Mr. Spring Rice expressed his readiness to withdraw his motion. Had he conceived it to be at variance with the good faith and honour of the House, he could not have proposed it. As there did, however, seem to be a very general opinion that, any alteration of the Relief bill might involve a construction of that kind he was anxious to withdraw it; and if any expressions had fallen from him calculated to excite angry feelings in Ireland, no one could regret it more strongly than he would. the knowledge which he had of the intension which had been conducted with great Mr. Wilmot Horton hoped his hon. friend would withdraw his amendment. It was one of the misfortunes of these discussions that they assumed a personal character, without the slightest disposition on the part of members to consider the question with reference to the hon. member for Clare as an individual. For his part, he had voted on the former evening against the claim of the hon. member because he considered the question as one of a nature purely judicial, and because he was convinced the claim could not be supported; and although some hon. members had not voted, he believed they held the same opinions. He wished to see Mr. O'Connell in that House; but when called upon to decide the question of his right to sit without taking the Oath of Supremacy, he felt that, in the discharge of an important duty, he could not do other wise than oppose the claim. He trusted that his hon. friend would withdraw his amendment; for he did not think it becoming in the House to employ its time, in looking for flaws in bills of importance, or in special pleading upon their wording and import. The House, after a discus 1 Mr. Secretary Peel said, he cordially rejoiced in the announcement of the hon. member. So little, indeed, was he disposed to take any triumph on this question, that he preferred such a conclusion to any negative of the motion, although supported by a large majority. Indeed, he should not have said a single word on the subject, had he not wished to make an observation on an expression which fell from an hon. member, attributing harshness and severity to those who brought forward the motion for the exclus sion of Mr. O'Connell. Now, every thing which could give the slightest semblance of the motion being a personal proceeding had been wholly avoided. So far from wishing to push the proceedings beyond the usual practice of parliament, the motion, although not expressly enjoined by law, was not in the discretion of the House, and was in every respect conformable to its practice, in cases either exactly similar or bearing a strong analogy to that of the member for Clare. In the cases of lord Fanshaw and sir H. Monson, upon a refusal to qualify, they were discharged from their attendance, not expelled, and new writs were issued. The case of Archdale, the Quaker, was, however, precisely in point. There had been a case, too, of recent occurrence, which bore a strong analogy to that of Mr. O'Connell. He alluded to the case of Mr. Southey. Mr. Southey was elected member for Downton; and having thereupon written a letter to the Speaker, intimating that he did not possess the necessary qualification, the Speaker read the letter to the formed that they could not be spared, House, and a new writ was issued imme- | for the transport of some troops into Landiately. So far, therefore, as precedent cashire. Now, so far from being inwent, the practice had always been in strict conformity with the present motion. Had not the House, however, acted with the greatest forbearance to Mr. O'Connell? It was well-known to every member that Mr. O'Connell had been in town from the commencement of the session; and yet although this was notorious, had any motion been made to compel him to present himself for the purpose of taking the oaths? No motion of that kind had been attempted; and when the decision of the House was made, that decision, it ought to be recollected, was forced upon it by Mr. O'Connell himself. The course of the House had been throughout perfectly justifiable. They could not, in compliance with their duty, have adopted any other, Mr. O'Connell had pronounced a determination not to take the oaths; and he would ask, was not the House bound to provide for a new election? It had been intimated, that government had used its influence to increase the majority upon this question. To that statement he gave the most peremptory contradiction. The government had not interfered in any way upon the subject. Even those ordinary forms which they all knew were used to give information to members when business of importance might be expected, was departed from in that instance. He viewed Mr. O'Connell's case merely as that of an individual; and should treat it as he should the case of any other member. The course which the law of the land and the precedents of parliament pointed out should be, without hesitation, pursued towards Mr. O'Connell, regardless of the consequences which an hon. gentleman seemed to fear would result from doing so. His gallant friend seemed to anticipate with considerable alarm the consequences which would follow the course now proposed for adoption by the House, Now, he felt no such alarm. The observations of his gallant friend he should answer by merely stating a few facts respecting the course which government had pursued, during the last few weeks, in the county with which his gallant friend was connected. Several instances of insubordination and disturbance having recently occurred in the manufacturing districts in that county, he had thought it right in mercy to the deluded sufferers, to send over to Ireland Mr. Brougham said, he merely wished that the course which the House was about to take should be clearly understood. It was a mistake to say, that the issuing of the new writ necessarily followed from Mr. O'Connell's refusal to take the path. There was no statute which attached such a consequence to the refusal of a member to take any particular test. There was no statute which vacated a seat under such circumstances. There was, indeed, one which inflicted a penalty for sitting and voting, before the oaths were taken; but Mr. O'Connell had neither sat nor voted. The simple refusal to take the oath, there fore, did not enjoin the issuing of the new writ. Indeed, there were cases upon the Journals for instance, that of sir Joseph Jekyl, in 1715 where a member might sit upon a secret committee of the House, although he had never taken his seat. Nothing was, therefore, more inaccurate than to say that the refusal to take the oath enjoined the disqualification from taking the seat. The Solicitor-general disclaimed, in the strongest manner, any personal hostility to Mr. O'Connell, while he felt it his duty to vindicate the privileges of parliament. The amendment was then withdrawn, and the original motion agreed to. PETITIONS.] Colonel Davies, after observing, that it was expedient that a limited time should be assigned for the presentation of Petitions, and having alluded to the great increase of business which had of late years devolved upon parliament, moved, "that it be a standing order of this House, that no motion shall be made for leave to present a Petition after half-past five o'clock, until the orders of the day shall have been disposed of." Mr. E. Davenport supported the motion, and expressed himself satisfied, that if business were to go on increasing as it had been of late years, the effect of the present system would be to kill off all the old members, in consequence of the late hours which they were in the habit of keeping. Mr. Littleton opposed the motion, on the ground that the right of Petition was the undoubted privilege of the people, and ought not to be restricted. He, as the representative of a populous county, the inhabitants of which often felt it necessary to petition parliament, felt bound to make this objection to the motion. He thought it would be more advisable to leave the matter to the discretion of the House, in the event of any pressing emergency which might render a departure from the usual mode of receiving Petitions necessary. The motion was negatived. BUILDING ACT PARTY-WALLS.] Mr. C. Pallmer begged to assure the House, that a sense of duty alone could have induced him to appear as the mover of a measure of great difficulty and public importance. He disclaimed all pretension to the merit of it, whilst he was willing, if the House should see proper, to take his share of any trouble which might attend it. For more than five years past the magistracy of Surrey had felt it necessary to direct its attention to the immense increase of buildings which had taken place in the county, and to the manner in which they were constructed, with reference to the public safety and individual protection. An inquiry into the manner in which the duties of the district surveyors were discharged, their powers and their legal redress as provided by the existing state of the law, and the discovery of a complete change in the mode of constructing houses, convinced them that this subject required a minute investigation; and in the year 1824, a report was made to the quarter sessions of Surrey by a committee (composed of magistrates many of whom had great knowledge and experience on the subject,) that the existing law required much alteration, and recommending that an application should be made to the ma gistracy of the county of Middlesex to cooperate in the investigation and remedy of its defects. A committee of Middlesex magistrates was accordingly appointed, and the opinions and recommendations of the joint committees were laid before the Secretary of State for the Home Department. That right hon. gentleman thought it proper to refer the matter, through the commissioners of Woods and Forests, to a surveyor of great eminence who declared, that professional men cordially concurred in the necessity of an alteration of the law. It was under such united opinions thus collected that he proposed to submit to the House the propriety of an amendment of the law. If the House should permit the introduction of the bill, it was his intention to have it circulated during the re cess, in order that it might be taken up early next session. He would now move, "That leave be given to bring in a bill to extend and amend the provisions of the Building-act, 14 Geo. 3rd, c. 78." Leave was given to bring in the bill. JUDGES' SALARIES AUGMENTATION BILL.] On the motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer for going into a committee on this Bill, Mr. Home Drummond said, that he thought this the proper time to state the doubts he entertained of the propriety of bringing forward the present measure; not that he doubted that an addition ought in justice to be made to the Salaries of the Scots Judges, but that he feared by bringing it forward now, a great impedíment would be put in the way of the proposed improvements in the Scots courts of justice. Two commissions had been appointed to inquire and report on this subject; and the report of the last commission appointed under the act of 1825 was on the table, recommending a most important measure, the union of the jury court with the court of session. The commissioners were unanimous on this point, though they differed as to the mode of effecting it. If this plan was adopted, the duties of the Judges would be materially altered, and with what propriety were their Salaries to be fixed before their duties were ascertained? There were other points that previously demanded the attention of the legislature; such as the expediency of abolishing the Admiralty and Commissary courts, in which case the greater proportion of their duties would devolve on the court of session. He was in favour of such a measure, but would willingly acquiesce in any decision the House should come to, though he was clear it should be discussed before the question of Salaries. It was true that an arrangement might be made, that the Judges should receive the augmentation, on condition of doing all the duties that might afterwards fall on them without any farther addition; but he thought insuperable practical difficulties would arise from fixing their Salaries before their duties were determined. He had no wish to oppose the government, and it was painful for him to obstruct this measure; but he could not remain in his place satisfactorily to himself without avowing the serious doubts he entertained on the subject. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that the question was one totally distinct from that to which the hon. member had addressed his observations. It referred to an augmentation of Salary, on the ground of the increase of active professional duty. This, he believed, could not be denied. It could not, therefore, interfere with the proposed alteration in the Scotch courts. Mr. Brougham thought there were many details requisite before they entered into a committee on this Bill. Surely the right hon. gentleman ought, at least, to tell the House the number of hours that the Scotch Judges sat, the number of hours that they did not sit, the number of days that they had nothing to do, the number of weeks and months which they kept entire holiday during six months of the year. There was one day in each week which they invariably kept holy, and that was Monday-a day usually kept as a holiday by much harder-working people; and the half of Saturday was spent in pretty much the same manner. These learned gentlemen had holidays for four months at one period of the year, and two at another; not including a fortnight or three weeks at Christmas. In these observations he did not include the Judges of the justiciary court, who went the circuits. It should be understood that there were three sorts of Judges in Scotland. First, the Judges of the Court of Session, who were what was called Civil Judges, or Judges with one gown. Next, there were six Judges with the double gown; who could try civil and criminal cases. And, thirdly, as there were in other countries Pachas with one, two, and three tails, so in Scotland, there were Judges with one, two, and three gowns. He hoped that time would be allowed, in order to see what the nature of the additional labour of the Judges might be; with a view to a due apportionment of the increase of Salary. Mr. Fergusson did not think the Judges of the Scotch courts at all over-paid. If they had less to do in court than the English Judges, it was because they did a great deal of other business at home. On the whole, the labour they had to perform was quite equal to that of the English Judges. The Judges of the Court of Session had as much labour as the Judges of Justiciary. He fully agreed, that it was time to do justice to those learned men. Four years ago the Salaries of the English Judges were augmented, and it was now 5,500l.; while the Scotch Judges, who were compelled to maintain their rank in society, had only 2,000l. a year. He also thought the Judges of the Consistorial courts were not properly paid. They decided all questions of legitimacy, marriage, and divorce; which were among the most important questions that could come before a Judge, and their salaries were not above 5007. or 6007. a year. Mr. Huskisson was surprised that a proposition for making such important alterations should have been brought forward on the eve of the session. It had been the general, opinion that it was the desire of ministers to bring the session to a close as early as possible; he dared to say for the best reasons. Many measures of amelioration and relief, as well as of inquiry, had been consequently put off, and yet this was the time chosen for considering an augmentation of the whole judicial establishment of Scotland. Four years ago the salaries of the English Judges had been increased; perhaps beyond what they would have been, if the proposition had been made at the present moment. But, what was to be inferred from the silence of ministers respecting the Scotch Judges for those four years? Why, that there was no pressing necessity for this augmentation. There might possibly be very considerable improvements in the system of the Scotch courts. There were twentyone judges: their circuits were very different from the circuits of England; the chief justice did not go the circuit at all. Then the court of Exchequer was hardly a court. The Salaries of the Judges, however, had been tripled since 1793. A single gown in 1792 received 7901.; now 2,000l. A system which sent so many appeals to the high court of appeal stood in need of some improvement; and the worst way to improve it was to increase the salaries of the establishment. No ground for the increase appeared from the dearness of the articles of necessity. The general complaint of the country was, that its present distress was occasioned by the cheapness of commodities. This, he thought, was a reason why the measure should be postponed to another session, to be considered with reference to the duties of the Judges and the whole establishment. Mr. Secretary Peel said, that all that his right hon. friend asked of the House, was to allow him to go into a committee, when he would state the proposal he had to make. It was the usual practice to give the Scotch Judges salaries bearing a certain proportion to those of the English Judges. He knew that it was contemplated four years ago, by his noble friend then at the head of the government, to propose an addition to the Salaries of the Scotch Judges. Within the last year it had fallen to his lot to advise his majesty in the filling up two seats in the Court of Session, and the gentlemen who had been appointed to those seats had lost the benefit of that increase. The question of salary was not, he thought, to be determined by the state of society in Scotland, but a. refer ence to the great consideration, what salary was necessary to induce men eminent at the Scotch bar to accept the situation of Judge. Sir Joseph Yorke was surprised to hear of the difficulty of getting persons to fill these offices. What! was there no Scotch lawyer to be found, in 1829, who would become a Judge without an increase of sa lary? His right hon, friend had asked, with all that gravity which so well befitted him, "shall we not, after increasing the Salaries of the English Judges, bring the Scotch Judges square with them, consi dering how much they have to do, and the impossibility of finding others to fill their situations?" Now, upon this point he really could not believe him. He was convinced, that if a hundred Scotch Judges were defunct to-morrow, there would be abundant opportunities of getting others. A learned gentleman who was himself a lawyer, and who had been improving himself by contact with the wise men of the East, had told the House of the heavy duties of the Scotch Judges, and of the prodigious mass of matters which came before them; and he thought it would strengthen their wits to give them a considerable quantity of money. But he thought, that the poorer a man was, the sharper he was; and that he ought not to blow out his jacket with roast beef on a Sunday, but to keep him spare and thin, in order that the sensorium might not be overloaded with the sanguineous humour, but that he might be able, at all: times of the day, to give a clear opinion. He, therefore, differed from his right hon. friend, and also from the learned sage from the East, [a laugh] and should give his negative to the motion for going into: a committee. The House having gone into the com mittee, The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, he had hoped his proposition would have met with general concurrence; and, though he now rose with somewhat a different impression, yet he could not think that the House would receive it otherwise than favourably. He looked upon his proposition as the discharge of a debt that had been long owing. The House had, almost unanimously, in 1826, agreed to an augmentation of the Salaries of the Judges in England. When he recollected this fact, when he recollected the fact, that government were then asked, why they did not augment the Salaries of thei Judges in Scotland, and when he recol |