SMALL DEBTS (SCOTLAND). (Hansard, 19 July 1833)

Mr. Wallace
rose to state his objection to the Bill. There were two Judges of the Court; one the Sheriff, the other the Sheriff Depute; one having a moderate salary and doing a great deal of duty, the other having a high salary, and doing little or no duty. The Bill departed also from the sound principle, that Judges should be paid by the Exchequer, and not by fees. By one of the provisions of the Bill, twenty-five per cent was taken from the Sheriffs' clerks as part of the fees in question. He was against all high salaries; and if a proposition were made to reduce such salaries as those of the Lords of the Treasury, it should have his unqualified support. But the clerks in question had, in the first place, been appointed for life, and had, in the second place, purchased their situations. They had also, in many cases, been obliged to allow retiring salaries to their predecessors. Another principle of the Bill was, in effect, taking twenty-five per cent from litigants in one part of the country for the benefit of litigants in other parts. He should therefore conclude by moving, as an Amendment, that the three clauses referring to these points should be omitted.

§ The Speaker
The Amendment cannot be moved till the Bill has been read a third time.

§ Mr. Thomas Kennedy
said, that the emoluments of the Sheriffs' clerks had considerably increased since the local jurisdiction was given to the Sheriffs. This was first done in 1826, and subsequently confirmed in 1830; he could not, therefore, see any reason why the emoluments of the Sheriffs' clerks should not be curtailed if Parliament thought proper. Their emoluments depended entirely upon the Statutes passed, which no one could deny the competency of the Parliament to alter or repeal. The Sheriffs were called on to discharge extra duties; and as they were not now overpaid, it was of course necessary that they should be remunerated. The extra business which would flow from this Bill would more than repay the deficiency occasioned by taxing their incomes twenty-five per cent. That taxation, be it remembered, only applying to that portion of their incomes which springs from the Local Courts' jurisdiction. Thus, in his own county, the Sheriff's clerk had an Income of 900l. per annum, 300l. of which arose from local jurisdiction; consequently he would only lose 75l. per annum, even if he gained no additional income. With regard to the objection to payment by fees, it should be remembered, that by adopting such a plan the Judge was only paid in proportion to the work done.

Captain Gordon
thought it most advisable that the hon. and learned Gentleman should postpone his Bill till the Commission now sitting to inquire into this subject should make their report. He would not support the Amendment, neither could he agree to the proposal for taking away twenty-five per cent from the salaries of the clerks of the Courts.

§ Mr. Hume
thought, that if the Sheriffs clerks were overpaid, the bettor plan would be to reduce the fees, and then the public would gain the advantage.

§ Mr. Stewart Mackenzie
approved of the principle of the Bill, but thought sonic of the details very objectionable. In Inverness-shire and Ross-shire he knew it would operate injuriously. The reduction of emoluments of the Sheriffs' clerks would in many cases, prevent respectable and intelligent gentlemen from undertaking such situations.

§ Mr. Cutlar Fergusson
said, that the fees of the Sheriffs' Court were already 1039 lower than those of any other Court. The summons cost 6d. only, and the decree no more. The Sheriff's' Court in Scotland might be made the best in the world; it would, however, be much better that causes should be heard by the Sheriff himself in the first instance. No one could grudge the Sheriff the emoluments he received.

Mr. Murray
defended the Bill. The emoluments of the Sheriffs' clerks were raised very high by the local jurisdiction, and he saw no reason why they should not contribute towards the expense of the system from which they derived so much advantage. As their fees were small, it was better to apply a certain portion of them for the public benefit than to reduce them.

§ Sir John Hay
inquired whether the per centage were to be taken solely on the additional fees derived from this Bill? He thought the Bill should be deferred till the Commissioners, one of whom was a Sheriff, had made their report.

§ Mr. Thomas Kennedy
said, that the per centage would be taken only on the emoluments derived from the local jurisdiction. As to the Commission, the Local Court system was known to be so highly advantageous, that the better plan would be to pass this measure, and give the Commissioners an opportunity of judging of the manner in which the Bill worked. The hon. member for Ross-shire had been made the victim of a clamour raised by the Sheriffs' clerks, by no means creditable to them. Amongst others who had sent letters of complaint, as though he were an injured man, was a gentleman residing in Edinburgh, and who derived an income of 1,000l. a-year from a place which did not give him the slightest labour.