218 / 338
find what exactly is the principle which indicates the
difference.
The same difficulty arises regarding
almost every aspect of the functions and work of a
local authority. As each new local government
act is passed
the difficulty becomes more acute.
New terms are used ; sections and parts of sections
of previous repealing acts are again repealed. In an
effort to find our bearings in this labyrinth, we
solicitors strike out repealed sections in our copies
of the statutes and make marginal notes of the
alterations in the alterations. Then we interleave
notes and interpolations in an effort to find unifying
principles between the newest amendment and the
existing legislation. After all this, when our opinion
is asked on the legal position on a simple set of facts
we find that there are some further sections or sub
sections of unrepealed ancient statutes or statutory
orders which appear to conflict with and negative
some of the most recent statutes. Our system of
local government
is very different
today from
what it was half a century ago. Yet many old statutes
and statutory orders which have little or no relation
to the facts of today still have the force of law. The
main function they serve is the creation of endless
confusion.
County managers are charged with the expenditure
of many millions of pounds each year which must
be in accordance with the lawful exercise of their
powers. It is a great tribute to the intelligence and
to the integrity of our county managers and of their
senior officials that they discharge their duties so
efficiently when on many occasions they can have
no more than a pious hope that they are putting into
effect the requirements of our existing legislation or
that they are making a lawful exercise of their powers.
Those of them who know precisely the right time
to disobey certain statutory orders are a big help to
the community as for certain sections of statutory
orders there appears to be no legislative sanction,
and so they would seem to be void. Surely it is an
unfair imposition on these officials to be expected
to discharge their onerous duties and an outrageous
imposition on the civil servants in the Department
of Local Government who must supervise this dis
charge, that they should be expected to carry out
their onerous duties in a veritable legislative jungle.
One easily agrees with the views of one of our High
Court judges who, about ten years ago, in the course
of a judgment, expressed the fear that the affairs of
local authorities could easily degenerate
to
the
level of " parish bumbledom ".
Time alone prevents me from referring to other
branches of law where a similar unhappy state of
affairs exists owing to lack of consolidation. The
longer this state of affairs is allowed to continue the
worse it will become. There is a danger of our legal
system falling into disrepute through confusion and
absence of reasonable certainty. The cynic may feel
tempted to say that the uncertainty of our law is of
more advantage to the lawyers than the knowledge
of it. It is doubtful if that be so. The general public
who can foretell their own business affairs with
reasonable accuracy will frequently suffer what they
believe to be grave injustices and forego what they
believe to be their legal rights rather than get in
volved in litigation of which the outcome is so
highly problematic.
The only way in which this situation could be
rectified is by the consolidation or the codification
of the law relating to these various aspects of our
social order. No Irish Government, even with the
best possible intentions, can hope to get this done
without the assistance of a law reform committee
constituted on the lines which I have indicated. The
civil servants in the Department of Local Govern
ment and our local officials, by the very nature of
their positions, are the least vociferous section of
our community. Those gravely affected by injustices
from the nature of other aspects of our existing
legislation are not organised and are equally in
articulate.
Undoubtedly every Government and
every political party which has been in power since
we attained our freedom has been assiduous for the
public good and sincere in their efforts to attain it;
but all Government time available for legislation is
occupied by pressure from sections of the community
who are organised and vocal.
In the welter of
legislation that is pressed upon the Government in
those circumstances, it is inevitable that fundamental
principles going to the roots of our system of juris
prudence are apt to be overlooked.
If the public
conscience could be awakened to the need for a
law reform committee consisting of experienced
lawyers such as exist in other countries our Govern
ment could be kept constantly informed of the
existing position relating to fundamental principles
and where our existing legislation is defective. Then,
the Government charged with the responsibility for
public good, could decide, whether any and if so,
what steps should be taken in accordance with their
political principles to remedy existing defects, to
keep legislation in harmony with our everchanging
social order and outlook, and to have our laws as
they should be—a mirror of the nation's social
conscience.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
May I conclude on a personal note by saying how
deeply grateful I am to the Council of our Society
for the honour they have paid me in electing me as
your President. With the kindly co-operation and
the help so unselfishly given by the Council and by
some other members of our Society who have so