- ment of which practice was in George the Second's The Rev. THOMAS BECKER examined.. time. The judges had a discretionary power on Was chairman of the quarter sessions of the the subject; but they allowed the costs in all Newark division of the county of Nottingham. cases except where the parties prosecuting had Not only did he complain of the increase of the not conducted themselves properly. In his county rates in Nottinghamshire, but he knew opinion this usage had had the effect of in- that there was a general disposition in the county creasing prosecutions for slight offences. The to complain of it. This increase he attributed fee upon the western circuit for acquittals was to a great variety of concurrent circumstances:11. 6s. 8d.; the fee on being found guilty was the increased number of prosecutions; the alsmaller; so that the poorer class were frequently lowances for conducting them; the conveyance recommended by their solicitors to plead guilty of soldiers' baggage; the establishment of lunato avoid the larger fees. In 1761, the expense tic asylums; the alteration of the laws, which for the prosecution of felons was 227.; in 1791, alteration imposed burdens upon the county rate 1737.; in 1821, 3,786. In 1761, the expense for the protection of personal property, and for of the conveyance of the prisoners was 21.; in other purposes which were more immediately 1791, 1777.; in 1821, 1,1147. In 1761, the ex-connected with the national interest than with pense of the clerk of the peace was 6s. 8d.; in the interests of the individuals who paid the 1791, 6s. 8d. ; in 1821, 1,1807. The increase in rate, &c.-The expenses falling on the landed the expense of the clerk of the peace had arisen interest would necessarily be reduced if the from a custom having crept in of paying him as expenses not immediately connected with that a solicitor for every act he did as clerk of the interest were to be in part defrayed out of the peace; from his now obtaining fees from indivi- public purse, to be granted out of the Excheduals, to which he was formerly entitled, but quer as a repayment to the several county treawhich he seldom got; from the power given to surers; being claimed in the same form as the the magistrates in some instances to pay him for sheriff's cravings. duties done in two courts, where there were Mr. HENRY HUNT examined.- By an intwo courts; and from some fees which had been vestigation in 1821, it appeared that the general given him by acts of parliament. Formerly the expenses of Ilchester gaol amounted to nearly office of clerk of the peace was sold by the judges; one-third of the whole expenditure of the county but within the last five and twenty years the of Somerset. In the five years from 1814 to judges had never sold it. In 1761, the cost in 1818 inclusive, that expenditure had been Somersetshire of the maintenance of prisoners 84,0317. 13s. 34d. During the same five years, was 1347.; in 1791, 1,3747.; in 1821, 7,304/. 15,9687. 6s. 6†d. more had been collected than This increase had mostly arisen from the in- was expended; as appeared by the returns. crease of personal property, and the increase of From documents and information which he had manufacturing towns; but the expense was received, he suspected that there had been great chiefly borne by landed property. The city of misapplication of the county's rates. A great Bath paid about one-tenth of the county rates of deal of work had been done at the gaol by the Somersetshire; it expended nearly one-third of prisoners, respecting which he had made a calcuthe expenses of public justice. The aggregate lation; and he was persuaded it cost the county number of persons committed every year in three times as much as it would have done had Somersetshire probably exceeded 600. The ex-it been executed by artisans. He knew that pense of conveying prisoners, and still more the the gaoler received 2 or 30007. a year from his expense of witnesses, was much greater in Somersetshire than in other counties, from the circumstance of the assizes being held in three different places.—In his opinion, the best mode that could be adopted to remedy the evils complained of would be, first, to simplify the accounts of the county, and to confine the county expenses to those matters over which the magistrates had control. For instance, if the expense of the militia and depots of arms were thrown on the secretary of war, they would be managed with more economy and regularity; if the expense of prosecuting felons at the assizes were paid by the receiver-general, instead of by the treasurer of the county, it would have a good effect, because then the government would regulate a system for the whole kingdom, whereas at present each judge had a system for himself. Various regulations also, respecting improper allowances and fees, might be advantageously introduced. situation. Considerable expenses had been incurred in the county of late years to pay undersheriffs, which were formerly never paid. There was also an enormous increase in the sum paid to the clerk of the peace. The charge of the keepers of the prisons had likewise greatly increased. To the three keepers of the prisons in the county there was paid, in 1804, 8067. 13s. 4d.; in 1818, 8,6087. 12s. His opinion was, that if the committee of magistrates at the quarter sessions, who had no time when there to investigate the accounts of the county, were to get one or two of their body to do so, the expenditure might be much diminished. He also thought the abuses of the gaols, the whole of which arose from the gaolers, ought to be reformed. The constables, who did the real work of the county, had very insufficient allowances. In the year 1818, when the expense for the conveyance of prisoners amounted to 1,3267. 16s. 6d., and that for the prosecution of felons to 4,2761. 5s. Hd. the constables were paid only 117. 2s. | penses did not amount to more than 30s, or 40. for the discharge of their duty. No fees were taken from a prisoner on his disNATHANIEL VYE LEE, esq., of Ilfracombe, charge, but a charge of (he thought) 25. 4d. was Devon, examined.—The county rates in Devon | made on the county. He believed that that had dimininished of late years, and would have was by virtue of the 58th of the late king. diminished much more but for the expense at- There was no fee on the conviction of a felon. tending the erection of tread-mills and additions He did not think that any inconvenience could to the prisons and county buildings. The de- result to the public from regulating the fees of crease was, he thought, partly owing to the in-officers, so that the same amount of fees should creased value of the currency. A committee be paid in every part of the kingdom, or at least of inquiry (of which he was chairman), in each county, for the same object; but the which sat four years from Epiphany sessions present holders of the offices, some of which 1820, had, by directing simultaneous privy searches for vagrants, who were an enormous charge to the county, much reduced their number; and sir George Chetwynd's bill had further decreased the expense very considerably, by preventing the passing of vagrants, and saving the cost of their maintenance in, and conveyance from, the bridewell. If a separate jurisdiction of the quarter-sessions were to be formed for Devonport, it would occasion an immense saving to the county. In some instances the charges for the conveyance of prisoners to the respective gaols had been reduced. There were at present great inequalities in the contracts for that purpose; they varied from 10d. to 2s. and 3s. a mile. In consequence of the investigations of the expenditure committee, considerable reduction had been made in the expense of the repairs and alterations of the county buildings, and more especially in the bridge expenditure. A considerable reduction had likewise been made in the charge for the expenses of prisoners previous to their commitment. Various diminutions were made in the expenses of witnesses and constables, who, formerly, being under recognizances to appear on several trials, had been paid their travelling charges and ex-recognizances that had been taken and not levied penses on each. By a special committee, appointed for that purpose, a reform had also been made in the office of clerk of the peace. were very valuable, would not like it. On the from the time of passing this act of parliament, and they were now got so voluminous that they would go a great deal farther than the abbey; THOMAS STIRLING, esq. examined. Was de- there were forty skins of parchment, containing puty clerk of the peace for the county of Middle- the recognizances, returned eight times in the sex. There were a great variety of fees belonging year, and it was more than the labour of one to the office. The common usage with respect to clerk to do it; and they must go on accumu the payment of witnesses in trials upon prose- lating every sessions, till the lords of the trea cutions for criminal offences, was to give them sury should be pleased to order that all those half-a-crown a day for loss of time, and likewise recognizances should be discharged, when the the exact sum of money they had been out of lords of the treasury thought fit to do so, and to pocket. The fees on prosecutions at the assizes take the trouble of looking through them; it were considerably larger than at the sessions; was quite impossible; if the clerk of the pear but there were no assizes in the county of Mid-returned the recognizances of the last sessions, dlesex. He had no doubt that if the allowance of the sheriff having all the rest in his possessiuz, expenses to prosecutors was abridged it would prevent persons prosecuting. The expense of a mere common prosecution carried on in Middlesex did not exceed 30s. or 40s. Some prosecutions were necessarily attended with more expense than others. For instance, if the bank had a prosecution, the indictment would reach from the place where he was to Westminster Abbey; but speaking generally of prosecutions for petty larceny and misdemeanors, the ex he could return them as well as the clerk of the peace. When asked if any application had been made to the lords of the treasury, and informa tion given to them of the extent of the grievance, the witness answered, that the access to the lords of the treasury was of that kind that one dil not know how to make an application to them; there was a committee of the house of cominot s who recommended the thing. The recognizances from the county of Middlesex were necessar....§ very voluminous, and as the parties who were to answer were a parcel of poor Irishmen, who had no friends or connexions in town, they were obliged to be bound for one another, and when the time came at which the recognisance was to be levied, if they ever lived in the place at all, they were gone before their recognisance came in operation; and it turned out that a great many of them never lived there at all, but there was somebody who represented them. He thought the remedy would be, that all those already returned to the sheriff, and in his office, if they could make any thing of them, they should levy on them: the clerk of the peace returning a copy of what had been in his possession seemed to be perfectly nugatory and unnecessary; they knew whether they had levied or not: if there was any mischief, it must be in the number of returns; if the first return was right, the second return might vary a little; and if the next return was made from that, it would vary a little more, so that the last return might not be so correct as the return in the first instance. many articles of property stolen, part of the stolen property is put into the possession of one constable, and part into the possession of another, in order that both may attend the trial, and in that case, when the judges have occasion to exercise their discretion, they generally disallow it. Would the marking of stolen goods, when they are handed to the constable, prevent the necessity of the constable's attending at the trial?—I think in general it might; but then there would be a difficulty about the intermediate custody. I should say this also, that the remuneration which a constable receives for attending the assizes may make him much more vigilant in the discharge of his duty, and he often assists in keeping the witnesses together. Do you suspect it to be the practice among low attornies to tell the prosecutor that his bill has swallowed up all the allowances for expenses?—I have found no precedent of that sort; I should think there would have been a complaint if that had been the case. Has any application ever been made to your The Honourable Mr. Justice BAYLEY called lordship, on the part of the county, that you in, and examined. Will you have the goodness to explain to the committee what is your practice with regard to ordering the expenses of prosecutions? We generally (I believe, in almost every case,) order them, unless it is a discreditable prosecution, or attended with strong circumstances to induce us to refuse the costs. Very often, if we find that a man, by his own intoxication, has taken up with a woman and gone along with her, we think there is so much discredit in him that he ought to bear the expense of the prosecution, and that the county ought not; but although we do not allow him his own costs, yet if there are any other witnesses who are bound over by recognisances, their costs are, I believe, generally allowed. We used to be in the habit, I believe, in former times, before the late act of parliament, of refusing the costs in banker's cases, when they prosecuted for forgeries on their own banks; but they were men, generally, of opulence. were too liberal in your orders, or that they were not sufficiently specific ?-The business of the assizes in general is extremely laborious to the judge; he is not in the habit in general (I am not quite sure whether there is not an exception to that in Northamptonshire), but he is not in the habit in general of looking into the allowances; that business is performed usually by one of the officers of the court. Do you know whether that has been done in Northamptonshire for some time?—I have not been in Northamptonshire now for a very considerable length of time. I remember once when I was there having some bills sent by the clerk of the assize to me, in order that I might overlook them, saying that the magistrates had come to a determination they would not allow them unless the bills had the sanction of the judges; and I certainly felt that was a very great additional degree of labour thrown on the judge, and that the judge was very incompetent to decide upon the charges. Would there be a danger, if less expenses were ordered, of persons not prosecuting for felonies and larcenies ?-It would be a great hardship on the prosecutor; in general when Do prosecutors of high rank and reputed large property apply now for their expenses as much as they did formerly?—I think they apply more now than they did formerly. And are they allowed ?-Generally speaking, they go before the magistrate their minds are they are allowed. If they apply?—Yes, if they apply. Have prosecutors in poor circumstances ever complained that the sum awarded them was not sufficient?-In some instances, particularly of late, I think they have. Does not the allowance urge them to become witnesses?-I think not; I should say this, we very often have a police officer, or a constable, to whom we refuse the allowance, if he is unnecessarily brought forward as a witness; and it very often happens, that when there are warm on the subject, and when they are bound over they cannot extricate themselves from the difficulty of prosecuting; I think in a great variety of instances it would be very hard if any part of the expenses were to come on themselves. Do you think that a plan might be proposed for lessening the expenses of prosecutions, by fixing the days on which in particular cases the witnesses might go before the grand jury, as at Lancaster; and that both judges should first be employed in trying prisoners and then in trying causes ?—I think there would be a very second day, a limited number on the third day, and so on the fourth day; the continuance afterwards of course must depend on the despatch of business. In Lancaster the division is according to the districts. There is another advantage which, perhaps, results from that plan, which is this, that the grand jury are regularly supplied with business in the early part of their Do you think that any mischief would arise from throwing on the general funds of the country the expenses of the prosecutors at the assizes?-There might be that want of check in taking care that the charges were reasonable, which, as it is to fall on the county, it is the interest of particular persons in the county to take care of; and there may be other objections I cannot foresee. The Honourable Mr. Baron HULLOCK called in, and examined. great difficulty indeed in confining the two judges to the trial of crown cases; in the first instance, there would be a hardship felt by all those who have civil business to discharge, and it would also be a hardship on the leading counsel in a variety of cases; the leading counsel are principally employed in civil cases, and have very little to do in criminal cases, and therefore if the criminal business was to be dis-sittings as well as the latter. charged first, for a period of time they would, in a great degree, have nothing to do; and then, when the criminal business is finished, there would be an extreme inconvenience in allotting any of the business to the judge upon whom the duty regularly of sitting on the nisi prius side does not attach; because in general, in all counties, there are great leaders, and every man is desirous of having his own leader in his own particular case, and he has given retainers with a view to that; then, if the cause comes on to be tried, and in the absence of the leading counsel whose assistance he expected to have, and perhaps in the absence of some of the other counsel he had retained, the suitor is dissatisfied, and is apt to attribute his failure to this arrangement; and then a man who fails in his case would feel, perhaps, persuaded that it was all through the leading counsel not being present; a division of the judges, therefore, would, | constituted a considerable portion of the of in my opinion, be inconvenient. My brother Hullock and myself have very often experienced on the northern circuit, when there is a vast pressure of civil business, that the crown business is finished first, and then the judge who has been on the crown business generally assists the other judge, and the counsel are very desirous that that should be the case; but the clients are very often very much dissatisfied; I think, therefore, employing the two judges first in the crown business until the crown business is finished, would not be attended with any good result. Do you think, if there was an adjourned quarter-sessions just before the assizes, in order to try the petty offences, so as to lighten the assizes, that that would be a saving to the county ?—That subject was suggested to me at Leicester, by the nature of the calendar. I tried at that place several petty larcenies, which fences which came before me. It occurred to me that much expense might be saved by the holding of an adjourned sessions immediately before the assizes, as I understand is done in Staffordshire. The expense of a trial at the sessions would, I apprehend, be much less than would be incurred upon a trial at the assizes. This plan, however, would throw upon the magistrates a grievous additional burden, as well as upon persons liable to serve on juries. But probably that inconvenience might be in a considerable degree obviated, and the object in view attained, by the commitment of persons Would any particular arrangement of the accused of petty felonies to the house of correcwitnesses going before the grand jury be of ad- tion, for trial at the sessions, and not to the vantage?—I believe that is practised in the gaol, for trial at the assizes. This course of counties of York and Lancaster, and might be proceeding, however, rests altogether with the practised also in all counties in which the grand magistrates. There is another circumstance jury are likely to sit for more than one day. which has a tendency to increase the county The plan adopted in the county of York is this: expenses: the witnesses which are bound over there is an advertisement prior to the assizes, by recognisance to give evidence in cases of which advertisement directs that in a given felonies, sometimes much exceed the number number of the cases standing first, the names that are necessary for establishing the charge. of which it states, with the exception of parti- | In the course of the last circuit, I remember a cular classes of offences, the witnesses on them case of highway robbery, in which there were, shall be ready to attend the grand jury as soon | I believe, fourteen witnesses on the back of the as they are charged, that another shall get ready indictment. The bill was thrown out, and the to attend the morning of the second day of their sittings, another on the third, and all the remainder on the fourth; that is assuming that the grand jury are likely to sit for a period of four days; that is a great saving of expense, for instead of having all the witnesses there on the first day, you have only a limited number of them on the first day, a limited number on the grand jury applied to me to disallow the expenses of the witnesses. I felt myself obliged to decline the application, inasmuch as the witnesses had been bound over to appear at the assizes, and were all in an inferior situation in life. In the case to which I allude, I believe eight out of the fourteen witnesses were alio gether unnecessary. The examination of Mr. Justice BAYLEY fectly competent to exercise their discretion continued. Do you think that the government what the quantum in each case ought to be, and ought to pay for the prosecutions to the extent to which it has been benefited by the abolition of rewards, and that issues should be made in aid of the county rates ?-That would be extremely reasonable. I remember on one occasion, I think it was at Chelmsford, in which the sums to be paid for rewards amounted to about 7607.; it would have been certainly a great relief to the county if that sum had been paid by government. Government, I believe, formerly paid those rewards; they have been relieved from that to a certain extent, but not altogether, because, under the act of parliament which abolished rewards, the judges were entitled to make an allowance for the expenses of apprehension, which in other cases they had not the power of doing; and the expenses of apprehension still continue, I apprehend, to fall on the government. Do you think it just that the land should pay the expenses of all prosecutions for stealing chattel-property, as formerly, in times in which the country is daily becoming more commercial, and chattels and thefts are of course daily increasing ?—I have great difficulty in answering that question, or in stating how you are to raise a fund, except out of the land; taxation of stock in trade, or upon the profits of trade, or upon funded property, would be difficult: I have a difficulty in answering that question. Is the remedy at law for one who feels himself aggrieved by an illegal charge in the county rate very expensive ?—I think it must be expensive; the expense of an appeal; if it is removed to the King's Bench it must be more expensive. by entering into that subject, they would have an opportunity of seeing whether the charges imposed on the different persons who attended the assizes, by the innkeepers and others, and for lodging, were exorbitant or otherwise. How is that to be done practically, because at the assizes your lordship orders the expenses to be paid; the clerk of the assizes makes out the order, and then it is taken to the treasurer and paid instanter, for the prosecutor so much, and for each witness so much ?—The investigation by the magistrates must, of course, take place prior to the payment. How is it possible that the magistrates could investigate those charges, they being made in the way the committee state; for instance, on the first day of the assizes the first prisoner who is tried, for example, is tried for a highway robbery, and an application is made to the judge for the expenses, which the judge allows; the clerk of the assize, at the early part of the assize, makes out an order, which the prosecutor or the attorney obtains possession of, and he goes to the treasurer and receives the money instanter ? -It seems to me, that he ought not to receive the money instanter. Mr. Baron HULLOCK.-The great difficulty is, that that is a labour which could not be done at the assizes; but if the magistrates were to make an inquiry at their sessions into the sums that are reasonable, according to the existing price of provisions, and the expense of lodging and travelling, and so on, and suggest a scale of allowance to the judges, I dare say the judges would be very happy to make that the rule of their allowance at the assizes, and that would Mr. Justice BAYLEY.-It is very beneficial that that should be done, because then the witnesses, when they have got to the assize town, might know whether the inns would supply them according to that scale. Do you think the fee of 14s. 8d. for the dis-obviate the difficulty. charge of a prisoner in gaol, tried and acquitted, would be a just demand if paid by himself, or the discharge of a prisoner by proclamation, the indictment being ignoramus, and the fee 138. 4d.? -I do not see why any prisoner in which there is no prosecution, or who, from being acquitted, may reasonably be considered as having been innocent, ought to be subject to the payment of any sum of money. Who are the officers on the circuit that receive fees on a prosecution ?-The clerk of the assize is one, the judges' crier receives fees, and the judges' marshal receives fees on acquittals; I know they do; I do not know any other person. Would there be any objection to paying the officers of the circuit by a salary, taking for instance an average of their fees for the last three years ?-It is difficult for me to answer that question. In a very petty assault, might it not be for the interest of a poor prisoner to plead guilty, in order to avoid the acquittal fee ?-No doubt; I have known many instances, when I practised at Clerkenwell sessions, where I have heard the present Mr. Baron Garrow desire the jury to find his client guilty, in order that the expense of the verdict might fall on the prosecutor, and not upon the prisoner. Do you think that the magistrates could inficers sustain, I should think that would be a any way regulate the expenses ordered by a judge at the assizes ?—No doubt the magistrates would be able to regulate the quantum; the judge only orders the expenses to be paid; and I should apprehend the magistrates are per-judges' marshals are in general carried by the What is your opinion ?-If there is a salary adequate to the real expenditure which the of fair mode of taking it; many of them travel at their own expense; the judges' clerks, I believe, travel at their own expense; they are maintained while they are there by the judge; the |