HC Deb 05 June 1882 vol 270 cc217-8

Order for Second Reading read.

MR. HASTINGS,

in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, explained that its chief object was to re-move a difficulty which existed in regard to the functions of the Committee of County Court Judges appointed by the Lord Chancellor, for fixing the costs of attorneys and solicitors in the Courts. By the 91st section of the original County Courts Act, no costs could be recovered for advocacy in any case below £5. The Bill repealed that section.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Mr. Hastings.)

MR. WHITLEY

said, he had no doubt that the object of the Bill was well intentioned; but as the Bill was now drawn, it would exclude the right to employ barristers, who were almost a necessity on important questions in the County Courts.

MR. HASTINGS

said, the Bill left the law on that point precisely as it stood at present. A barristers' fee was an honorarium, and could not be recovered in any Court.

MR. WARTON

said, he would not oppose the Bill; but he would suggest that the word "Advocate" was a misnomer. That term was only used in the Court of Arches, and in other Courts which were now rapidly becoming extinct; and he thought it had better be omitted.

MR. HASTINGS

pointed out that that would be a matter for the Committee.

Motion agreed to.