gentlemen seemed to think, that they had puisne judges from members in that walk of the profession, who had had previous opportunities of amassing fortunes for their families. Those who thought so were not acquainted with the details of the law-they overlooked the expensive nature of the education required for such a profession, and that there was no prospect of any return arising from it, until the individual had, at least, passed thirty years of age. If he could previously support himself out of his profession, that was all he could reasonably expect. Then, suppose such a person to be made a judge when he was forty years old, what opportunities could he be reasonably supposed to have had of amassing a fortune for his family? Very few judges in his time had acquired such opportunities. But, it was said, Where is the instance of any person having refused a judicial office, upon the ground that he could not afford to support the dignity of such a station? He knew a case in point, and that was one of the most learned, and who had afterwards been one of the most eminent judges on the bench. He meant Mr. Justice Dampier, who, when offered a puisne judgeship, declined it on that account; but a few years after, when illhealth had befallen him, did apply for and obtain the office, in the administration of which he shortly after died. This was a case in point. Then, as to the amount of salary-what was 3,200l. to support the rank, and station, and expenditure of a judge? a private practitioner at the bar, whatever his eminence, might spend what he liked, and might live in any state he pleased; but it was incumbent on a judge to support the rank and dignity of his station. Whatever might be his individual disposition, he was obliged to assume and maintain a certain style of life, with reference to his office and his character with the public. Under these circumstances, with the present rate of remuneration, a judge could not save a single sixpence, and his family was obliged to depend upon the small savings he had been able to make before he was raised to the dignity of a judge. It was, however, within the province of parliament to consider and determine what ought to be the remuneration to the judges for their public duties. For his part, he was of opinion that the salaries of the judges ought to be augmented, and he thought that they could not be placed below what the present

measure proposed. He had heard with attention the observations which had been made respecting the court of Exchequer, and he did not hesitate to state, that he should give the subject his most serious consideration, with a view to some practical increase. At the same time, he would not disguise from the House that the case was full of difficulties, and that any alteration must be effected with the greatest caution. It was very far from plain sailing here, as some might consider it. Let it be recollected that the court of Exchequer was a court of equity as well as a court of law, and that it had peculiar jurisdictions. Let it be remembered, too, that though the impediments to the approach of business were removed, though the courts were thrown open, it did not follow that business would flow in. If there were three courts sitting with equal advantages and facilities to the suitors in each, there would be one necessarily at the head. And if this were so to ever so slight an extent, it would become the favourite, and business would be mutiplied in it. The measure which he had before introduced, was intended by him always as a temporary measure. He had felt that it was not very consistent to establish permanent and extra facilities in a particular court, and join in the complaint, that there was too much business in that court, and too little elsewhere. His object was, ultimately to resort to the old system with respect to the court of King's-bench, to let the suitors have the benefit of the natural facilities, and allow the natural impediments to continue to press; for otherwise they would drain the other courts. -Again, he should be anxious not to overload the judges with business, so as to make them, as they actually were in too many instances, slaves to the technical part of the profession. He would give them the opportunity of cultivating general literature he would allow them leisure to return to the pleasant pursuits of early years, which, he lamented to say, too many at the bar were obliged to suspend -a suspension that, in his mind, was a great drawback on the profession. When an individual was raised to the Bench, he should have the opportunity of directing his mind beyond the mere technical duties of his office-he should be able to turn his attention to what was passing in the world. This was his option, and he thought that if acted on, it would tend

very much to the improvement of the profession. With respect to the other questions, he confessed he saw no reason why the court of Common Pleas should not be as open as any other court. He did not see why the serjeants of that court should not act in the same relation to the rest of the bar, as the king's counsel in the court of King's-bench did; and why juniors should not be admitted to argue in term in the former court. He thought he discerned a cause for the limited amount of business in the court of Common Pleas, in the diversity that prevailed between it and the other courts in the mode of taxing costs. The attorneys were compelled to pay down costs at an earlier stage of the proceedings than they were required to do in the other courts, and many of them not having capital to comply with this regulation, naturally favoured the other court. In conclusion, he would beg gentlemen to bear in mind, that when all the fees now taken were funded for the public, they would go a great way in making up the additional incomes proposed to be now assigned to the judges.

Sir M. W. Ridley said, that as a country gentleman, he felt disposed to give his unprofessional opinion on this important subject, and he would simply ask those who had ever any thing to do in the courts of law, and who had there witnessed the labours of the judges, whether they could reconcile it to their notions of propriety, to see men of such abilities, and intrusted with the performance of such high duties, so ill-requited for their services? He did not think the present salary of the judges sufficient. It did not allow them the means of raising any fund for their family. He trusted the committee would agree to the resolutions. It was a question in which the feelings of every man in the country ought to be interested.

Sir C. Forbes said, he fully concurred in the proposition. He trusted, however, that the increase of salary would not stop here, but that the proposed regulations would be extended to Scotch and Irish judges. He could not speak as to Ireland, but it was his belief that not one judge in Scotland received any fees. He believed, further, that, with one exception, there was no legal office in Scotland that was disposed of for money. The salary of the puisne judges in Scotland, he meant the lords of sessions, was only 2,000l. per annum ; and he hoped that the

House would consider it necessary to add a clause to the present bill, granting them an augmentation of 1,000l. a-year.

Mr. Hume said, he had paid great attention to the whole debate, and must confess, that he did not recollect any question proposed to the House, which had received so little of satisfactory elucidation. The introducer of the measure had laid no grounds whatever for his proposition: he had not stated that any one judge had been dissatisfied with his remuneration, or had made any claim upon the public. Why should they give larger emoluments to public servants, who made no complaint of their being insufficiently remunerated? He should really like to know how the giving larger salaries to the judges would afford them any relief from the mass of business with which it was said they were overwhelmed. But, he objected to the measure upon a general ground. The moment the House began to augment the salaries of one class of public servants, they would find themselves called upon to extend their measure throughout the other departments of government. If he saw any difficulty to obtain great talents, or sufficient industry on the bench, at the present rate of remunerating the judges, he might support the measure; but, as it was notorious that the reverse was the case, he should give it his decided opposition. In fifty years, only one instance had been produced of a lawyer declining to accept the office of judge, on the ground of its rate of remuneration being inadequate. If any commission had been appointed to ascertain the value of the places which the judges had a right to sell, the House would then have had some data to proceed upon, but at present they were called to vote away the public money, and to establish a dangerous precedent, without any evidence or ground to proceed upon. By Mr. Abbot's report, it appeared that there were forty offices under the patronage of the chief justices of the King's-bench and Common Pleas. Some of these were allowed to be sold, and the rest were in their gift. The House ought not to come to any decision until this, and all other points relating to the subject, had been examined into, either by a committee or before a commission. The step from 3,200l. to 6,000l. a-year was enormous, and beyond any increase that he could recollect ["no, no"]. He begged pardon: he was aware that there were many instances of the

House voting away large sums of the public money wthout any inquiry whatever, but he thought that the present measure was only the commencement of a system of augmentations, and it was therefore more important than any single grant of greater amount. Money was now returned to its proper value, and instead of the government reducing the expenses of the State, they were putting it out of their power to give that relief to the country that was held out in the assurances of ministers. The present plan was ill-timed and uncalled-for, and he should give it his decided opposition.

Mr. Tremayne cordially concurred in the motion, and would also promote any increased facility for enabling judges, under certain circumstances, to retire from the bench.

Mr. Denman then said, that he would adopt the suggestion of proposing an amendment. No grounds had been laid for this motion, except inasmuch as related to the impounding the fees of the chief-justiceships of the court of King's bench and the Common Pleas. There was no reason shown for altering the salaries of the puisne judges, except the single exception of Mr. Justice Dampier's case. Now, it struck him as extraordinary, that while the government avowed such a desire to encourage men in the prime of life to undertake the office of judges, they should have so recently appointed a chief baron who was seventy years of age. He deprecated this great interference in the administration of justice on such futile grounds, and thought it at once assailed the independence of the bench, and the public purse. With respect to the connexion between the payment and the administration of the duties, he would say this that the best paid part of the administration of the justice of this country was by far the worst administered, and in the inverse ratio, the contrary was the case. He should conclude by moving an amendment, “that no part of the emolument or salaries of the two chief justices of the court of King's-bench and Common Pleas should in future be paid out of fees or the sale of offices; and that a reasonable compensation should be allowed the same in lieu thereof; and also that the office of Master of the Rolls should be put in point of salary, upon the same footing as the vice-chancellor."

Mr. Home Drummond thought that he might well recommend the Scotch judges

to the liberality of parliament. He was sure he spoke the sense of his constituents when he declared, that nothing would be more grateful to them than a reasonable addition to the salaries of those very useful public officers. He gave his cordial support to the motion; at the same time, there was nothing in the amendment which he could conscientiously oppose.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer thought that all the objections against the measure had been replied to most satisfactorily. He did not mean to say, that there were not good grounds to consider the case of the Scotch judges; but he was not prepared to look at that question at present. One judge of Ireland had had his salary increased since any similar increase had taken place in England. He alluded to the increase granted to the Master of the Rolls in 1812. He did not view this measure as the hon. member for Aberdeen had viewed it, as a link in a chain of augmentations. He considered simply whether a set of public servants were or were not adequately paid for their labour. If other public servants were in the same condition, he should not hesitate to bring in a bill for their relief.

Colonel Bagwell observed, that the puisne judges in England were to receive 6,000l. per annum, whilst the chief justice in Ireland received only 5,500l. per ann. He trusted this would be attended to in the progress of the bill.

Sir John Wrottesley said, he had come down to the House determined not to vote for the proposition of the chancellor of the Exchequer, unless it included a plan for doing away with the disgraceful practice of judges making money of their offices as part of the emoluments of their station. He had heard with great satisfaction what had fallen from the right hon. gen. tleman on that head; and in the arrangements which had been proposed, he congratulated the public upon having so good a bargain. He thought that the salary of the Master of the Rolls ought to be equal to that of the vice-chancellor. He thought 6,000l. a-year was too much for the puisne judges. He would rather say 5,000l.; and if he could be sure of sufficient support to justify him in putting the House to the trouble of a division, in any other stage of the measure, he would certainly make that amendment.

Sir F. Burdett said, that, on so important a measure, they were invited to proceed too hastily, when they were asked

for their consent to a large augmentation of public salaries, without the benefit of previous inquiry, and with so very little of detail. The proposal went upon the supposition of some necessity for raising the salaries, because competent men could not otherwise be had to fill the situations. Now, no such necessity appeared. The tribunals were never in higher credit with the public. On the ground of utility, therefore, all argument for opening the public purse was concluded. Perhaps the case was one for the generosity of parliament to act upon, in its desire to portion the judges according to the high character which they bore in the general estimation: but then, there were great differences of opinion as to the means of doing it. He himself was not able to form a competent opinion. The learned member for Peterborough was of opinion that there were fees which ought not to be abolished. On that point there was considerable variance. That learned member was in himself an authority. The difference of sentiment argued a necessity for inquiry. Perhaps there might be fees, the abolition of which would tend to retard justice. The uncertainty proved that the House had not sufficient information. He had no immediate objection to raising the salaries of the judges, if it were absolutely necessary to their dignity. His impression was, that their consequence could not be rated too high: but they must ask themselves, if the duties were not adequately performed. And, if they were satisfactorily discharged by able and respectable persons, without any appearance of deficiency as to competitors for the vacant places, then what reason was there for the addition? There might be an error as to the number of judges. If more judges were necessary, more ought to be appointed: but, it was a mistake to lay more duties upon a judge than any man could be expected to bear, and then to hope to make up the matter by an increase of salary. He paid but a just tribute to the public services of the right hon. Home Secretary in acknowledging their extent and usefulness-especially in regard to those improvements in the laws, which went to remove many errors which disgraced our code in the estimation of all the world. He would most readily accede to the increase of salaries, if it would have the effect of cheapening and hastening justice-if it would bring justice to any or every man, with little expense VOL. XIII.

and little delay. For such an advantage no expense could be too high. He strongly objected to those promotions on the bench which resembled the translation of bishops, and which made the judges feel too much dependence on the Crown. The practice of raising puisne judges was justified by the right hon. gentleman, on the ground that without that prospect the salary was so low that men of eminence and ability would not accept the situations. It was a practice full of danger to the interests of justice, though it had prevailed to a great extent. If the grant of large salaries could be proved to be a remedy for the evils complained of, he would be happy to support the motion; but, in his opinion, no such case was made out, and he would not go a step beyond the amendment of his learned friend the member for Nottingham. He was most anxious that all fees should be abolished; their value should be estimated, and an equivalent given.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer thought the hon. baronet was mistaken in one respect. He seemed to suppose there was no information upon the subject. Now, there were two most elaborate reports upon the subject, and his measure respecting fees would be in conformity to the advice of the commissioners.

Mr. Scarlett thought it would be better to propose, as an amendment, that the salaries should be grounded upon the estimated value of the situations for the last twenty years. By this means be thought the public would be a gainer. He asked if the average for the last twenty years would not be a fair mode of now deciding? This measure was to regulate all future times, and certainly some consideration was necessary. He hoped the House would consider him as a disinterested witness; and he had rather that a liberal salary should be allowed the judges than the reverse.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, he owed it to the chief justice of the court of King's-bench to state, that that learned lord was totally ignorant of the salary which it was proposed to allow him in lieu of all fees, &c. The reason why an average rate had not been made was, that there were certain offices and fees, which, though emolumentary, would not come into the gift of the present lord chief justice.

Mr. Hobhouse said, that the rest of no gentleman had, he believed, been inter2 T