laws, without first inquiring whether they know any thing about them-nay, with the certain knowledge, in most cases, that they are entirely ignorant of them—is, one might suppose, so strikingly manifest, that the British legislature, for its own credit, would abolish the system as soon as it is brought to its notice; that is, if the legislature does not itself know a fact which is so patent to all portions of the community.

The legislature cannot plead ignorance to the censure of permitting the system to disgrace the national character. As long ago as 1828, Lord Brougham, then a member of the House of Commons, in his celebrated speech on Law Reform, brought the administration of the law in the country by Justices-of-peace to the notice of parliament. In that masterly exposition of legal abuses, which has since led to the abolition of most of them, a doubt was expressed whether it be fit that magistrates should be appointed by lords-lieutenant of counties, without the interference of the Crown's responsible ministers. "Looking," said the eloquent speaker, "to the description of persons who are put into the commission, I am not at all satisfied that the choice is made with competent discretion; and upon this part of the question I may as well declare at once, that I have very great doubts as to the expediency of making clergymen magistrates. My opinion is, that a clerical magistrate, in uniting two very excellent and useful characters, pretty generally spoils both; that the combination produces what the alchymists called a tertium quid, with very little indeed of the good qualities of either ingredient, and no little of the bad ones of both, together with new evils superinduced by their commixture. There is the activity of the magistrate in an excessive degree; over-activity is a very high magisterial offence in my view, yet most of the magistrates distinguished for over-activity are clergymen ; joined to this are found the local hatings and likings, and, generally, somewhat narrow-minded opinions and prejudices, which are apt to attach to the character of the resident parish-priest, one of the most valuable and respectable if kept pure from political contamination. There are some lords-lieutenant, I know, who make

it a rule never to appoint a clergyman to the magistracy; and I entirely agree in the policy of that course, because the education and habits of such gentlemen are seldom of a worldly description, and, therefore, by no means qualify them to discharge the duties of such an office. Some lords-lieutenant appoint men for their political opinions; some, for activity as partisans in local contests; some are so far influenced as to keep out all who take a decided part against themselves in matters where all men should be free to act as their opinions dictate; and in the exercise of this patronage no responsibility whatever substantially exists." Appointed, then, by irresponsible advisers, and irremoveable without a conviction, the speaker next expatiated on the authority of men so chosen, and so secure; and, first, with respect to the evils and hardships of the licensing system, which places millions of property at the disposal of Justices. "Nor," said the illustrious orator, "is the licensing power of the magistracy that in which alone great abuses exist. They prevail wherever their authority is exercised; in the commitments for offences against the game laws, in dealing with petty offences against property, in taking cognizance of little assaults, especially on officers, and a number of other matters affecting the liberties and property of the subject; and yet, for their conduct in all these matters, they are not amenable to any superior power, provided they only keep their own counsel, and abstain from stating the reasons by which they have been actuated should their motives be evil. There is not a worse constituted tribunal on the face of the earth, not even that of the Turkish cadi, than that at which summary convictions on the game laws constantly take place; I mean a bench, or a brace, of sporting Justices. From their decisions on those points, where their passions are most likely to mislead them, no appeal in reality lies to a more calm and unprejudiced tribunal; for, unless they set out any matter illegal on the face of the conviction, you remove the record in vain.

"Equally supreme are they in cases where, sitting in a body at quarter-sessions, they decide upon the most important rights of liberty and property. Let it be remembered that they can sen

tence to almost unlimited imprisonment to whipping, to fine, nay, to transportation for seven or fourteen years (now to penal servitude for proportionate periods). I have shuddered to see the way in which these extensive powers are sometimes exercised by a jurisdiction not responsible for its acts."

The quotation from this important and valuable oration has been long, because, in the most select and apposite terms, it treats on the subject under consideration. It should be republished; some parts of it have been cited before, others will be noticed further on.

Thirty years have elapsed since the administration of law by Justices was so vividly brought before the legislature, and yet it remains not only untouched, but the evils then so distinctly pointed out have been increasing ever since, and are still spreading. The lords-lieutenant still appoint county Justices-the strictures then made on the exercise of their choice continues to be justly applicable. Church magistrates (the "tertium quids”) of 1828, are in 1858 made in crowds. The reason, perhaps, that every parson is not made a Justice is, that some of them have too much respect for their profession, and a too conscientious regard for the duties, to the discharge of which they have solemnly vowed to devote their best energies, to undertake others of which they are wholly ignorant, and for which they are totally unfit.

The licensing system remains in all its enormity-nay, its evils are intolerably increased. At present, in cities and boroughs having magistrates, partisan Justices may grant licences to their friends, or refuse them to men who are not friends. The legislature has invested these functionaries, made so because they are partisans, with the power of benefiting their friends or of punishing their enemies through the licensing system. The evils of the system were palpable thirty years ago; now they are really abominable.

A bench, or brace, of sporting Justices continues to form the tribunal at which summary convictions on the game laws take place. The worst constituted tribunal on the face of the earth is still perpetrating injustice! The court of the Turkish cadi may

have been improved; but the court of the English cadi yet exists in all its detestable absurdity.

The quarter-sessions tribunal in 1860 is one of the disgraces of the country. The mode of exercising its immense power, which thirty years ago made Lord Brougham shudder, is still the same; but that jurisdiction has since been extended to a great number of other matters. The quarter sessions, however, remains irresponsible for its acts, of whatever nature they may be. The speech that has been quoted thus marks the difference of responsibility between the quarter sessions and one of the superior courts:-"In the Queen's Bench, the name of the judge who pronounces the judgment is known, and the venerable magistrate stands before the country in his own proper person, always placed at the bar of public opinion. In the other case it is merely quarter sessions, which is nobody's name. The individual magistrates composing it are not thought of: their names are not even published. It is a fluctuating body. If the same individuals always sat in the court, there might be some approach to responsibility. At present there is none; and where there is no responsibility injustice will occasionally be committed as long

as men are men."

Though in very many instances gentlemen are made chairmen of quarter sessions because of their peculiar fitness, both by intellectual qualification and social standing, this is not always the case the office has been conferred as a compliment on some sprigs of nobility, whose high birth was their only visible qualification. Sometimes the choice seems whimsical. Not very long ago the magistracy of a county elected a PARSON for chairman, and, with a similar display of practical wisdom, refused to make a Queen's counsel the deputy chairman! Perhaps they ought, as a matter of just consistency, to have made the Queen's counsel their county chaplain; for there can be no valid reason why parsons alone should be permitted to poach on the preserves of others, and no other profession be allowed to enter upon theirs, especially as it is supported at a cost of five millions a-year to the public. If there are parson

judges, reverend commissioners, and clerical chairmen, why should there not be medical canons, legal deans, and military bishops? Unless parsons desire to have their nice preserves thrown open, they had better refrain from poaching! The chairman of quarter sessions ought to be an experienced lawyer, thoroughly unbiassed by local prejudices or partialities, and not a tertium quid, who may be strongly imbued with professional bigotry and narrow-minded prepossessions. Clearly, if he were good for any thing, he would attend to his own profession, and eschew matters so utterly inimical to it. But, however competent and unbiassed the chairman may be, he forms only one member of the sessions court: he has colleagues whose incompetency may sadly detract from and mar his official fitness. There is another evil attending the trial of prisoners at quarter sessions. Very generally the committing magistrate attends; he very often brings to the bench a personal knowledge of the prisoner's antecedents. If the accused has been a poacher, or has in any manner made himself obnoxious to the squire or parson of the parish, and is convicted, the sentence is not strictly a punishment for the offence then tried, but a making it quits for other matters-a paying off of old scores; hence the severe punishments at quarter sessions for apparently trifling offences. On the other hand, if the accused is the pet of the parson or Justice, the fact operates the other way, and a bad offence brings only a light punishment; in either case, the convicted does not get the penalty due to the offence which he is proved to have committed. Unquestionably, for the above reasons, and many others which might easily be adduced, there ought to be a duly qualified chairman of quarter sessions, paid for his services, and entirely free from party bias, and local or personal prejudices. It is often alleged that the magistracy ought not to be responsible because it is not paid. The noble reformer from whose speech so much has been taken, thus answers the quibble, about administering the law for nothing-" He ought not to forget that, as gold itself may be bought too dear, so may economy: money may be saved at too high a price. But is it often all a gratuitous