Lord Hatherley has lost his Bill for the creation of
a Supreme Court. Lord Cairns on Tuesday opposed the resolution which it was necessary to carry before the Bill could pass—the 13111 reducing the privileges of the Lords—in a long historical speech, the burden of which was that the House of Peers had always been an appellate court, that it had done its work exceedingly well, that it had now but 18 cases on its list, and that the transfer of Its jurisdiction to another Court was merely the first step towards the extinction of the House itself. Lord Westbury resisted the proposal on the more statesmanlike ground that it is a pity to arrange for an appellate court while great changes are under con- sideration in the Courts of original jurisdiction, but it is understood that the moving argument with the Peers was the loss of dignity their House would sustain if it ceased to be a Court ; indeed Lord Houghton admitted as much, and there is just this much reason in the argument, that without its judicial function the laziness of the House would be much more apparent to the public. That, however, is scarcely a reason for refusing reform to all future time. There was no division, but a committee of inquiry was appointed, and the Lord Chancellor's project is practically at an end.
Previous page
