THIRD READING. (Hansard, 28 March 1859)

THE EASL OF LEITRIM
urged two objections to the measure; first, that it provided no compensation for the lords of manors, who by its operation would lose their present right of appointing the officers of the manor courts; and, secondly, that no case had been made out for interfering with the manor courts at all. The noble Lord moved, as an Amendment, that the Bill be read a third time that day six months.

THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE
said, that the disclosures made before the Committee of the House of Commons in 1837 proved to demonstration that there were in the constitution of those courts defects inherent in the system of such a character that it was impossible but that injustice should be wrought so long as they continued. He admitted that it was most unfortunate that the evil had not been corrected long ago; but the lapse of time had neither weakened the case nor removed the necessity for legislation. It was in the power of lords of manors to appoint any person as seneschal who could give security to the amount of £500, and though in some cases they had taken pains, in others they had shown carelessness in their selection. Then the class of jurors was objectionable. Many persons were in the habit of serving as jurors for the sake of the treat of liquor which they received from the suitors. In the next place, the plaintiffs were generally money lenders, the defendants people of the poorer class. The result had been, as broadly stated by the witnesses, that the cases were almost 910 invariably decided in favour of the plaintiff. "Do you mean," one of the witnesses was asked, "that the plaintiffs always obtain verdicts?" "I don't mean to say that, "he replied," but I say this, that the plaintiffs win in ninety-nine cases out of one hundred." Another of the defects of these courts was that their patents were vague, many of them having never been translated out of the barbarous Latin in which they were originally drawn up. Disputes as to jurisdiction were constant; the seneschals being paid by fees of course had an interest in extending the limits of the manors; while, on the other hand, the defendants contending that the seneschals had overstepped their jurisdiction, often disputed the decrees, and the consequence was not unfrequently riot and criminal charges there from arising. Another objection was that the courts were often held in public-houses, and the juries had to decide without having the advantage of a retiring room, but sitting amongst the suitors, and amidst temptations to drink and riot. Many other objections might be urged to these courts, but enough had, he thought, been said to prove that Her Majesty's Government had exercised a wise discretion in proposing to abolish them altogether. In some places the bailiffs and officers of the courts were in the habit of acting as attorneys, and it appears that in one case a woman was in the habit, for a fee of one 1s., of undertaking the cause of one or the other party to the suit. He trusted that, for the sake of the dignity of public justice, their Lordships would consent to abolish these courts. As to the other objection raised by his noble Friend, that the Lords of these manors ought to be compensated for the loss of their rights of appointing the judges, how would the noble Earl measure the value of a right of nomination to an office which was paid, not out of fixed property, but which was remunerated by fees for services performed? If an officer received fees, what did he receive them for? For discharging certain duties, and the fees were only paid accord-as he performed the duty. Let him cease to perform the duty, and from that hour he ceased to be entitled to fees. Then was the right of nomination to these offices worth anything? Was it worth a shilling? He confessed he did not think it was. Had he such patronage he certainly should refuse to exercise it. The right of nomination was worth nothing; and, therefore, 911 the Lords of manors could have no possible claim for compensation. The question of compensation for the seneschals themselves was quite another thing. An appeal from the manor courts could only be brought now to the assizes; but by the present Bill an appeal would be from the petit sessions courts to the court of quarter sessions, so that disputes might be settled more speedily and more cheaply. He trusted that their Lordships would concur in the third reading of a measure which would effect a great improvement in the law.

§ THE EARL OF BANDON
hoped that the Amendment would be withdrawn, as he thought the Bill contained some beneficial alterations.

VISCOUNT DUNGANNON
said, the existing system was a mockery of justice. Disgraceful scenes of drinking, carousing, and riot often took place in the public-houses where these courts were held; and a great been would result from the abolition of the courts in favour of the substitute provided by this Bill.

THE EARL OF LEITRIM
made a few remarks in reply.