CONDUCT OF CHIEF BARON O'GRADY. (Hansard, 8 July 1823)

§ Mr. Brogden
reported the resolutions of the Committee of the whole House on the conduct of the Chief Baron of the Irish Exchequer. The said Resolutions are as fallows:

1. "That, in consequence of an address from the House of Commons, his late majesty was graciously pleased to issue a commission under the great seal for examining the salaries, duties, and emoluments of the several officers, clerks, and ministers of justice, within that part of the United Kingdom called Ireland; and that the commissioners so appointed have laid before parliament eleven several reports, founded on the examination of the parties, as well as on evidence taken on oath, the ninth and eleventh of which reports relate to the judicial fees of the court of Exchequer in Ireland; that, on the faith of the reports of the commissioners so appointed the legislature has acted, regulating some offices, abolishing others, and introducing a new system of proceeding in the courts of King's-bench, Common Pleas, and the common-law side of the Exchequer."

2. "That the office of lord chief baron of Ireland is an office of the highest dignity and importance, on the impartial and uncorrupt execution whereof the honour of the Crown and welfare of the realm greatly depend."

3. "That the right hon. Standish O'Grady was appointed lord chief baron of his majesty's court of Exchequer in Ireland in the month of October 1805, 1472 and became entitled by such appointment to a salary of 3,500l. per annum, and to the lawful fees incidental to his office."

4. "That it is stated in the aforesaid ninth report, that by art alteration of practice introduced by the present lord chief baron, fees are now received for his lordship's use on bills of costs on the law side of the Exchequer, in cases where the bills of costs are not and never were made out; that a select committee having considered the statement of the commissioners, and the evidence taken on oath before them as aforesaid, together with the reply of the lord chief baron, and having reported thereon to the House, and the said report, together with the reply of the lord chief baron, having been referred by his majesty's government to the said commissioners, the said commissioners, after a further examination of the lord chief baron and of other witnesses on oath, have again reported, that by the alteration of practice introduced by the present chief baron, fees have been received for him on bills of costs in cases where no bills of costs existed; and that it is further stated in the report from the select committee on the eleventh report of the commissioners of inquiry, that the direction of the chief baron, as slated by Mr. Pollock, to whom it was personally given, that the fee of 2s. 2d. should be charged and received for him upon all bills of any sort that were taxed in the Office, and had it been so confined in its operation, it does not appear to your committee, from any evidence before them, that it would have been incorrect, except so far as relates to the increase already noticed under the head of currency; but under this regulation in practice the fee is now stated to have been received by the officers of the court on behalf of the chief baron in certain cases, and by the chief baron himself in others, upon all writs except renewals of executions in case, including the writs specified in the eleventh report of the commissioners, upon which no bills of costs could ever have arisen."

5. "That it is stated in the aforesaid ninth report, that, in pursuance of an order made by the present lord chief baron, fees have been received as for his lordship's signature to a description of writs, on which, previously to the year 1805, no fees have been charged; that, notwithstanding such charge, these writs still remain without signature, except in 1473 a very few instances, when intended to be executed; that a select committee, having considered the statement of the said commissioners, and the evidence taken on oath before the said commissioners, together with the reply of the lord chief baron, reported to this House, 'That it was not alleged that the extension of this application of a fee was warranted by practice at any former period.'"

6. "That it is stated in the aforesaid ninth report, that, pursuant to an order made by the present lord chief baron, certain fees, which had, previously to such order, been accustomed to be received for the said lord chief baron in Irish currency, has been subsequently charged in British currency, whereby the amount of such fees has been augmented 8¼ per centum."

7. "That it is stated in the aforesaid ninth report that an ancient fee is payable to the said lord chief baron on perusing and signing every decree, and a like ancient fee, of the same amount, for every exemplification of a decree (not under the four seals), but that no other fee is payable to the lord chief baron, in respect of any decree, or any copy thereof."

8. "That it is stated in the aforesaid ninth report, that, pursuant to an order made by the present lord chief baron, the ancient fees so payable on perusing and signing a decree, has been collected on the previous proceeding of setting down the cause for hearing, notwithstanding which, a like fee was again demanded and paid to the lord chief baron on making up the decrees, although one only of such decrees appears to have been exemplified; that a select committee having considered the statement of the said commissioners, the evidence taken on oath before the said commissioners, and the reply of the lord chief baron, and having reported to this House, and these several reports having been referred by his majesty's government to the said commissioners, they have, after further examination of the lord chief baron, and of other witnesses on oath, reported to this House, that the distinction between exemplifications and copies had been understood and maintained in the court of Exchequer, and that previously to the appointment of the present lord chief baron the fee upon signing a decree had been the only fee accruing to the lord chief baron upon the passing of a decree."

9. "That the said reports of the commissioners of inquiry, so founded upon evidence taken on oath, and upon the 1474 examination of the chief baron of Ireland himself, having been, together with the two letters from the chief baron in reply to those reports, referred to a select committee during the present session of parliament, a report has been presented, adverting to the alteration of fees from Irish to British currency, to the fees on writs, the fees on decrees, and the fees on taxation of costs."

The Solicitor General
expressed his conviction that no corrupt motive could be attributed to the learned judge. If the resolutions, however, were agreed to, and placed on their Journals, they would imply, a censure on him, unless followed up with some such resolution as the one which he had prepared, without concert with any body, and which he would now move: viz. "That it does not appear to this House that there are sufficient grounds to ascribe the alteration stated to have been, made by the chief baron of the Exchequer in Ireland, in the fees of his court, to any improper motive on the part of that judge."

§ Mr. Canning
would not express any opinion on the resolution proposed by his hon. and learned friend. He would rather wish the hon. member for Limerick would propose a resolution.

Mr. S. Rice
declared that he should have been willing to have followed up the resolutions of fact, by a resolution expressive of the opinion of the House; but from that course he had been deterred by what he understood to be the opinion of a great number of gentlemen.

§ Mr. Hume
said, that the motion of the hon. and learned gentleman certainly was not consonant to the understanding which had been come to on the subject.

Dr. Lushington
said, he was completely taken by surprise by the hon. and learned gentleman coming down at that hour, and moving a resolution, which was in fact decisive of the whole question.

§ Mr. Scarlett
said, he was strongly inclined to concur in the substance of his hon. and learned friend's resolution. He certainly did not believe that the conduct: of the learned judge in question was imputable to corrupt motives. He suggested, however, that it might be expedient to word a resolution to the following effect:—"that it appears by the fifth report of the commissioners, that for the last 100 years a discretionary power has been 1475 exercised by the courts of justice in Ireland, and by some of the individual judges, to increase the fees of the courts, from which, in some instances, the judges themselves derived advantage. That by a recent act of parliament all fees of that nature have been abolished. And that under the circumstances of the case the House does not think it expedient to adopt any further proceeding with respect to chief baron O'Grady.

§ Mr. Daly
was of opinion, that the hon. member for Limerick could not justly complain of being taken by surprise.

§ Mr. W. Courtenay
never understood-that the delay in passing a resolution of opinion, grounded on resolutions of fact, was to be the delay of a session. It might, however, be expedient to adjourn the discussion.

Mr. S. Rice
said, it had been distinctly understood, that the object of confining his resolutions to mere matters of fact, was to give the chief baron fair parliamentary notice of what was going on, that he might be prepared to explain, and defend his conduct. Now, however, it was suddenly proposed to agree to an exculpatory resolution.

Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that the question on which he was called upon to decide was not, whether the chief baron was guilty or innocent, but whether he should be put on his trial or not. He was for not putting him on his trial.

Colonel Barry
wished the hon. and learned member for Peterborough would adopt the precise words of the report of the commissioners.

§ Mr. Scarlett
consented to do so, and observed, that the early part of his resolution would then be to the following effect, "That it is stated in the fifth report of the commissioners, that it is not their province to discuss 'how far, or within, what limits, the judges of the superior courts of law, are authorized to establish new or increased fees for their own services;' 'but that it will be, seen, from the table subjoined (to their report), that a discretion of this nature has, in fact, been exercised to a considerable extent at some period or periods within the last one hundred years; and that, during the time of the present chief justice of the Common Pleas, such an exercise of judicial authority appears to have occurred in three instances.

§ Captain O'Grady
said, he should be perfectly satisfied with the resolu- 1476 tion, if there were added to it the following sentence from the ninth report of the commissioners: "If the amount of the increase of the judicial fees in the court of Exchequer be greater than in. the other two courts, the more extensive jurisdiction of that court ought to be recollected."