LEAVE. (Hansard, 1 May 1866)

§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. LAWSON)
, in moving for leave to introduce a Bill to extend the jurisdiction, alter and amend the procedure and practice, and regulate the establishment of the Court of Admiralty, Ireland, said, that as he understood there would be no opposition to the introduction of the Bill, he would merely content himself by saying that its object was to unite the business of the Irish Court of Admiralty with that of the Irish Court of Probate.

§ MR. WHITESIDE
remarked that there could not be a better Judge for the discharge of such responsible duties than the present Judge of the Irish Court of Probate. The only question was whether the learned Judge would like to have this jurisdiction transferred to him.

§ SIR ROBERT PEEL
desired to know what was to be done with the present Judge of the Admiralty Court—whether he was to discharge other duties, or whether he was to be superannuated.

§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. LAWSON)
said, it was proposed to allow the present Judge of the Admiralty Court to retire upon his full salary.

§ SIR COLMAN O'LOGHLEN
objected to the two Courts of Admiralty and Probate being united. The jurisdiction of the Irish Court of Admiralty might be extended beneficially, and it should be placed upon the same footing as that of England. He wished to know whether the proctors of the Irish Court of Admiralty would receive compensation in the event of that Court being thrown open to the profession generally.

§ MR. PIM
said, that what was required in the Court of Admiralty was prompt decision. He thought that a remedy ought to be provided for the existing evils, of which complaint was so justly made.

§ MR. MAGUIRE
thought that the Government had acted wisely in dealing with this question, but did not approve the course adopted in ignoring some of the most material recommendations of the Commission by whom this matter had been considered. He was in favour of reforming the practice and procedure and extending the jurisdiction of the Court, and continuing it as a separate and independent Court, as recommended by the unanimous Report of the Royal Commission. He did not recommend the superannuation of the present painstaking Judge but should there be an intention on the part of the Government to superannuate that Judge, he then said it would be a more politic course to carry out that intention, and appoint a new Judge to preside over a Court whose business would be certain to be very much increased by the assimilation of its practice with that of the English Court of Admiralty, than to hand it over to the eminent Judge of the Probate Court who had sufficient business of his own to occupy his time.

§ THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. SULLIVAN)
said, that the Judge of the Probate Court would be able to discharge the additional duty.

§ MR. SERJEANT ARMSTRONG
concurred in the opinion that the recommendations of a Commission ought, as a rule, to be accepted. He did not purpose dis- 282 cussing the details of a Bill not before the House, but he trusted that the Government would be prepared at the right time to show that the Commissioners had made a great mistake, and that they were not entitled to the confidence of the House.