was to put a new con- 5 44 in the discharge of their duties. The Bill which was now passing the Legislature imposed fresh duties upon them, and there was no doubt that they would be fully occupied now. There was no actual disqualification in the Act of last session. Yet this was a new office, and although the judges of the county courts were appointed by the Lord Chancellor, and not by the Secretary of State, the question might arise whether they were not officers appointed by the Crown. He wished to ask the Attorney-General whether these officers were eligible to sit in Parliament? If his answer was in the affirmative it would be his (Sir J. Graham's) duty to bring up a clause on the third reading, expressly disqualifying them from sitting in Parliament so long as they held their offices.-The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said his attention had been directed to this matter. The Act of Parliament did not give to the Crown the power of appointing the judges of these local courts, but gave the appointment to the Lord Chancellor. The question then arose whether they were or not "places or offices of profit under the Crown." Parliamentary precedents might be cited both on one side and the other, a select committee of that House having given an opinion one way, and an election committee having given an opposite decision. If he gave an explicit answer to the question, he might, by giving an opinion which might not be upheld by an election committee, compromise the exercise of the franchise by the electors; and if, on the other hand, he should say that the candidate was qualified to sit, and the committee were to determine that he was not, the candidate and the committee would both have cause to complain. For these reasons, if the House did not think it would be inconsistent with his duty, he must beg to decline answering the question.-Sir J. GRAHAM at once yielded to the reasons given by the hon. and learned gentleman, and would not press for an answer to his question. But, as the law was so doubtful upon this point, he thought it would be the duty of the House to clear it up. And, although he disapproved of the practice of moving amendments of importance upon the third reading of Bills, as cutting off the opportunity which hon. members ought to have of expressing their assent or dissent respecting these points upon the different stages of the Bill, he gave notice that he would, on the third reading of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Bill, bring up a clause disqualifying the judges of county courts from sitting in Parliament. Sir G. GREY could say that, whether the judges of the county courts were legally disqualified or not from sitting in that House, the Lord [The most important Statutes relating to the Law are Chancellor was of opinion that their duties would be given verbatim; of the less important an abstract is preso onerous that he had never contemplated their hav-sented; of the rest the title only is extracted.] ing a seat in Parliament. The clause was then withdrawn, the report was received, and the Bill was ordered to be read a third time. Majority against the second reading 39 POOR REMOVAL ACT AMENDMENT (NO. 2) BILL. On our re-admission to the gallery, Mr. BODKIN was moving the order of the day for the third reading of the Poor Removal Act Amendment (No. 2) Bill.Mr. CHRISTOPHER opposed the Bill, on the ground that it would establish union rating. If union rating was established, they would very soon establish union settlement, and they would then proceed to a national settlement, and eventually to a national rate. He considered that this measure would inflict a very great hardship on many parishes which had hitherto conducted the administration of the Poor Law in a manner most beneficial to the recipients of relief. As the house had determined to adhere to the Poor Removal Act of last session, he considered that any temporary legislation, on so important a subject was most objectionable: and as the Government intended to give their serious consideration to the question, and had intimated their intention to bring forward a measure to remedy the evils of the existing law, he would move that this Bill be read a third time that day six months.-Mr. E. B. DENISON hoped the House would pass this Bill, in order to afford some relief to the open parishes, which had sustained serious injury under the Act of last session.-Sir W. JOLLIFFE considered the Poor Removal Act so bad a measure, that it was almost impossible to propose any Bill which would not effect an improvement in it; and he would, therefore support the bill of the hon. and learned member for Rochester. He believed there was only one provision in the existing Poor Removal Act which had been beneficial, and that was the clause relating to the allowance of relief in cases of sickness.-Captain PECHELL Would vote for the hon. member for Lincolnshire (Mr. Christopher), in opposition to this Bill.-After a few words from Sir T. Acland, the amendment was withdrawn, and the Bill was read a third time.-On the question that the Bill do pass,-Sir W. JOLLIFFE regretted that his clause could not be proposed at the present stage of the bill. Before next session arrived there would be such complaints of the working of the Act that the Government would regret having carried it.-The Bill was then passed. POOR REMOVAL (No. 2) BILL. TUESDAY, July 13.-The order of the day having been read for resuming the adjourned debate (from the 8th inst.) on the second reading of this Bill, and it being moved as an amendment, by Sir G. Grey, we believe, that the Bill be read a second time that day three months, Mr. BODKIN rose to oppose the Bill. He did not deny that extreme inconvenience had arisen under the Poor Removal Act of last year, rendering irremovable those who had resided for five years in a parish; but what would be the effect of the present Bill? It would be that all persons rendered irremovable by the Act of last session would, immediately on the passing of the present Bill, be liable to removal to the parishes to which they belonged. The parochial authorities would instantly avail themselves of this power, and the consequence would be that troops of paupers would be removed from places where they had been living for the last twenty years to distant spots. For these reasons he thought the House ought to pause before it passed the present Bill.-The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER explained the position in which the Bill now before the House stood. The Act of last session contained a certain proviso, upon which the law officers of the Crown had put their interpretation; but the question had been taken before the Court of Queen's Bench for decision. In the meantime the Poor Law Guardians had generally acted upon the interpretation given by the law officers of the Crown. PUBLIC GENERAL STATUTES, 10th Victoria, A.D. 1847. (Continued from page 317.) CAP. XXVII. An Act for consolidating in one Act certain Provisions usually contained in Acts authorizing the making and improving of Harbours, Docks, and Piers. (May 11, 1847.) This is another of the series of Consolidation Acts. CAP. XXVIII. the session of Parliament held in the seventh and eighth years of the reign of her present Majesty, intituled "An Act to amend the Laws relating to Labour in Factories ;" and by the said first-mentioned Act it was provided, that no person under the age of eighteen years should be employed in any such mill or factory as in the said Act is mentioned, in any such description of work as therein-before specified, more than twelve hours in any one day, nor more than sixty-nine hours in any one week, except as thereinafter is provided; and by the said last-mentioned Act it was provided, that no female above the age of eighteen years should be employed in any factory as defined by the said Act, save for the same time and in the same manner as young persons (by the said Act defined to be persons of the age of thirteen years and under the age of eighteen years) might be employed in factories: and whereas it is expedient to alter the said Acts for the purpose of further restricting the hours of labour of young persons and females in factories: Be it enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, That, notwithstanding any thing in the said Acts contained, from the first day of July, one thousand eight hundred and fortyseven no person under the age of eighteen years shall be employed in any such mill or factory, in such description of work as in the said first-mentioned Act is specified, for more than eleven hours in any one day, nor for more than sixty-three hours in any one week, except as in the said Act is provided; and that from the said first day of July, one thousand eight hundred and forty-seven the said two Acts before mentioned shall in all respects be construed as if the provision in the provision in the said first-mentioned Act contained, as to persons under the age of eighteen years working in mills and factories, had been confined to eleven hours instead of twelve in any one day, and to sixty-three hours in any one week instead of sixty-nine hours. 2. Limiting the number of hours for which persons under eighteen years of age are to be employed.-And be it enacted, That from the first day of May, one thousand eight hundred and forty-eight, no person under the age of eighteen years shall be employed in any such mill or factory in such description of work as in the said first-mentioned Act is specified, for fifty-eight hours in any one week, except as in the more than ten hours in any one day, nor more than said Act is provided; and that from the first day of May, one thousand eight hundred and forty-eight, the said two Acts shall in all respects be construed as if the provision in the said first-mentioned Act contained, as to persons under the age of eighteen years working in mills and factories, had been confined to ten hours instead of twelve hours in any one day, and fifty-eight hours in any one week instead of sixtynine hours. 3. Act extended to females above eighteen.-And be it enacted, That the restrictions respectively by this Act imposed as regards the working of persons under the age of eighteen years shall extend to females above the age of eighteen years. 4. Recited Acts and this Act to be construed as one Act. And be it enacted, That the said two hereinbefore mentioned Acts as amended by this Act, and this Act, shall be construed together as one Act. 5. Act may be amended, &c.-And be it enacted, That this Act may be amended or repealed by any Act to be passed in this present Session of Parlia An Act to amend the Acts relating to County An Act to facilitate the Improvement of Landed Buildings. (June 8, 1847.) By this statute, which consists only of two sections, the process of statutes 7 Wm. 4, and 1 Vict. c. 24, relative to the building of any new Shire Hall, &c. are to be deemed to apply, although the Assizes have heretofore been held in some place not being the property of the county. CAP. XXIX. An Act to limit the Hours of Labour of young Persons and Females in Factories. (June 8, 1847.) This is the famous "Ten Hours' Act." It is so short that we present it entire. 1. 3 & 4 Wm. 4, c. 103-7 & 8 Vict. c. 15-Limiting the hours during which persons are to be employed in mills and factories.-Whereas an Act was passed in the fourth year of the reign of his late Majesty, intituled "An Act to regulate the Labour of Children and young Persons in the Mills and Factories of the United Kingdom;" and another Act was passed in CAP. XXXIII. (June 8, 1847.) Property in Ireland. An Act to amend the Laws relating to the Removal of Poor Persons from England and Scotland. (June 21, 1847.) We give this statute entire. 1. 8 & 9 Vict. c. 117-8 & 9 Vict. c. 83, s. 77 -Guardians, &c. in England may take persons removable therefrom under the first-recited Act before two justices without summons, &c.-Whereas an Act was passed in the ninth year of the reign of her Majesty, for the Removal from England of poor Persons who, though born in Scotland, Ireland, or the Islands of Man, Scilly, Jersey, or Guernsey, and not settled in England, are chargeable to some parish in England; and by another Act passed in the same year provision was made for the removal from Scotland of poor persons who, though born in England, Ireland, or the Isle of Man, and not settled in Scotland, receive relief from some parish or combination in Scotland. And whereas it is expe lient that certain provisions of the said Acts should be amended: Be it enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, That it shall be lawful for any guardian, relieving officer, or overseer of any parish or union in England to take and convey before two justices of the peace, without summons or warrant, every poor person who shall become chargeable to any parish in England, and who he may have in the colony, governor, &c. may permit them so 7. If term of enlistment of soldier expire after any 8. If soldiers are absent from duty by reason of reason to believe is liable to be removed from Eng-An land under the first-recited Act; and the justices before whom any such person shall be so brought shall hear and examine, and proceed in the same manner in all respects as if such person had been brought before them under and in the manner directed by that Act. 2. Inspectors of the poor in Scotland to take persons removable therefrom under secondly-recited Act before sheriff or two justices, without previous complaint, &c.-And be it enacted, That it shall be lawful for any inspector of the poor, or other officer appointed by the parochial board of any parish or combination in Scotland, to take and convey before the sheriff or CAP. XXXVIII. Act to facilitate the Drainage of Lands in Eng- land and Wales. It will be sufficient to give only a summary of Sec. 1. Inclosure commissioners to be the commis- 2. Powers of recited Act to extend to this Act. State, and to both Houses of Parliament. 4. Persons desirous of draining land may memorial- quisition. The candidate for the degree of Bachelor, if he shall pass a distinguished examination in Jurisprudence, is entitled to a scholarship (in University College), which is held for three years, at 501. a-year. There are other subjects, such as Conveyancing, Common Law, Law in the Courts of Admiralty, which a candidate may also take up, and for successful answering in which a medal may be awarded to him; but there is no pecuniary scholarship attached to honours obtained for answering on those other subjects, and therefore the majority of candidates are merely candidates for honours in Jurisprudence. It any two justices of the peace of the county in which under provisions of this Act. Map or plan, schedules, London is merely a degree-giving body," and we are the parish or combination for which such inspector or officer acts, or any portion thereof is situated, without previous complaint or warrant in that behalf, every poor person who shall be in the course of receiving parochial relief in any parish or combination in Scotland, and who he may have reason to believe is liable to be removed from Scotland under the secondly-recited Act; and the sheriff or justices before whom any such person shall be so brought shall make such examination, and proceed in the same manner in all respects as if such person had been brought before him or them under and in the manner directed by that Act. 3. Persons taking paupers before justices to have powers of constables. And be it enacted, That every person who by this Act is autho ised to take and convey any poor person before any sheriff or justices shall, in the execution of this Act, in that behalf have and exercise all the rights, privileges, powers, and immunities with which a constable is by law invested. 4. Interpretation of Act. And be it enacted, That in the construction of this Act the sin gular number or masculine gender shall, except when the context excludes such construction, be understood to include and shall be applied to several persons, matters, or things, as well as to one person, matter, or thing, and to females as well as males respectively; and that the words "justices of the peace" shall be understood to include and extend to a justice of the peace or magistrate of a county, county of a city, or county of town, or of any city or town corporate. a 5. Act may be amended, &c.-And be it enacted, That this Act may be amended or repealed by any Act to be passed in this Session of Parliament. CAP. XXXIV. An Act for consolidating in one Act certain Pro- CAP. XXXV. An Act to continue until the 31st day of July, 1818, CAP. XXXVI. An Act for limiting the Time of Service in the Army. (June 21, 1847.) It will be sufficient to copy the marginal notes only of this statute. Sec. 1. After passing of this Act the period for enlistment for a soldier limited to ten years in the infantry, or twelve years in the cavalry or artillery. 2. Repeals certain questions in schedule to 10 & 11 Vict. c. 12, and substitutes those contained in Schedule (A.) to this Act annexed. 3. Soldiers, at any time during the last six months, or on completion of term of limited service, may be re-engaged. 4. Soldiers ordered on foreign service, within three years of expiration of first engagement, may be re-engaged for a further terin. 5. If terms of limited services expire while soldiers are on any foreign station, they may be prolonged for and estimates, to be annexed to memorial. Memo- of costs of inquiries. sioner to examine and hear objections. 8. Assistant commissioner to report to commis- 11. The Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 (8 & 9 Vict. c. 18), incorporated with this Act. execution of works to be deposited. Copies of orders 14. Where, by neglect of parties to join in main- 15. No entry to be made on the lands of occupier neglecting to maintain banks, &c. without warrant of two justices. 16. Expenses and costs of adjudication of justices may be levied by distress. 17. Distress not unlawful for want of form. 18. Nothing to affect rights of commissioners, &c. of sewers or drainage. Persons interested in lands authorised to be drained under any local Act may have the same drained under the provisions of this Act. 19. No person acting under this Act to construct 20. Definition of terms. REPORT FROM THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON LEGAL EDUCATION. is to be observed, however, that to Jurisprudence (in There being thus no direct inducement held out by the University as such, either for the cultivation of the study of the Law, as a branch of general education, or for the establishment of Chairs, or for a regular attendance on a course of Law lectures, it is remarkable we should find any attention devoted to it The "University of London" presents very material in any of the colleges. Yet in University College the improvements on the preceding system. Its organi- foundation at least for such attention has been laid. zation differs from that of the Universities of Oxford, The Chair of Law has been to a great degree effecCambridge, and Dublin, and resembles more the tive. Professor Amos, who filled it between four and constitution of the continental universities. Juris- five years with much distinction, states that whilst he prudence forms one of its faculties, and degrees of held that office, (except when on circuit, and during Bachelor and Doctor of Law are annually conferred. long vacation,) he gave, he thinks, a lecture every day In order to obtain the degree of Bachelor, the candi- in the week for one hour. The course appears to date must have a certificate of having attended for have been comprehensive, and successful. Professor two years at one of the institutions in connection with Amos lectured upon Equity, and Common and Crithe University, as student, and have passed an ex-minal Eaw, and indeed the whole system of Law, amination, in which he has the option of being ex- Constitutional Law as well as every other. He also amined in Blackstone's or Kent's (the American gave lectures on the Law of Nations and International writer) Commentaries; he must also undergo an Law, and treated, though less amply, the principles He endeavoured to throw into examination (at his option) in Rutherforth's In- of Commercial Law. stitutes of Natural Laws, or Bentham's Principles them as much as possible of a philosophical character, of the Civil and Criminal Code, as edited by De to give as much of theory as he could in these lecMuhl. For the examination for the degree of Doctor tures, illustrating his theory by constant reference to no particular books are prescribed: the candidate actual practice, especially to his own experience as a Doctor is required to undergo an examination on cer- barrister on circuit, and, vice versa, his practice by tain subjects; he mentions his own books, and he what ought to be the guiding principle in regulating may, to a certain degree, choose his own subjects. it. Nor did he confine himself to lecturing alone. There are six or seven subjects generally named, After the lectures were over, he held a conversation out of which he must choose one or two; the rest are with his class, going round among his pupils, and left optional, if he desires to take honours in them. asking questions, and conversing on all points of The answers of Bachelors are given to written ques-nicety which had occurred in the course of the lecture, tions, in writing; the Doctors have a viva voce as well in order to collect their ideas and to rectify them; as a written examination. Besides the ordinary examination, there is an examination for honours in Jurisprudence, and advantages attached to their ac and he had examinations (for which prizes were given) upon the subject of the lectures. He had examinations upon particular books, and also prize essays; |