§ LORD WESTBURYrose to call the attention of the House to the state of business on the Civil Bill side of the Courts of Quarter Session in Ireland, and to the defects in the jurisdiction of such Courts, and to ask a Question. The noble and learned Lord said, that in directing attention to this subject, it was necessary to bear in mind the differences between the County Courts in England and the Courts of Quarter Session in Ireland, and that to these tribunals in each country important duties were attached in connection with the administration of justice. In England the County Courts had attained great importance; as would appear from the fact that while in 1870 the total amount recovered in our Common Law Courts was £370,000, the amount recovered in the County Courts 502 was £1,321,000. The Courts of Quarter Session in Ireland were of equal importance; for though the amount recovered in them in civil causes might not be so large, nevertheless their business was of the most diversified character. Last year they decided on twice as many offences as the higher criminal Courts in that country, issued 30 times as many ejectments, gave judgment in cases involving four times as much as the verdicts in the Common Law Courts amounted to, heard 500 appeals from magistrates, and disposed of 3,000 applications for licences, in addition to a large number of cases under the Irish Land Act. The County Courts in England were established in 1847, but they possessed at that time merely common law jurisdiction in cases involving sums under £50. Since their institution many additions of jurisdiction had been advantageously conferred on them. During his own tenure of office as Lord Chancellor, they received equitable jurisdiction—whereby they were enabled to make decrees relative to the administration of a deceased person's estate when it did not exceed £500, to entertain questions arising out of partnerships, also suits for specific performance, applications for injunctions, and various other matters. All those powers, however, were wanting to the Chairmen of Quarter Sessions in Ireland; and he was assured that frequent and signal failures of justice occurred in that country by reason of the persons resorting to those Courts finding that they had not authority to dispose of the questions involved in their cases. The necessity for an alteration was imperative. Take the case of a tenant-farmer who died intestate, leaving an estate of some £300 or £400; if he died childless a contest almost always ensued between the widow and her friends and the relatives of the husband; and even when there were children it was found that one member of the family usually took possession of the property and doled out to the other members such small sums as he thought proper. For that there was no possibility of redress in Ireland, unless the aggrieved party resorted to the Court of Chancery, where a small estate would probably be swallowed up. Again, it continually happened when a man was suing another for a debt, that it turned out in the course of the action that there 503 was some kind of partnership between them. Then, unfortunately, the Chairman of Quarter Sessions was obliged to tell the parties that he had no jurisdiction, and that they must both quit the Court without obtaining relief. The litigants went away complaining of the difference between English and Irish justice, and of the neglect of the Imperial Parliament in not giving them the same remedy as was extended to Englishmen. All that arose from the want of a most beneficial jurisdiction. In an address delivered in November, 1870, by the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, that noble and learned Lord said that the County Court was created for the benefit of the comparatively poor; and yet in very many cases in which it was impossible for such people to invoke the jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery, their access to the Civil Bill Side Judge was wholly useless, for he had no authority to entertain their claims, and the relief which the rich man could compel under precisely the same circumstances, was denied to those to whom it was equally due and might be more important. The noble and learned Lord added that that was an evil which pressingly needed redress, and that its removal would prevent the practical denial of justice in a multitude of cases, and confer a real benefit on the humbler classes of Ireland. Now, he (Lord Westbury) hoped to see the day when his noble and learned Friend would be enabled to confer on Ireland the great benefit the Lord Chancellor of Ireland had described; but he was afraid that, in proceeding with the work, he would be encountered by what might be called the evil genius of the present Government—the demon of parsimonious economy which prevented them from doing the great things they meditated, but had not the heart to achieve. In Ireland there were 33 districts, having 33 Chairmen, who were not only subject to most injurious disabilities, but received very small salaries, being in return allowed the very questionable privilege of carrying on private practice. If the changes he (Lord Westbury) advocated were effected, and the jurisdiction of these Courts extended, he believed that large additions would be made to the Revenue in the shape of augmented stamp duties and fees; for in Ireland, under the present state of things, a very small amount 504 of probate duty was paid, and in cases of intestacy few persons took out letters of administration. The noble and learned Lord then asked the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, If it is the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill during the present session for extending to such Courts the equitable and other jurisdiction and powers vested in the county court judges in England, but not possessed by the judges of the Civil Bill courts in Ireland, so as to make the aforesaid courts in Ireland co-equal in point of jurisdiction and authority with the county courts in England?
§ LORD O'HAGANsaid, he cordially agreed in the substantial part of the noble and learned Lord's complaint; for it was in substance very much the complaint he had himself made on the occasion when, as President of the Statistical Society of Ireland, he delivered the address quoted by the noble and learned Lord. He agreed as to the improvement of these Courts as the poor man's Courts, and as to the advantage of assimilating the law of Ireland to the law of England and the law of England to the law of Ireland, when by such a process any advantage could be gained by the one side or the other. But what was good for one was not always good for the other, and it was not possible to make a rigid rule in all cases, and perhaps not in the case now under consideration. Strange as it might appear, with regard to many of their legal institutions in Ireland they had outrun the civilization of England. The County Court system was instituted in Ireland in the last century, and became the model for the County Court system in England, which was not established until 1840. The same might be said as to registration fees and the question of a public prosecutor. This system of County Courts in Ireland was, he thought, very creditable to the country, and upon the whole it had been satisfactory. Originally the jurisdiction was small, but it was extended according to the exigencies and the circumstances of the people, and ultimately it became a very important tribunal for administration of justice. He did not believe that the English County Court system, good as it was in many respects, had been so entirely satisfactory as to make it one to be followed as a model to the extent suggested. At the same time he admitted that the sys- 505 tem in Ireland should be extended for the reasons and much to the degree mentioned by the noble and learned Lord. He withheld, however, at present any opinion as to an organic change of the system:—and he would say nothing with regard to the county officers. That was a subject connected with the Grand Jury system, and would be properly dealt with by a separate measure. In the other House a promise had been given that such a measure should be introduced either this or next Session. If that were done, it appeared to him that a simple arrangement, amalgamating the officer representing the Crown at the assizes with the clerk of the peace, would provide an officer who might do duty very well at the Quarter Session Court and the Civil Bill Court without one penny of additional cost to the country. But, so far as the matters referred to by his noble and learned Friend were concerned, he was clearly of opinion that there ought to be an extension of the jurisdiction of the County Court Judges in Ireland. He had no doubt whatever that it was necessary for the good of the people of Ireland that they should have an equitable jurisdiction—at all events to a considerable extent. That was becoming more necessary every day, because Ireland was materially progressing. The people had a great deal of money in their hands, and there was no doubt that the operation of the Land Act had not only led already to a larger expenditure upon the soil of Ireland in the way of improvement than any other measure ever invented by the Imperial Parliament, but it had induced the people to enter into contracts one with another as to land, which it was of the greatest importance there should be power to enforce at small expense and in a facile way. When a man purchased a small piece of land, say worth £100 or £200, or obtained the promise of a lease worth £20 a-year, and the person with whom he had contracted would not carry it out, he had no alternative but to go before one of the Judges of the Court of Chancery at an expense which it was totally beyond his power to incur. It was clear that there should be equitable jurisdiction in such cases; and also in cases of commercial relations, because there were often partnerships involving accounts of a complicated character. There should also be an extension of jurisdiction in 506 the Civil Bill Court. At present, even when grievous injury was done to a poor man, he was frequently left without remedy unless he could gather money to go into a Superior Court. As the result justice was denied to the poor man. For instance, if a man went to the Civil Bill Court to complain of an obstruction of a right of way, he was told to go to the Superior Court or he could not have redress. In consequence of justice according to law being thus denied the justice of the strong hand was sometimes appealed to, leading to breaches of law and order. That being his opinion, he could not express it too strongly. Although unable to answer the Question of the noble and learned Lord (Lord Westbury) he might say that he had done his best towards carrying out all those views and principles he had alluded to. For a considerable time he had been in communication with Chairmen of Quarter Session in Ireland with the object of initiating a reform in this respect; and a Bill which had been prepared touching these questions was at present under the consideration of the Government. It would be a cause of great satisfaction to him if the views he had expressed could be carried out. He believed it was necessary that these things should be done, and that the people of Ireland would be very grateful if they were done for them.