82 / 144
It also proposes to effect a number of administra
tive changes in the management of the various
Court offices. By Sections 2 and 3 of the Bill it is
proposed to enable the Minister for Justice, after
consultation with the President of the High
Court, to make orders relieving the Master of the
High Court of the management of the Central
Office and of the general superintendence of such
of the offices established by Part I of the Principal
Act as are attached to the High Court. On and
after the commencement of such orders the
management of the offices is to be transferred to
such officers serving in the High Court as the
Minister may appoint after consultation with the
President of the High Court. The effect of the
proposed changes is to place the administration
of the various Court offices more directly under the
control of the Department of Justice, a process
of which was commenced in 1926. The rights of
the judges to give directions in matters affecting
proceedings in their particular Courts is preserved
by the provision that the officers nominated by the
Minister shall be responsible to him in regard to
all matters of general administration, but shall
be responsible to the President of the High Court
in regard to all matters relating to the conduct
of that part of the business of the High Court
which is required by law to be transacted by or
before the High Court judges. The Bill also pro
poses
to make more adequate provision for
pensions for holders of the position of Master of
the High Court, Taxing Master, and County
Registrar than has heretofore been the case. The
interests of solicitors are affected by section 6 of
the Bill which defines the qualifications for the
appointment of Probate Officer and Examiner.
The Minister may after consultation with the
President of the High Court appoint to these
positions a barrister or solicitor with twelve
years' experience in a Court office, or, if no such
person can be found who in the opinion of the
Minister is suitable for appointment, a practising
barrister or solicitor of six years' standing. The
position of Under-Sheriff. which is to be renamed
"Sheriff," is dealt with by Part II of the Bill.
Since the Court Officers' Act, 1926. the functions
and duties of any existing Under-Sheriff have on
his death devolved upon the County Registrar.
This system has been found unsatisfactory in
some of the more thickly populated areas, and
the Bill proposes to enable the Minister to declare
by order that in respect of any county or county
borough in which the office of Under-Sheriff
becomes vacant, Section 54 of the Principal Act
(which provides for the transfer of the duties of
the office to the County Registrar) shall cease to
have effect. The Minister is also empowered to
appoint Sheriffs in respect of areas where the
duties of that office have already been taken over
by the County Registrar. No person is to be ap
pointed to the office of Sheriff unless he is either
a barrister or solicitor who has practised for not
less than five years, or a person who has acted as
managing clerk to a sheriff or Under-Sheriff for
not less than five years. By Section 12 of the Bill
it is proposed to repeal Section 45 of the Debtors1
(Ireland) Act, 1840. The effect of this repeal will
be to abolish the offices of Under-Sheriffs return
ing officer in Dublin.
Poor Prisoner's Defence.
EVERYBODY connected with the administration
or practice of the law must feel that the existing
facilities for the proper defence of poor persons
being tried on criminal charges are very inade
quate. There is no statutory provision for the
assignment of Counsel and Solicitor for any
poor person. The only case in which legal aid will
be granted to a prisoner is where he is charged
with murder, and in this case the facilities are
limited to legal representation at the trial, and
not at the preliminary investigation. Under the
existing scale of fees which will be paid by the
State to the solicitor and counsel assigned to defend
a prisoner on the charge of murder the defence
has to be conducted on the basis of charity.
The scale of fees at present allowed to the solicitor
is six guineas in the case of a country solicitor
and four guineas in the case of a Dublin solicitor,
with refreshers of two guineas for each subsequent
day of the trial. No solicitor can undertake the
defence of a poor prisoner on these terms and give
it all his time and attention, as he must do,
without serious pecuniary loss to himself. In this
connection it is interesting to see that the whole
position of legal aid for poor persons has recently
been considered in England by the Rushcliffe
Committee, which was appointed to deal with the
subject and whose report has now been published.
The statutory provision in England for aiding
poor prisoners is contained in the Poor Prisoners'
Defence Act, 1930, which empowers magistrates
to grant defence certificates and legal aid certi
ficates in cases where they are satisfied that the
accused persons have insufficient means to provide
for their own defence. This provision is not con
fined to cases of persons charged with murder,
but extends to any charge, including cases tried
under the summary jurisdiction. The Rushcliffe
Committee Report criticises the existing system
on the ground that it is not sufficiently used, and
on the further ground that solicitors and counsel
undertaking the defence of poor prisoners are
22