59 / 122
DECEMBER, 1911]
The Gazette of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland.
61
blacklegs and scabs on my profession.
(Hear,
hear.)
MR. DAVID A. OUAID :
While deeply
interested in the position of the County
Coirrts (Ireland) Bill, I cannot quite follow
the reference made by my friend Mr. Brady
to the deadlock in the procedure of the
County Courts. No doubt there may be a
congestion of business in the Court we are
probably very much
interested
in here
locally; but it is entirely owing to the
immensity of work thrown upon the dis
tinguished Judge who presides over that
Court, and to no other cause whatever.
What I am interested in principally is that
the Report which is before you makes no
allusion whatever to the continued neglect
of
the claims of' this profession by the
Executive Government in regard to the
members of the profession being preferred
before other classes for administering Petty
Sessions law throughout the country.
I have
a return made to Parliament on the motion
of Mr. MacVeagh, and I find from it an
extraordinary state of affairs.
I find that
there are about 66 Resident Magistrates, and
of these there are only seven Solicitors. Two
of them, I think, have only been appointed
quite recently. The qualifications of most
of
the
others are of a startling kind,
and I have tried to analyse them.
I find that
22 Resident Magistrates are ex-R.I.C. officers,
and 16 are Barristers-at-Law.
I
think,
however, that Solicitors would be of greater
service than Banisters in administering the
Petty Sessions system.
I find that the
remainder of these gentlemen are military
gentlemen, a ship and quay owner, Civil
Servants,
in Commission
of
the Peace,
" served
in Militia," Constabulary Officer.
These seem to be the qualifications that
appeal to the Executive Government.
To
my mind the contempt which obtains in a
great many parts of Ireland for the Criminal
Law is entirely owing to the fact that the
gentlemen
appointed -by
the Executive
Government do not understand the law they
are administering, and do not understand
the people for whom they are supposed to be
administering the law. We should protest
most strongly at the practical exclusion by
the Executive Government of this profession
from its proper share. I hope that next year we
will be able to secure more than two positions.
THE PRESIDENT: There were
four
Solicitors appointed last year.
MR. CRAIG :
I think this question of
Civil Bill procedure in Ireland is a very
important one, and I do not agree with Mr.
Brady that it is a matter that does not
concern our profession. I think it is a matter
that concerns our profession vitally.
In
support of that I would like to give you two
or three figures.
In the recent return issued of civil business,
I find that in 1910 there were 14,540 writs
issued in the High Court of Justice. Now we
all know that every action that is commenced
in the King's Bench Division—that there is
a record of every writ issued, because there
is a 2s. stamp on it. But in the Civil Bill
Court there is no record of every Civil Bill
issued, because the only record kept is the
number of cases entered for hearing before
the Court, which in the County and City of
Dublin alone for last year was 6,799, or in
other words, in Dublin City and County we
were dealing with nearly half as many actions
entered for hearing as there were writs issued
in the whole of Ireland.
One other set of
figures. The number of Civil Bills entered
for hearing in the whole of Ireland was 82,153,
above five times as many as there were High
Court writs issued. The amounts recovered
by Civil Bill and ejectment decrees, or
rather the amounts of the cases which were
entered for hearing, were £317,646. Taking
into account a reasonable figure for Civil
Bills issued and paid before entry, we may
put the total amount at £467,646 dealt with
by the Civil Bill Courts in Ireland.
Can
anyone say that is not an important subject
for our profession to deal with ?
(Hear, hear.)
I want to ask what steps do the Council
intend to take in reference to this Bill which
has being going on now since 1895. Surely
there is some method by which this persistent
opposition could be put an end to.
Is there
any real reason why the names of
the
opponents of the present measure should not
be known—why the public should not know
who are opposing the Bill ?
The Bill has
been approved of by the practitioners, by
the Mercantile Association, and the Chamber
of -Commerce, and it was
introduced as
everybody's child, and yet somebody saying
" I object to this Bill " puts a stop to the
whole thing.
I have been trying to get that