§ Order of the Day for the Third Reading read. Bill read 3a.
The Earl of Wicklowrose to move an Amendment. The Bill professed to assimilate the law in England and Ireland; and yet, though according to the English Bill, the Office of Taxing Master in the Court of Chancery was confined exclusively to solicitors of twelve years' standing, in the Irish Bill no qualification was specified for the same office. He therefore proposed, with the view of assimilating the law in both countries, that the persons to be appointed to the office of Taxing Master under this Bill should be solicitors having practised in the Court of Chancery for twelve years.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that the Bill had been approved of by the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, and he would be responsible for the appointments. He did not think that solicitors ought to have the exclusive right to appointment to this office. Nineteen-twentieths of the business of the Taxing Master was mere matter of routine, and could be performed by any man of common sense and education; if a question of principle arose, a barrister was even a more competent person to decide on it than a solicitor. In the Common Law Courts in England the majority of persons filling the office of Taxing Master were barristers, and this was also in a great measure the case in the Courts of Equity; and, taking all the Courts together, the majority was composed of men who had practised as barristers. In the Court of Bankruptcy, it was left to the option of the Lord Chancellor to appoint either a solicitor or a barrister. The solicitors wished to be appointed to certain offices, amongst which was that of the Accountant General of the Court of Chancery. In England no person was appointed to such an office but a person of high legal learning and experience. Another office was that of Examiner in the Courts of Equity. Should solicitors be selected to that office to the exclusion of barristers? Why, how much better was a barrister qualified to examine a witness than a solicitor! Besides those two offices, and that of Taxing Master, there were some others. He must contend against 1343 the exclusive principle, and hoped the appointment of these officers would be left to the judgment of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland.
§ Lord Cottenhamsaid, that his noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack, was quite right in saying that a barrister would be a better examiner of witnesses than an attorney, because that was a business to which he was accustomed. Now, an appointment such as that under this Bill should be conferred on a person whose past duties were as nearly as possible similar to those of the office of Taxing Master. Now, it was notorious that a barrister knew nothing of costs, as he had nothing to do with them; while an attorney lived throughout the whole of his career in costs. The objection of his noble and learned Friend to the Amendment was, that it would exclude barristers; but as the Bill now stood, not only barristers might be appointed, but a coachman or footman, or any other person the Lord Chancellor might choose to patronise. He, in the course of his professional career, had on a few occasions to argue cases of costs, and he confessed that nothing had given him more trouble; but on each occasion he had to learn his lesson, as matters of this kind seldom or never came under his attention. He was surprised at the course his noble and learned Friend now took, since by the Bill of 1842 he admitted that attorneys were the qualified persons for the office in question, and the only qualified persons, barristers not being mentioned at all. Were he to ask any barrister in Westminster Hall if he could sit down and tax a Bill, he should be answered in the negative. If their Lordships wished to have barristers appointed to perform a duty of which they knew nothing, they would oppose the Amendment; but if in this case they wished to do "justice to Ireland," they would agree to it.
The Lord ChancellorThe form of the Amendment will give these appointments to solicitors and attorneys exclusively.
Lord Campbellsaid, he strongly suspected that there was a job at the bottom of this Bill. His noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack had made a most ingenious speech, which he was able to do on any occasion, and in support of any cause; but probably he had so acted at a suggestion from a highly respectable quarter. But his noble and learned 1344 Friend had not answered the question of the noble Earl (of Wicklow), why should there be a difference made between England and Ireland in this matter? By the Bill of 1842, of which his noble and learned Friend approved, the office was limited to attorneys or solicitors of ten years' standing. He thought his noble and learned Friend would find that he was as ill qualified for the office of Taxing Master as himself or any Member of the Bar. Could his noble and learned Friend tell him whether the charge for taking instructions should be 3s. 4d. or 6s. 8d., or what the charge ought to be for this item—"To dining with you, and having much conversation respecting your cause?" Would his noble and learned Friend consider the dinner as a set-off for the conversation? He thought his noble and learned Friend might spend much more than the long vacation in vainly trying to learn this business. With respect to the observation that some baristers were now taxing masters in the courts in Westminster Hall, he would remind his noble and learned Friend that most of them had previously been solicitors and attorneys, and therefore were qualified. He trusted that the noble Earl would persist in his Amendment and divide the House.
Lord Stanleyadmitted that he was not competent to discuss the duties performed by the officers in question, and would not attempt to dispute the opinion of the noble and learned Lord opposite, founded, as it was, upon that long experience which he had had in the Court of Chancery, Ireland, respecting the qualifications of the solicitors of Dublin. No doubt there might be found among them persons competent to the office; but the question was, whether the selection of persons for the office should be left to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland?—not to this or that particular Lord Chancellor, for the purpose of patronage or jobbing, as the noble and learned Lord had gratuitously assumed. The question was, whether they would leave it to the Lord Chancellor to appoint these officers from barristers and solicitors, or that the selection should be made exclusively from solicitors? For himself, he should be satisfied to leave the selection to the responsibility of the Lord Chancellor, on whichever side of the House he might sit; and he should impute no motive to any individual who filled that high office, whether he selected 1345 the larger or the smaller number from one body or the other. The argument of his noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack was directed against confining the choice to solicitors. It appeared that high authorities differed as to whether barristers or solicitors were best qualified and most competent to fill this office. His noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack, and the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, considered barristers better qualified for the office; whereas the noble and learned Lord opposite thought that solicitors were better adapted for such an office. He hoped that he should be guilty of no offence if he placed his confidence in the opinion of his noble and learned Friend and the Chancellor of Ireland, rather than in that of the two noble and learned Lords opposite. He believed that his noble and learned Friend would not object to the Amendment, if it extended to barristers or solicitors of ten years' practice.
The Marquess of Clanricardewas not surprised at this measure, for it was in conformity with all their proceedings with regard to Ireland, and which had been productive of such excitement in that part of the kingdom. For his part, he believed that the Bill had been drawn with the view of some piece of patronage. He thought the insinuation thrown out against the attorneys and solicitors of Ireland would annoy and aggravate them. If there were the slightest ground for any such insinuation, it was still one which it would not be very prudent or very wise to make; but he begged utterly to deny that any such ground did exist. He would maintain that the solicitors of Ireland were as respectable and as intelligent a body as the solicitors of England. In fact, he knew them to be as respectable and intelligent as any class in any country in the world. He wished, therefore, to know why a distinction—always odious, but in this case particularly so—should be drawn between the solicitors of the two countries. Why should the solicitors of Ireland be deprived of any share in these appointments?
The Marquess of ClanricardeThey had a chance—but why should they not have a right? Her Majesty's Government had no influence in Ireland. There were influence and power possessed by the Repeal Association, and by a strong knot of 1346 Orangemen in that country; but in what part of the country, he would ask, was Her Majesty's Government strong, or possessed of influence? And yet they now came forward to insult gratuitously a class which was one of the most influential in all countries, but which was peculiarly so in Ireland. Every drop in the cup—already, he was sorry to say, extremely full of discontent and dissatisfaction—was of importance in the present condition of Ireland. The solicitors of Dublin did not ask for this matter as a boon or a favour. They demanded as a right to be placed on the same footing as the solicitors of England with respect to the provisions of this Bill. As the Bill now stood, the Lord Chancellor of Ireland might appoint his coachman, or his footman, or any person whatever to this office; and when they looked to the history of Ireland, it should not be regarded altogether as a gratuitous assertion to state that it was possible some English favourite might be brought over to perform the duties of the office. If they looked to the Church, or to the law, or even to minor officers, such as the appointment of architects under the Board of Works, they would find that Englishmen had been constantly preferred to appointments in Ireland, and yet he would, if allowed, wish to remind their Lordships that in this very profession of the law, when the question arose of bringing over a distinguished Irish lawyer to this country, of the feeling which was exhibited among the Members of the English Bar. Were the Irish solicitors, then, he would ask, not justified in looking forward to the possibility of an Englishman being brought over to fill this office? He had the honour of receiving more than one communication on the subject, and he knew the solicitors of Dublin to be extremely dissatisfied with the Bill as it now stood; and if his noble Friend had not moved his Amendment, he (the Marquess of Clanricarde) would undoubtedly have done so. He would conclude by again cautioning the Government against creating distinctions which would give cause for great dissatisfaction among a most influential and most respectable class, who might prove to be very dangerous enemies to the Government.
The Lord Chancellorwished to be allowed one word of explanation. He believed the solicitors of Ireland to be a respectable, and worthy, and able body; but 1347 he, at the same time, felt that in legislating they ought to guard against the possibility of abuse.
§ Lord Langdalesaid, he believed that this appointment ought to be given to solicitors, who had peculiar qualifications in addition to others which they had in common with barristers; and he had no doubt but that there could be found among that class a sufficient number of men of ample integrity, influence, and respectability, and having the advantage of long acquaintance and familiarity with the subject, to undertake the duties of the office. He would not have broken through his general rule of not troubling their Lordships with any remarks, if direct reference had not been made to him by his noble and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor, in connexion with the Bill of 1842. He believed his noble and learned Friend entertained the same objection to that Bill on its first introduction which he now felt to the present measure, and that he had been anxious that the offices created under it should be open to barristers and solicitors of a certain number of years' standing. He (Lord Langdale) entered into discussion with the noble and learned Lord on the occasion, and his noble and learned Friend finally consented to have the appointments reserved exclusively for solicitors. He thought it would be a great deal better to adopt the Amendment of the noble Earl, than to continue the principle of the Bill as it now stood. In reference to what had fallen from his noble Friend (the Marquess of Clanricarde), he should beg to remark that it would not be open to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland to appoint a menial, or any such incompetent person to the office, as the Bill expressly stated that the appointment was to be given to a "fit and competent person."
§ The Earl of St. Germanssaid, the solicitors of Dublin were, undoubtedly, as they had been described, a very respectable and numerous body; but still it should not be forgotten that for every one solicitor practising in Dublin there were at least twenty in this metropolis, and therefore the comparison drawn between them did not exactly hold. He had very great pleasure in expressing his concurrence in what had fallen from the noble Marquess respecting the solicitors of Ireland being a very respectable body. At the same time, he thought it should be borne in mind that 1348 the exclusive appointment of solicitors to this office in England was confined to the Court of Chancery, and that noble Lords—if their argument were worth anything—ought to move for a measure to restrict all other Courts in a similar manner. With regard to the imputation cast upon his right hon. and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, he would venture to say that there was no man in that House who would be less capable of departing from the correct line of his duty for the purpose of appointing any connexion of his own, than was Sir Edward Sugden.
The Marquess of Clanricardebegged to remind the noble Earl who had just sat down, that though there was a disproportion between the number of solicitors in the two countries, there was also a difference between the appointments to these offices. In Ireland there was to be but one officer appointed under this Bill, while in England the number filling similar appointments was six.
The Lord Chancellorwished to remark, in consequence of what had fallen from his noble and learned Friend (Lord Langdale), that the Bill of 1842, as originally drawn, confined the appointments to solicitors, when he (the Lord Chancellor) had proposed to amend it by adding barristers of a certain standing. It was drawn, he believed, under the superintendence of his noble and learned Friend; and after more than one conversation between them on the subject, he (the Lord Chancellor) yielded with reluctance to his noble and learned Friend's opinion, and consented that barristers should not be included; but he did so solely in consequence of the great attention which that noble and learned Lord had given to the subject.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, if their Lordships decided on not passing this Amendment, it was his intention to propose another, that the office should be open to solicitors and barristers of a certain standing.
The Earl of Wicklowwished to remind his noble Friend near him (the Earl of St. Germans), that though the Bill of 1842 was, as he had stated, confined to the Court of Chancery alone, and did not include the Courts of Law, the present Bill was also confined to the Court of Chancery in Ireland, He would candidly confess 1349 that he thought it was an act of madness on the part of Her Majesty's Government to persist in their opposition to this Amendment; and he could not bring himself to believe that his noble and learned Friend (the Lord Chancellor) would continue to do so. He and those who supported him merely required to assimilate the law in the two countries, and not a single reason had been adduced to show why that assimilation should not take place. Was it, he would ask, because the people of Ireland were unreasonable in some demands, that they were to be denied what was just and reasonable in others? He only asked his noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack to forego his opinion in this case, as he admitted he had done on another. If he did not, he would, he promised him, give offence, not only on his own part, but on that of the Government with which he was connected; he would be doing an act of injustice, and be creating disaffection among a most influential class in Ireland.
§ Their Lordships divided:—Contents 19; Non-Contents 30: Majority 11.
§ Amendment negatived.
The Lord Chancellorthen moved an Amendment, that the appointment should be confined to barristers-at-law of not less than ten years' standing, or solicitors of not less than ten years' practice.
§ The Earl of Ellenboroughsaid, he trusted some attempt would be made in the next Session to assimilate the law of the two countries in this matter.
§ Amendment agreed to, and other Amendments. Bill passed.