§ MR. O'HAGAN (THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND)in moving for leave to bring in a Bill "to amend the procednre of the County Courts in Ireland" said, he desired to remind the House that these courts had existed in Ireland antecedent to similar courts being established in this country, and might be taken to have afforded a precedent for the English system. At first their jurisdiction was limited to £10, but had since been extended to £40 there was also a testamentary jurisdiction, and their power extended to actions of ejectment in cases where the value of the property did not exceed £100 a year. He believed he might fairly say that the manner in which the business was conducted was, on the whole, satisfactory: they were, he believed, as a general rule, very efficient and very popular tribunals. But there was one portion of their procedure which was the subject of almost universal condemnation in Ireland, and for the reform of which this measure was intended—that was the mode of execution of the process of the Courts, which operated mainly among the humbler classes, and in whose case it was extremely important, not only that the process should be efficient, but that it should be conducted by means of a machinery to which due responsibility should attach. At present the execution of process in the County Courts in Ireland was as badly carried out as it could possibly be. By the 14 & 15 Vict, it was directed, that a decree of these Courts should be executed by the sheriff, or by a special bailiff nominated by the plaintiff in. a suit; but the practical result was that 481 the sheriff never executed a decree—indeed, it was impossible that they should do so; because, whereas in England the jurisdiction of each county court was specifically confined to the county in which it was situated, in Ireland the jurisdiction often extended over large districts embracing parts of several counties, and often in the course of a single year as many as 100,000 might be issued;—the result consequently was that the execution of process was committed to the hands of a bailiff appointed by the plaintiff in the cause at his own peril only. Thus it came to pass that while in the superior Courts the sheriff was responsible in those instances both to the plaintiff and the defendant for any mischance that might arise, the person generally appointed to execute process by the plaintiff in the County Court was some one of rather low character, to whose performance of the duty cast upon him great extortion, great oppression, and great public mischief were incident. Indeed, he had heard of cases in which the execution of a decree for a sum of £20 had, in such hands, cost the plaintiff £3, £4, or even £5;while, in addition, frequent assaults and rescues were the consequence of committing execution to ignorant and worthless persons, who were apt to display great recklessness and violence of conduct. To remedy that state of things was the object with which he proposed to ask the House for leave to introduce a Bill that evening. It was only, he might add, within the last month that a memorial had been received from the merchants of Londonderry pressing for some amendment in the law in that respect, while equally strong opinions in the same direction had, he was aware, been expressed by the Chamber of Commerce of Belfast. Acting, then, on what he thought was the almost universal feeling on the subject in Ireland, the Government proposed that, on the analogy that the duties of the sheriff were generally delegated to an officer who was called the high bailiff of the Court, the persons who should in future execute the decrees in question should be the sub-sheriffs of counties, who would be responsible officers fairly remunerated for the work. There were at the present moment such officers in Ireland brought very much into connection with the chairman of County Courts, and on them he thought the like duty of the executing their process might very ad vantageously be devolved, while the high sheriffs should be relieved from the nominal 482 responsibility in those matters which now rested upon them, and which it would, in his opinion, be somewhat harsh to continue to impose. According to the provisions of this Bill the sub-sheriff alone would be charged with the duty of executing the process of the Court. He would be made the responsible person, and so give security, not only for the efficient performance of the duties devolving upon him, but for the due transmission of the proceeds of the distraint with the least possible cost and delay to the person in whose favour the decree was made. Then, the sub-sheriff must be fairly paid. It was calculated, that by giving the sub-sheriff fees on the warrants and poundage on the decrees, he would be sufficiently paid, while suitors would be considerably relieved. It was intended to make him directly responsible to the Crown, to whom he would give security, instead of, as at present, to the high sheriff; and to place him under the control of the County Court Judge, who would have the power of fining him for any impropriety of conduct or neglect of duty. There were other provisions in the Bill, which he thought would be a great improvement upon the existing law. One of these made it competent for a Judge of assize, upon appeal, to reserve a question of law for the opinion of a superior court. He trusted that the system to be established by the Bill would work cheaply and efficiently, without injury to individual interests, and with protection and benefit to the public.
Moved, "That leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend the proceedings of the County Courts in Ireland."
MR, GEORGEexpressed his general concurrence with the scope and object of the Bill; but said that he thought it was a mistake that it was not provided that the warrants should be sent to the high sheriff in the first instance, in accordance with the practice of the superior courts, to be afterwards transmitted by him to the sub-sheriff for execution. If that plan had been adopted he believed it would obviate the difficulties which he foresaw would arise if the system proposed was adhered to.
§ Motion agreed to.
§ Bill to amend the procedure of the County Courts in Ireland, ordered to be brought in by Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL for IRELAND, Sir ROBERT PEEL, and Sir GEORGE GREY.