shilling go out of the Treasury without first looking on either side of it.

Mr. Brougham admitted that it was a very ill saving of money to underpay men holding high offices; for such men should always be independent and respectable, and they could be neither if they were underpaid. There must, however, be a rule to guide them in this as in other matters. No doubt, men in the vigour, not in the first, but in the second vigour of life, should, if possible, be placed on the bench; -no doubt such men should be in the possession of a considerable professional income, If men possessing these two qualifications refused a seat on the bench, then they might be sure that Judges were underpaid. But he denied that it was necessary that the bench should be filled from the first class of lawyers or from the second class of lawyers, dividing them into classes by the extent of their practice. There was a third and a much more numerous class; and he would venture to say that in England there would be no difficulty in finding in the third class men of talent, experience, and independence, who would be glad to take a seat on the bench at the ancient salary of 4,000l. a year. So in Scotland, he had no doubt that such men would be found to whom 2,000l. a year would be sufficient. The right hon. gentleman seemed to be impressed with a notion far too high of the emoluments of Scotch advocates. He was sorry to say that many men at the Scotch bar who were very fit to be Judges did not make 2,000l. a year. As to the proportion between the salaries of Judges in England and Scotland, we had invariably broken through that proportion; and therefore there was an end of that argument. He was rather alarmed, however, at this part of the right hon. gentleman's speech. For if, as the English Judge rose, he was to draw after him the Scotch Judge, why was he not also to draw after him the Irish Judge? It might be said, that the Irish Judge ought to keep company with his fellow Judge in England; and that when he saw the English Judge reaching, by a rapid stride, to a salary of 5,500l. a year, he ought not to be stranded, as it were, on 4,000l. a year, as before. As to the augmentation of the salaries of the English Judges, he must say, that he never heard a proposition with more unmingled disapprobation than he heard that of lord Goderich; and he believed

that no persons were more astonished at that proposition than the twelve individuals who were most interested in it. With respect to the Scotch Judges, he thought that 2,000l. a year would be found sufficient; but if a seat on the bench were declined, on the ground that 2,000l. a year was not enough, then there would be a good reason for augmen tation. Enough, however, had been said by the chancellor of the Exchequer to show, that this proposition was premature; for many alterations would probably be made in the Scotch judicial system next session. The Sinecure committee reported, that the office of lord justice-general ought to be abolished; and he believed that, after the termination of the existing interest, that office would be abolished. It could not, therefore, be contended, that the provision proposed to be made by this bill was for the purpose of compensation. It was said, that it was intended to remodel the office of president of the court of session. Why not let the augmentation of the salary await, instead of preceding, the increase of the business of that office. He thought that, in estimating the amount of increase of salary by the amount of business performed, the Judge of the Jury court, who had twice as much work to do as the other Judges, ought to to be allowed more than 1007, per annum than the others. The Scotch Judges had incomparably less work to do than the English Judges, in consequence of the absense of that refinement, which created great litigation in this country. By the establishment of the Jury court the business of the Judges had been diminished, while their salary had been increased. The Judge formerly used to be obliged to read large quantities of written evidence and to compare the arguments, and then decide on the fact at issue. The decision of the court was now left to the jury, and therefore the Judge was saved the great labour of reading through these vast minutes. He was of opinion, that a proportion should be kept up between the labour done and the salary given for that labour; and he thought it would be better, in the present state of the country, and when it was stated that something was to be done. next year with the duties of the Scotch Judges, to postpone the question respecting their salary until it was arranged what amount of business they were to perform.

The Lord-Advocate thought the pro

posed augmentation of the salaries not unreasonable, because it would tend to make the Judges independent. He was of opinion, that when the subject of the practice of the Scotch courts came under consideration next year, parliament would be better able to deal with it, than when connected with a question of salary. The income of the Scotch Judges was certainly inadequate; barristers were often solicited to become Judges, and many individuals had refused for a length of time to take places on the bench. He must say, that a great extent of business had come before these courts for many years past. At that moment, there was in one court a year's arrear, although it certainly was not a very heavy arrear. The time of the sitting of the Judges was not to be viewed as a matter depending on them; but a much greater portion of their time was occupied than the hon. and learned gentleman had stated. There were ample grounds for granting the moderate allowance proposed to the committee. It was much wanted; for there were no less than four of them who had not private carriages to convey them to their courts. Was that befitting the dignity of the judicial station?

Mr. Fergusson argued, that, instead of going to the third class of lawyers to select Judges, it was much better to select them from the first. They could not judge of the talent of an individual, clever though he might be, who was unknown in his profession; and therefore there was danger of making a mistake, by selecting from the third rank. The safe rule was, to look to the higher barrister. He must say, that the Secretary of State, since he had the selection of the Judges, had acted in a manner which was exceedingly creditable to him.

Sir G. Warrender said, he could not concur in the fitness of the time at which the augmentation was proposed. The time of alteration and arrangement next session would be the most reasonable opportunity for fixing the amount of salaries."

Mr. Huskisson said, it was obvious, now that every thing had been stated, that this was not the time to make the proposed augmentation of salary. On the grounds of expediency, of deference to public feeling and to parliamentary usage, they were bound to make the alterations which had been spoken of in the judicial esta

blishments before they decided on this measure. At a future session, the question must come before the House, and he should then not object to a modified augmentation of salary to the Scotch Judges.

Mr. Home Drummond said, that finding the opinion he had at first expressed in favour of delay, so strongly confirmed by all that had since passed, he should propose to report progress. Additional reasons for this course of proceeding might be given; but he must first observe, that some misconceptions seemed to him still to prevail as to the duties of the Scotch Judges. The learned member for Winchelsea spoke chiefly of the Inner Court, but there were two Inner Courts, in one of which the business was considerably in arrear; and though some of the Judges in the outer House had not much business, others had more than they could do. Now, this ought undoubtedly to be considered, before considering the increase of their salaries. Many persons of the highest authority thought that the sittings of the court should be prolonged, as by the late changes a greater proportion of the business was done by the Judges in court. It was of great importance to consider how far their duties could be equalized. He had already adverted to the question as to abolishing the Commissary Courts and Admiralty Court--he did not agree with the hon. and learned member for Kirkcudbright, that a case was made out for augmenting the salaries of the commissaries; but injustice would be done to the Judge admiral if his salary were not raised with those of the other Judges while the office continues. The duties of the Teind Court that remained, should be got rid of. They were ministerial, and not judicial, and of a discretionary and arbitrary nature, and tended to render the lords of session unpopular. It was much for the interest of the landed proprietors and of the clergy also, that their stipends should be settled once for all by a parliamentary commission or otherwise, and the perpetual litigation between these two classes got rid of. This was an evil which the landed interest felt severely, and sooner or later it must attract the attention of the House.-He was most desirous in what he had said not to be misunderstood as opposing altogether an increase of the salaries of the Judges; so far from this was his

opinion, that the increase proposed seemed to him in some respects too small. He had called the attention of the House to the propriety of an augmentation at the same time with his hon. friend the member for Malmesbury, during a former administration, and his opinion was still the same. His object therefore was not to oppose an increase of their salaries, but to postpone it for a year, in order that the contemplated improvements in the courts might at the same time be taken into consideration.

Mr. Peel said, that as he perceived it to be the general feeling of the House that the question should be postponed to next session, he would not press it on the present occasion, though his opinion of the justice of the measure remained unchanged.

After a few words from Mr. Hume, the chanceller of the Exchequer, and sir C. Forbes, the original motion was withdrawn, and the House resumed. The measure therefore stands over till next session.

ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS BILL.] Sir John Nicholl moved the further consideration of the report of the committee of this bill.

Mr. Hume hoped, that the motion might be postponed, as it was his intention to move to-morrow for the production of certain papers; until the House was in possession of which it would be improper to proceed upon a bill of so much importance. The bill was objectionable in many of its most important features; and it did not remedy a single evil of which the public had so long and so justly complained. It was well known that the Ecclesiastical Courts took cognizance of cases involving the dearest interests and deepest feelings of men; and yet their proceedings were so expensive that they were closed to all who were not able to make a considerable sacrifice of money. It was the imperative duty of government to provide some more cheap, expeditious, and satisfactory mode of trying and determining the cases to which he alluded The bill before the House did not moderate, a single fee; on the contrary, it gave to the judge the power of increasing fees in number and amount, whilst it left him no power to diminish them in either respect, Again, it gave to the same person the arbitrary power of suspending and dis missing officers of the court, without

allowing them the right of appeal, The right hon. gentleman (sir J. Nicholl) had a salary of 2,0007, a-year; the remainder of his official income was made up by guinea fees. Now he thought such a mode of remunerating any person in a judicial office liable to the strongest objection. The bill also continued the monopoly among the proctors of the court. The regulation of 1696 established, that only thirty-four proctors should be allowed to practise in the court, and by this absurd restriction that body was enabled to make a monopoly of the business; depriving the public of the benefit of that competition which they enjoyed in every other court. The proctors held offices by which they were enabled to tax the bills of their own class. He knew an instance where a person had received a bisl, in which, in three lines, he was charged the enormous sum of 9921. He demanded that the bill should be taxed; but he was told to apply to the court of King'sbench for redress. He did appeal to that court; and all his satisfaction was, to learn, after a further expenditure of no inconsiderable amount, that the court had no jurisdiction, and consequently could afford no redress. So vague, arbitrary, and uncertain were the fees, that the right hon. gentleman had suspended titioner for six months, for charging fees to the amount of 217., when he (sir John) declared, that the legal exaction had never been carried beyond 147. The person replied, "Why not publish a list of your fees, that we may all know what to charge? He did not pretend to say whether the right hon. gentleman or the sufferer were right; but this he would say, that there ought to be a power of appeal in such a case. He liked not to see gentlemen framing bills and passing them through the House, which put them in possession of all existing fees, and continued to them the exercise of arbitrary power; exercised even without scrutiny. The registrar of the court received fees to the amount of 15007. a-year; and he saw no necessity for such large incomes, derived from a system which inflicted such grievous evils upon the public.

Sir J. Nicholl said, that his functions in his court did not allow him to sit up so late-[it was two o'clock]-but hearing that the hon. member intended to say something about his court, he thought it best to come down to the House and keep