The Gazette 1911-12

FEBRUARY, 1912] The Gazette of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland.

95

you occupy to-day than I do. May I ask those present if they consider that we have made a case here to-day after they have heard the different speakers ; may I implore them to unanimously support the proposition of my friend Mr. Craig. MR. J. R. STRITCH, in supporting the motion, said :—I had the privilege of attend ing Wolverhampton Sessions, and saw how the work was carried on there, and it has often struck me as a peculiar thing that we do not get such an Act of Parliament over here. Under their Act of Parliament, when a subpoena is issued and is not obeyed, the Judge can order imprisonment. In this country a witness not attending can be fined a sum not exceeding £10. What is the result ? You subp'i'iia a gentleman to attend and prove his means—this is the practice in Green Street; and although he gets the summons requiring to attend personally, he does not attend and is fined £5. The English Act is advantageous from another point of view. Here, if a man living in Dublin sues a man in the country for a small sum, and the latter enters a defence, the plaintiff will have to go down and prove the debt. But in nine cases out of ten he won't go on, owing to the small sum involved, and he loses his debt. In England it is different, and if the English system prevailed here, a defendant from the country would have to attend at Green Street. MR. T. W. DELANY (Longford), said :— The Solicitors in County Longford approve very heartily of the proposal which has been so very well made by Mr. Craig. However, our only difficulty in the matter is that these resolutions do not go far enough. As I gather from the speech of Mr. Craig and the phrasing of the resolution, 'the object of the Commission is to inquire into how you can better the procedure in the County Courts. After twenty years' experience in the country I say, and I voice the opinion of my brother Solicitors in the County Longford, that the resolution proposed does not go far enough. The County Court is the poor man's Court, and the poor man ought to have all the luxury and opportunity of going to law that the rich man had in the past. I may put it that unless you go further and have reform in jurisdiction and proper setting out of all the work that should go before the County

Court, a Commission would be largely a waste of time. We realise that when we come to the Four Courts, we come more or less to a wilderness, and that when we go back to the County Courts we go back to a place full of life and business. But there are a great many obstacles placed in the way of those who have of necessity to go to law to seek redress of an honest grievance. If the resolution was amended in the way I suggest, it would have, the hearty approval, not merely of the profession, but of the public who have to go into the County Courts, and who would go in under different circumstances in much larger numbers. Everyone knows the pro cedure is antiquated, and that there are a hundred and one ways in which it might be improved. The only way I can see that it can be done is by having proper procedure jurisdiction, and proper machinery. The only way I can see of having the improve ments carried out in the way of proper procedure jurisdiction and machinery, is by putting the benefits of our experience before the Commission. But I think we should try and induce the Government to give us the opportunity of providing for the public the proper conveniences that modern civilisation requires, and that the poor man is entitled to have just as much as the rich. In hundreds of cases actions are neglected simply because of the expense of coming to Dublin, and the uncertainty of the result makes men very chary of going to law. I think that amongst Solicitors there should be no arguments necessary to convince them of the absolute necessity of the procedure now suggested by this resolution being adopted. I think that instead of giving instances of how much better off they are in England and Scotland we ought to make up our minds to agree to the resolution proposed and devise such machinery as will bring about the result asked for. Evidence could be given by the most skilled representatives of the profession, and even by members of the public. Let the Commission in its turn properly report, and we shall have an unanswerable case not in the interest, of the profession merely, but of the public at large. SIR JOHN P. LYNCH, said:—I am entirely in favour of the reforms suggested, but I think that in asking for a Royal Com mission to inquire into a subject of this kind,