HC Deb 13 July 1908 vol 192 cc383-6
MR. HUGH LAW (Donegal, W.)

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the solicitors to the Local Government Board for Ireland have claimed to be paid a fee of £4 14s. 2d. for the costs of the formal approval by them on behalf of the Board of a lease granted by the Corporation of Londonderry to one Mary J. M Girr, of Corporation property in Londonderry, and that, on a protest by the solicitors of the said Mary J. M Girr, the demand for the payment of this fee was withdrawn; whether the solicitors to the Local Government Board for Ireland are paid a yearly salary for legal assistance to the Board; whether credit is given in the public accounts for fees received by the solicitors to the Local Government Board for Ireland on approval of deeds in which the Local Government Board are parties; whether his attention has been called to the amount of the fee proposed to be charged in the case referred to, considering that there were eight leases, all similar in terms, being granted by the Corporation to different persons; whether he can say on what authority the solicitors to the Local Government Board for Ireland attempted to charge fees in this case, seeing that the Board had made an order authorising the letting by lease of the ground by the I Corporation; whether any fee is claimed I by the solicitors to the Land Commission or the solicitors to the Board of Works for approval of conveyances, leases, or other documents made by them to public bodies or private individuals; and if he can state what is the practice in similar cases in England.

(Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The statements in the first part of the Question are correct, save that the approval was not formal. As a matter of fact, the draft of a fee-farm grant instead of a lease was sent for approval, and a correction was made accordingly. The solicitors to the Local Government Board are I not paid by way of salary, and, consequently, the question of giving credit does not arise. The lease referred to was submitted to the Board's solicitors for approval, and they considered the Board a necessary party. They applied for payment of the costs in accordance with the prevailing practice, but, subsequently, the Board consulted counsel, and having some doubt as to whether they were a necessary party they gave the benefit of the doubt to the local authority, and included the solicitors' fees in the law charges of the Department. I am informed that no fee is claimed by the solicitors of the Land Commission for the approval of conveyances or leases made by the Commission, but in the case of the Board of Works a fee of £2 2s. is charged. I have no information as to the practice in England.

MR. HUGH LAW

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, since the passing of the Labourers (Ireland) Act, 1906, the solicitors to the Local Government Board for Ireland countersign all orders made by the Board's inspectors for improvement schemes under the Labourers Acts; whether a fee, and, if so how much, is paid by the Board to their solicitors for signing such orders; whether, before the passing of the said Act of 1906, the solicitors to the Board were not required to sign or approve of orders made for improvement schemes under the Labourers Acts; and if he can state the necessity for the signature of the Local Government Board's solicitors to all orders made since 1906.

(Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The orders are prepared by the solicitors to the Local Government Board for signature by the inspector, and not merely countersigned by the solicitors, as implied in the Question. The solicitors also advise the inspectors on legal points arising in connection with the schemes into which they are inquiring. A fee of £5 5s. is paid to the solicitors for their services in relation to each scheme and order. This fee covers all legal advice given to the inspectors, and is very much less than the solicitors received prior to the Act of 1906, when they were paid by taxed costs. Then, as now, the solicitors prepared the orders, but as the orders before 1st November, 1906, were signed by the Local Government Board, it was not deemed necessary that the name and address of their solicitors should also be printed at the foot of the order, as is now considered advisable, in view of the fact that the address of an inspector may vary from day to day and that the Board's powers in relation to such orders are limited to the consideration of petitions presented to them against the orders. Appeals also lie to the County Courts, and it is obviously desirable that the orders should be prepared by legal hands.

MR. HUGH LAW

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the fees payable under the Labourers (Ireland) Order, 1906, to solicitors for rural district councils for approving of the titles of both owners and occupiers of lands taken by such councils for the erection of labourers cottages, under the Labourers (Ireland) Acts; whether the fee allowed is the same, irrespective of whether the purchase-money of the lands taken is under or over £60; whether, in the case of the purchase-money of the lands taken being over £60, the solicitors to the district councils must see that an indefeasible title in fee is given to their respective councils by the owners of the lands; and whether, seeing that the solicitors to the Local Government Board recently claimed the sum of £4 14s. 2d. as a fee for formally approving of a lease about to be granted to one Mary J. M'Girr by the Londonderry Corporation of a plot of ground in Londonderry, and comparing this fee with the fees allowed to solicitors of rural district councils under the Labourers (Ireland) Order, 1906, the Board will consider the scale of fees payable to solicitors of rural district councils under the said Labourers (Ireland) Order, 1906.

(Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The fee payable, one guinea per plot, is prescribed by Rule 53, Paragraph 3, of the Local Government Board's Order of 1906. The reply to the second part of the Question is in the affirmative. As regards the third part of the Question the sufficiency of the title is a matter for the council's solicitor. There does not appear to be any similarity between the two kinds of costs referred to in the concluding portion of the Question.