costs, knows not what they are: if the Chief Justice, whose everyday business it is to hear discussions about costs, knows not what they are, or what they ought to be.-See now how the account stands :-the money account. Of the 10s. 6d. legalised, say 6s.: remains confessed to have been extorted, 4s. 6d. : sub-extortioner's profit, the 4s. 6d. : head extortioner's, the 4s. 6d., minus ×: to find the value of x see above, § 4, and forget not, any more than Lord Eldon and Lord Abbot forgot, that pounds and thousands of pounds are made of pence and shillings.

Mark now another sort of account. Case, a criminal one. Codefendants, had the list been complete, Tipstaff, Master, and Chief Justice. Had it been as agreeable to punishers to punish themselves as others, what a rich variety of choice was here! Motion for imprisonment by attachment, as above: for this is what is meant by answering affidavits: Indictment for extortion, Indictment for corruption, Indictment for conspiracy; Information for or any

all

of the above crimes.

Mark now the denouement. The case, as above, a criminal one: the crime not punished, but without the consent of the sufferer compounded for: of the fruit of the crime the exact nominal amount ordered to be restored :-not a farthing even given to the hapless masterman by whose sad day's labor thus employed, so much more than the value had been consumed in thus sueing for it with cost of affidavits several times as much. After seeing in this precedent the utmost he could hope for-what man, by whom like extortion had been suffered from like hands, would ever tax himself to seek redress for it? Redress-administered in semblance, denied in substance. With not an exception, unless by accident, such or to an indefinite degree worse, is matchless Constitution's justice!

But the punishment ?-where was the punishment? This is answered already. Had the order for redress comprised a sixpence beyond the 4s. 6d. the inferior malefactor might have turned on his principal, and the fable of the young thief, who at the gallows bit his mother's ear off, have been realised. Isn't it you that have led me to this? These four and sixpences that I have been pocketing-is there any of them you did not know of? Had it not been for this mishap, would not my place have been made worth so much the more to you by every one of them? Is there any one of them that did not add to the value of the place you will have to dispose of when I am out of it? Why do you come on me then? Can't you afford it better than I can? Pay it yourself.

But the two learned Counsel, who thus fought for the 4s. 6d. -by whom were they employed? by Tipstaff, Master, or Chief Justice? Not by Tipstaff, surely seeing that his cause was so much the Chief Justice's, he would not thus have flung away his

money he would not have given six, eight, or ten guineas to save a 4s. 6d. these, if any, are among the secrets worth knowing, and which House of Commons will insist on knowing. Insist ?But when? when House of Commons has ceased to be House of Commons.

Well, then, this four-and-sixpenny tripartite business-is it not extortion? Is it not corruption? If not, still, for argument sake, suppose, on the part of all three learned persons-all or any of them-suppose a real desire to commit either of these crimes; can imagination present a more effectual mode of doing it? Till this be found, spare yourself, whoever you are, spare yourself all such trouble as that of crying out Shame, Shame! Contempt of Court! Calumny! Blasphemy!

Contempt of Court? forsooth! If contempt is ever brought on such Courts (and, for the good of mankind too much of it cannot be brought on them), it is not in the telling of such things, but in the doing of them, that the culpable cause will be to be found.

Here then, we see, were Statutes-here (according to Lord Eldon's instructions) laid down as per § 9, at the outset-here were Rules of Court disposed of in the same way, and at one stroke. Anno 1801, in the first year of his reign-disposed of at one stroke, and in the same way. A liberty which might so easily be taken with Acts of Parliament-hard indeed it would have been, if a Judge might not take it with the Rules of his own Court. Conformable (we see here exactly) was this operation to the instructions laid down by him, as per § 9, just 20 years before, anno 1801, in the first year of his reign. As to the Rules of Court, it was not in the nature of the case that they should present any additional difficulty; Rules which, if it were worth the trouble, and would not make too much sensation, he might have repealed in form at any time.

"You

Be this as it may, here was the exact case, so long ago provided for by Eldonic providence: the case, which, being the principle laid down, with virtual directions given for the guidance of his next in command, had been made broad enough to fit. need not be told (say these directions) how much more obedienceworthy Common is than Statute law-law of our own making, than any of the law we are forced to receive from lay-gents. But, though you should find one of our own laws in your way-nay, though with one of their's, you should find in your way one of our's to give validity and strength to it-never you mind that; your business is to make sure of the fees. At the same time, for decency sake, while our underlings, who get more of them than we do, are screwing them up (and you may trust them for that), you of

course will know nothing of the matter. Should any unpleasant accident happen-such as the having the Table with the lawful fee, in company with the proof of the additional money habitually exacted, bolted out on you in the face of the public, you will of course be all amazement. Though the thing can never have taken place, but under your own eye-while the prisoner was beginning to be conducted from your own chambers, where you had just been examining him-never had you so much as suspected. the existence of any such difference."

As to Lord Abbot, whatever want of disposition on his part there may have been to pay regard to Acts of Parliament, no such want could there have been as to any such instructions as these of Lord Eldon's. But whether it was that he had not got them by heart, or that when the time came to repeat them and apply them to practice, his heart failed him,—so it was-they were not follow ed and so, out came the confession that has been seen the confession in all its nakedness.

This is not all not more than three years before, this very fee had been taken into consideration by specially-appointed authority, and the 4s. 6d. disallowed. Under the head of Tipstaff,' "the Table of 1760," (say certain commissioners, of whom presently,) "directs the fee of 6s. to be paid to the Tipstaff that carries any prisoner committed at a Judge's chambers to the King's Bench prison."...."The fee of 10s. 6d. we conceive to have been taken in respect of these commitments.... for twenty-five years, and probably longer: but we recommend that the fee of 6s. only be received in future." "

Mark now the regard manifested by these commissioners-by these commissioners of Lord Eldon's-for the authority of Parliament. Recommendation soft as lambskin: of the extortion, and contempt of Parliament, impudent as it was, not any the slightest intimation, unless the rotten apology, thus foisted in instead of censure, be regarded as such. Of this recommendation the fruit has been already seen the fee taken, and for aught that appears uninterruptedly taken, notwithstanding. What ?-In all the three intervening years, the Chief Justice, had he never heard of any such recommendation? never heard a Report, of which his own court, with the fees belonging to it, were the subject? never seen any thing of it?

And the commissioners? For what cause disallow the 4s. 6d. ? Only because the Act of Parliament, and the contempt so

1

1 Report printed for the House of Commons-Date of order for printing, 14th May, 1818. Sole subject of it: "Duties, salaries, and emoluments as to the Court of King's Bench."

impudently put on it, and the extortion and corruption for the purpose of which the contempt was put, had been staring them in the face. Men, who from such hands accept, and in this way execute, such commissions-is not some punishment their due? Yes, surely therefore here it is. Public-behold their names! 1. John Campbell, Esq. Master in Chancery ;-2. William Alexander, Esq. then Master, now, by the grace of Lord Eldon, Lord Chief Baron of the Exchequer ;-3. William Adams, Doctor of Civil Law ;-4. William Osgood, Esq.-5. William Walton, Esq.

Accompanied are these recommendations by certain non-recommendations. From those as to Tipstaffs, reference is made to ditto as to Marshal: and there it is, that, after stating (p. 172) that his profit arises chiefly out of two sources, of which (be it not forgotten) the tap is one-with this source before them it is that (after ringing the praises of it) another of their recommendations is"that this matter be left in the hands of the court to which the prison more immediately belongs." In plain English, of the Chief Justice, whose interest it is to maximize the profit in all manner of ways, and of whose emoluments they saw a vast portion, rising in proportion to the productiveness of this source. Throughout the whole of the Report, except for a purpose such as this, not the least symptom of thinking exhibited: "fees taken so much, we recommend so much :" such throughout is the product of the united genius of these five scholars of the school of Eldon.'

See now, Mr. Peel, and in its genuine colors, this fresh fruit of the consistency of your consistent friend. See, in this rich fruit, the effect and character of his commission. Oppose now, Mr. Peel, if you have face for it; oppose now, Mr. Attorney-General, if you have face for it; oppose now, Mr. Attorney-General Copley-for neither must your name be covered up-the permitting of the House of Commons to exercise the functions of the House of Commons.

Oppose now, if you have face for it, "the dragging the Judges of the land" before the Catos whom you are addressing-the tribunal of Parliament. Fear no longer, Mr. Peel, if ever you feared before, the obtaining credence for your assurance-that it was by Lord Eldon his Majesty was advised to commission Lord Eldon to report on the conduct of Lord Eldon. Mr. Canning-you, who but two years ago-so light in the scale of sentimentalism is

' Report of the commissioners on the duties, salaries, and emoluments in Courts of Justice ;-As to the Court of King's Bench, "Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 14th May, 1818."

public duty weighed against private friendship, (and such friendship!)-you, who so lately uttered the so solemn promise never to give a vote that should cast imputation on Lord Eldon, watch well, Sir, your time, and when, these imputations having come on, votes come to be given on them, repress then, if possible, your tears, and, wrapping yourself up in your agony, hurry out of the House.

§ XIII. How the Chancellor went to Parliament, and got the Corruption established.

The explosion has been seen. Blown by it into open air, was the scheme of taxing without Parliament, and in the teeth of Parliament. At the same time, a handle for denunciation was left prominent; and it has been seen how broad an one: a handle too, which some Williams or other might at any time lay hold of, and give trouble: the trouble which the driver of pigs has with his pigs-the trouble of collecting Honorable Gentlemen together, and whistling them in when the question is called for. Delay, therefore, was not now in season. Nov. 21, 1821, was the day on which the breach, as above, was made: a session did not pass without providing for the repair of it: the 10th of June, 1822, is the day on which the first stone was laid; and how thorough and complete the repair is, remains now to be shown. The hand of Parliament being the only applicable instrument, stooping at last to employ it could not but be more or less mortifying to a workman to whom, for so many years, it had been a foot-ball. But, to Lord Eldon, the part of the reed is not less familiar than that of the oak; and what was lost in universally applicable power will be seen gained in ease and tranquillity, reference had to this special and most valuable use of it.

Act 22, July 1822, 3 Geo. IV. c. 69. Title, "An Act to enable the Judges of the several Courts of Record at Westminster to make regulations respecting the fees of the Officers, Clerks, and Ministers of the said Courts."

The preamble has been seen: business of it, skinning over the past illegality, section 6. Business of the first, empowering these same Judges to screw up to a maximum, and without stint, the accustomed fees: of the second, to add any number of new ones: of the third, making it to this effect, the special duty of all underlings to do whatever their masters please: of the fourth, anxiously easing them of the trouble of regulating Solicitors' fees, forasmuch as nothing was to be got by it: of the fifth, providing, as has been and will be seen, for the concealment of the fees as before, should