COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 10 August 1882)

§ MR. HEALY
moved to report Progress. This was a Bill concerning which hon. Members on the Opposition side of the House had received a large number of complaints and telegrams. It appeared the Scotch people had taken the liberty to send to Irish Members asking them to represent their grievances. The Committee ought certainly to receive from the Lord Advocate some explanation of the clauses which this Bill contained. One of his (Mr. Healy's) correspondents said he was a messenger-at-arms at Edinburgh, that the Government did not give the Law Societies a chance, that the Courts rose before the Bill was printed, and that the lawyers were off to the country without knowing the purposes of the Bill. He did not exactly know what a messenger-at-arms was; but he thought there should be some answer given to the allegations made in reference to the measure.

§ COLONEL ALEXANDER
said, he did not often agree with the hon. Member for Wexford (Mr. Healy); but he cordially agreed with him on this occasion, and if he persisted in his Motion to report Progress he should certainly support him. He (Colonel Alexander) had been waiting night after night in order to make certain representations with regard to the Bill. All Scotch Members had been receiving telegrams respecting 1486 the Bill: and, in common decency, the representations made in those telegrams should receive some consideration. The Bill was to come into operation on the 1st of October, and all the future gains of the messengers-at-arms would be entirely gone. It was very objectionable that such Bills as this should be brought in at this time of the Session. Though a small class of men were affected, the interests of those men were just as important as those of larger numbers.

THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. B. BALFOUR)
said, the object of the Bill was to provide a simpler and less expensive method of serving writs of certain kinds issuing from the Civil Courts than the method now in existence. It was believed that it would be very advantageous, particularly in the smaller class of cases. Representations had been made, especially in reference to serving of such writs in the remoter parts of Scotland, that for the purpose of recovering exceedingly small sums—they might only amount to shillings—messengers-at-arms and other officials were required to be sent long distances, and that the cost of service very often amounted to much more than the actual sum involved in the suit. He apprehended that was one of those things which was a real grievance, and which Parliament ought to do its utmost to redress. There had been of late years a series of Acts passed, under which the facilities afforded by the Post Office had been used for serving writs. There had been citations of jurors and various other citations. The Act of 1871, providing for the serving of a certain class of small debt writs, had been entirely satisfactory. So far from no time having been given for considering this Bill, even while it was in the other House, a representation came up from Scotland, not only entirely approving of the Bill, but expressing a hope that the scope of it might be extended, so as to include executions and diligence, as it was called in Scotland. There was no doubt that such a measure of reform as the present would involve a diminution to some extent of the gains of particular classes; but he had never heard that urged as a reason against the introduction of reforms in themselves clearly advantageous. The method of citation proposed was entirely optional, and anyone who wished to employ a messenger-at-arms would still have it in his power 1487 to do so. There were other kinds of executions, as distinguished from citations, which this Bill did not interfere with. The officers of the Court could still be employed; but if the law agent preferred to cite the other party to a cause by posting a letter, the option was given him of doing so. As regarded the merits of the Bill, he could hardly suppose there could be any difference of opinion. If there were any objections to it he should be glad to meet them, or to offer any explanations which might be required. He had no desire to proceed with the Bill then, if there was any general wish for a little longer time to consider it; but he might say at once that he had not the least idea of postponing it to another Session.

§ MR. BIGGAR
said, he did not think the Bill ought to be pushed forward. It was in itself a dangerous principle to admit, that important documents might be delivered by means of a registered post letter instead of by personal service, and it was too important a Bill to decide upon at the last hours of a long Sitting at the fag-end of a Session. And then, again, there were the claims of the messenger, who might or might not be deserving persons; but the personal service was certainly preferable to the posting of a letter by an obscure solicitor's clerk, who might swear to the posting, and yet, in point of fact, not post the letter at all. If a messenger or an official whose duty it was to serve the notice undertook the service, there was some security that it would be properly done, for he would have the responsibility. But to a dishonest attorney there would be no responsibility in simply posting a letter. Then, as to the Lord Advocate's argument, that this was intended to apply to the poor and more remote districts, he was disposed to think that nothing would be more likely than that the citation would reach a person in the remote Highlands or Islands of Scotland, after the decision had been given against him, and he had no means of redress except by a costly appeal.

§ MR. ANDERSON
said, this objection was purely visionary. The Post Office receipt would prove the despatch and receipt of a registered letter. This Bill was merely the extension of a system introduced some years ago by an Act passed by himself, and which had been found to work admirably hitherto; it 1488 was only going a little further, and he was quite satisfied it would be an immense benefit to Scotland.