which we now live under-the law where- | in the teeth of the opinion of three most by the Attorney General is the sole judge eminent lawyers, who have answered more in all cases between his client, the Crown, and all other parties, I mean the public, and individuals having their rights damnified, or threatened to be damnified, by the power of the Crown. The Attorney General now stifles all proceedings and suits by the subject against the Crown-the Attorney General now shuts the doors of all the courts, which ought to be as open to the subject as to the Crown, and decides judicially, ay, and more than judicially, for no Judge could prevent a suitor coming to his court, and having his case argued openly, in his own private closet against one party and in favour of the other. And the judicial character which Mr. Attorney General assumes is this. But I will first read what Sir Robert Wilmot, once Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, has said upon this very subject. What says he of the Attorney General ?

cases by thousands and thousands than have ever been answered by the present Attorney General, or by him and the Solicitor General to boot. I state this as a positive matter of fact. In the whole course of my professional career I never stated any case before your Lordships, I never brought any question before this House, I never made any address on any subject either to you, my Lords, or to the other House of Parliament, which was ever attended by more applause than my speech on a late occasion, and never were heartfelt thanks more gratefully and cordially rendered to me by persons in private some of them Members of this House, and other Members of the other House of Parliament-than those which have been rendered to me for my exertions on that occasion. Dead silence there was within your Lordships' "The Attorney General is instructed by the walls-dead silence there was within the King, and not by the constitution. It is the King walls of the House of Commons, showwho is instructed by the constitution. The great ing most painfully that absolute prostraability of the persons appointed to the office of tion of the understanding which takes Attorney General has made it higher in imagina-place even in the minds of the bravest tion, and has given it more importance in the eyes of the public, than it really deserves to have; for the Attorney General is but an attorney, though it be of the King, and stands in no different relation to his client than any other attorney to his employer."

But the Attorney General of the Queen now assumes to himself judicial functions, and says, “I act judicially." And how? By not hearing the parties; by shutting the doors of the court in the face of the public; by giving judgment in his own closet in behalf of his own employer, whose servant he is, against the other party. This is what is now said to be a judicial officer, acting judicially. All depends on the way in which the power of the Attorney General is exercised. I do not, my Lords, deny his power, but I question the way in which it has been exercised. I have brought this matter before your Lordships in order that you may know and understand the law under which you are living; and I say that there is no great or petty prince in Germany, Turkey, or even Russia, who exercises a power more absolute in dealing with the property of his subjects than the constitutional Sovereign of this country, provided that this power claimed and exercised by the Attorney General can be legally enforced as he enforces it in the teeth, not of a doubt-for that might be enough to justify him—but

men when the word "prince" is mentioned in this country.

The LORD CHANCELLOR : My Lords, I hope that my hon. and learned Friend will not consider that he is always right when he gains applause. There are very few subjects which fall into the hands of my hon. and learned Friend, on which he is not likely, when he speaks, to obtain applause. He says that the House was struck with silence the other night when he spoke on this subject. I listened to my hon. and learned Friend's speech on that occasion with all the attention and respect which I trust that I shall always give to every word that falls from his lips. I did not, however, remain silent because I thought that he was right, but because I thought that the discussion was altogether irrelevant, and because it was just possible that the whole question might come before me in my judicial capacity as Lord Chancellor. My noble and learned Friend has thought fit, in the exercise of his discretion, to censure the Attorney General very severely. He thinks, of course, that he is right in making such an attack upon the absent; but I shall endeavour to satisfy him and your Lordships that he is perfectly erroneous in his opinion, and that the Attorney General has acted all throughout these matters in a perfectly legal and con

66

6

stitutional manner. I don't intend, my not a case to justify the proceedings of Lords, to say now whether the exercise of John-a-Nokes, he has a right to refuse his his discretion has been sound or not. I assent to them; and he would be guilty of forbear for several reasons from answering moral cowardice if, from any fear of oblomy noble and learned Friend on that quy, he should give his assent where he point. I was informed that it was the in- conscientiously thought that it ought to be tention of several parties to bring a Mo- withheld. The Attorney General, in retion into the Court of Chancery to put a fusing to allow these parties to file an instop to the proceedings in Hyde Park by formation in his name, did not prevent means of an injunction. As I consider it them from proceeding as they might by possible that it might thus come before me indictment. This is a totally different as Lord Chancellor, I did not think it thing. Who is it that complains? Are right to take any share in the discussion they private parties having any private inon that occasion. I have already stated, terest affected by these proceedings? Let my Lords, the reasons why I was silent; them bring it into court, as they are entibut when my noble and learned Friend tled and have power to do, and there let says that the other House was equally them try their right. Have they any pubsilent, I think that he cannot have con- lic interest? Let them proceed, as they sulted the ordinary vehicles of information, could do, by indictment against the wrongby which we obtain intelligence of what is doer. You bring before the Attorney passing in that assembly; for the Attorney General an opinion which says that there General there made a most satisfactory are certain Acts of Parliament which do answer to the objections urged against his not give the Crown the right of erecting conduct-an answer which, if my noble buildings in Hyde Park. The Attorney and learned Friend will give us a legiti- General replies, That is not the quesmate opportunity for debate, I will under- tion; the question is, Have any rights take to prove was in every respect a legal been taken away from you?' If the and substantial answer. Such topics, as Crown, which is the owner of the soil, my noble and learned Friend well knows gives its consent to the erection of those how to introduce, are likely to make an buildings, what right have you to object? impression on those who are not aware Do not alarm the public by stating that of the nature and duties of the office of your rights are in jeopardy, and that you Attorney General. But I must be permit- are likely to be injured, when you cannot ted to tell him, that when he cited this show that you have any rights, as indivievening the opinion of Sir Robert Wil- duals, or that any injury has been or will mot, the Chief Justice of the Court of be inflicted upon you." The Attorney Common Pleas, as an opinion condemna- General says no more than this, "I will tory of the proceedings of the present not be the means of assisting you-take' Attorney General, he quoted an opinion such remedies as are open to youthat has nothing to do with, and can- I will not interfere for you, or against not make any impression on, the present you." My Lords, the Attorney General case. The question in that case was, whe- has exercised a sound discretion, and these ther the Solicitor General as well as the attacks upon that functionary are without Attorney General could file an information; foundation, and are inconsistent both with and the judgment upon it cannot be legi- law and with justice. The Attorney Gentimately twisted into any analogy with the eral has exercised his powers for the subject now before us. It is said that the benefit of the public-he is responsible to Attorney General represents the public. Parliament for his exercise of those powUndoubtedly, and therefore it is his duty, ers; and if he has exercised them improwhen his name is to be used in the manner perly let his noble and learned Friend in which it is proposed to use it on this bring that charge regularly and substanoccasion, to see whether it is for the pro- tially before the House. I do not question -motion of the interests of the public that my noble and learned Friend's right to it should be so used. If John-a-Nokes discuss the question whether the Attorney chooses to go to the Attorney General, and General has exercised or not a sound disto say, "I am the public," it is the duty cretion; but I do complain of the system of the Attorney General to see whether he of attacking an honourable man, and a high has any right to be considered as the legal functionary, in a place where he canpublic, and the Attorney General must not not answer for himself. Where he could take it on his unsupported assertion. If answer his detractors, he has answered the Attorney General sees that there is them in a straightforward and satisfactory

manner; and I now tell my noble and than by their own attorney in his private learned Friend that, whenever he will closet. The ground of his complaint condescend to bring forward his charges against the Attorney General was, that by against the Attorney General in a regular his refusal the matter in dispute could not manner, I will not fail to prove to the sa- come before the Court of Chancery. tisfaction of every impartial man that the Attorney General has exercised a sound, impartial, and legitimate discretion.

The LORD CHANCELLOR gave a decided negative to that assertion. If any individual had to complain of a private wrong, there was nothing to prevent him from bringing it before the Court of Chancery.

He

LORD BROUGHAM could not refrain from rising to put his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack right on one or two matters of fact. In the first place, his noble and learned Friend had not been so long in the House as to be aware of its ordinary forms, or he would not have used the term "honourable " Friend in an assembly where every man was noble. In the next place, had he been longer a Member of that House he would have known that nothing was less irregular than to moot a case like the present on presenting a petition. He might bring forward without notice in that House any question, without being liable to the charge of irregularity. The courtesy of the House led to the practice of giving notice; but irregularity there was none in bringing forward any matter without it. If his noble and learned Friend had no better foundation for his knowledge of law than he had for his knowledge of the rules and orders of Parliament, when he stigmatised as irregular a proceeding which was strictly regular, he was certain to fail in the case which he had just pledged his reputation to establish. He had not, on the occasion to which his noble and learned Friend alluded, travelled even one hair's-breadth out of the four corners of the petition, and everything which he had then said had relevancy to that petition. As to his noble and learned Friend's saying that he (the Lord Chancellor) would take issue with him (Lord Brougham) on the point of law, he begged leave to remind the House that he had never said that the Attorney General had not the legal right to act as he had done. He had distinctly admitted that the Attorney General had that right; but the whole question rested upon the LORD BEAUMONT brought up the rediscretion with which he exercised it. He port of the Select Committee appointed to repeated his assertion, that this country inquire into the fraudulent signatures atwas not a free country if the Attorney Ge- tached to the petition recently presented neral had a right to refuse to the subjects from Liverpool. His Lordship read the of the Crown all access to the courts of report at length. It stated that the Comlaw and equity by refusing to join them in mittee were of opinion that it was not esa triable, probable, and maintainable cause. tablished that the promoters of the oppoOh! but he was the attorney for the pub- sition to the Bill had directly aided in inlic, was he? Why, the public repudiated creasing the number of signatures to the his office, and would rather have these petition. The Committee, however, were matters decided judicially by the courts of opinion that due precaution had not

The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE begged to remind his noble and learned Friend, who stood up so stoutly for the regularity of his and their proceedings, that he had himself departed from the Orders of the House in making an attack upon the conduet and proceedings of the Attorney General, when he merely rose to ask a question about the paving of Hyde Park. assured his noble and learned Friend, that he had made inquiries into the subjectmatter of this question, and that he could now inform him that the invasion of the sacred territory of Rotten-row, on which he admitted that he and others were wont to ride, was confined to the pavement of the entrance at the gate, and thence to. the building erected in the Park. Not the road nor any part of the grass was to be paved.

LORD BROUGHAM was understood to admit that, strictly speaking, he had been out of order in the observations which he had made that evening on this subject; but, if he had erred, he had erred in common with great authorities. Communis error facit jus. With respect to the Park, it was a great consolation for him to have heard from the noble Marquess that they were not to have a paved road to Kensing ton. Some, but a small part of the Park, it appeared, would be paved. Nothing could be more fair than the language and conduct of his noble Friend.

BREACH OF PRIVILEGE THE LIVER-
POOL CORPORATION WATERWORKS
PETITION.

the sums received by the Privy Purse from these various sources amounted to about 140,000l. But it was a great mistake to suppose that the Privy Purse was unencumbered.

bread--he meant the corn laws, would be long continued. He had expressed his assurance that the law must be repealed, and he had asked what would be the effect on the prices of all the articles of general consumpHe did not mean to say that tion. He had also asserted that the con- that debt had been increased by the presequence of such repeal would be that sent Sovereign, but there were arrears they could not properly appropriate the due from charges placed on it by former amount that would be required in each of Sovereigns. The late William IV. had these departments with the existing state charged it with about 28,000l. He (Lord of facts before them. As he had fore- Brougham) never could allude to that seen, the corn laws had been repealed, beneficent monarch without expressing his and savings to the amount of 38,000l. admiration of his excellent temper and had been effected in the expenditure of his kindness of disposition, which perhaps the Civil List in one year. He took credit had induced him to bestow grants on those for not having agreed at the time with the who had served with him, or who, in his esti-. sums fixed for each, for the whole of a mation, had rendered service to the State. reign, for these several departments. It was not in conformity with the genius Many objections, however, were taken of the constitution that the Sovereign of against making the Civil List temporary, this country should have the means of acand he was induced to content himself quiring wealth, but that he should be dewith protesting against the course taken. pendent on Parliament. If the Sovereign There was also another reason which he and the Parliament went on with amicable had urged, it was that he wished that feelings and with a good understanding, they should know what were the revenues the latter would be ample, liberal, nay, of the duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster. even generous in its grants for the support He found the revenue of the duchy of of the dignity of the Crown. He had Cornwall for the year 1848 was 67,000l. been many years a Minister of the Crown, This was under a management than which and he had never doubted for one moment one more expensive never existed. It that such would always be the result of a appeared that for every 21. collected from mutual good feeling existing. There had the revenues of the duchy, 11. 5s. was been no means hitherto of a Sovereign paid to defray the expenses of the depart- amassing wealth from savings from the ment. It was impossible that any noble Civil List, and indeed the Sovereign had Lord would allow anything of the kind to not the means of disposing of any prooccur in the management of his estate, or perty belonging to the Crown till Mr. Pitt for a moment sanction a charge of between passed a measure on the subject, in 1799, 60 and 70 per cent on the gross revenue enabling certain grants to be made out to defray the expenses of the stewards of the landed property of the Crown. and agents and other managers of his The law, however, clearly was, that if an property. In 1848, not less than 7,000l. estate descended to the Crown by gift, was paid out to defray the charges con- devise, or other means, it could not be nected with the Prince of Wales, the settled as any estate belonging to a priauspicious young prince being only seven vate person. It was held not as a devise years old. In the following year the whole of private property, but was considered to amount drawn for the alleged service of be Crown property, and was held by the His Royal Highness was considerably Crown in trust as public property. The greater, amounting to not less than ground for the measure of Mr. Pitt was, 29,000l. It was quite impossible that that George III. wished to devise some that House could believe that the expense of his education, the charge for maintenance, or any other necessary expenditure for him, could amount to so much; such, however, was the sum received by the Crown out of the revenues of the duchy for the alleged maintenance of the Prince of Wales. It appeared, also, that a saving had been effected in the duchy of Lancaster of not less than 12,000l., and this was to be added to the 38,000l. saved in the Civil List; and altogether he found

land to his favourite daughter, the Princess Amelia, and that was the first time for a very long period that the Crown was enabled to separate a portion of land from Crown property, or the property of the Sovereign separate from that of the Crown was recognised. He had formerly broached the subject as to the alleged too high salary paid to high judicial and other functionaries, and to diplomatists who represented the Crown at foreign Courts. It was very much the custom at that period