COUNTY COURTS. (Hansard, 28 February 1922)

§ Mr. RENDALL
It would be interesting to know exactly upon what basis the increase of payments by litigants referred to in the Estimate have been made. As I understand it, a Committee was appointed which raised these fees in the County Courts, so that the State is no longer making a present of the services of these Courts to persons who are litigants, as was previously the case. Can the learned Solicitor-General inform us whether these fees meet the bill which they ought to meet? In regard to the judges, it would be interesting to know what the bonuses are, if they are based on any particular percentage, and whether they have now some maintenance or travelling allowances which they had not formerly, and also whether this bonus is being paid—of which personally I am entirely in favour—or whether it is connected with certain pension rights which have been given to County Court judges, I understand, and which enables them to retire in a way which was not previously possible. I think this point arises under this Vole. Under the item dealing with additional fees in bank- 317 ruptcy earned by registrars, I should like to know whether these additional fees are being earned because of the increased number of bankruptcies, and I should also like to know whether there has been an increase in the general character of the fees, and whether that increase falls on the bankrupts or on the creditors. The item "Postage for the Courts" seems to be very large, and I am not at all clear what it means. I was under the impression, with regard to the County Courts or other Courts, that when the civil or legal establishments of the country made use of our postal arrangements, they got free postage. I do not therefore understand why there should be any need for an increase in the charges for the postal business of the Courts.

Mr. YOUNG
I confess that, as regards some of the very technical questions which have been put by the hon. Member, I should have been glad to have been given notice that he was going to ask them. As a matter of fact, the necessity for this Supplementary Estimate is not in any way accounted for by any question of County Court judges' salaries, and so on, which are all provided for under the original Estimate. Perhaps I can best meet the hon. Member's convenience by supplying him with full information as regards the scheme of bonus that is being paid on County Court judges' salaries, with the explanation that, as a matter of fact, it is not raised by this Supplementary Estimate at all, and none of the money is necessitated by any question as regards judges' salaries.

§ Mr. RENDALL
If the hon. Member will look at Item B, he will see it says there, "County Court officers, etc., salaries and allowances," and that it then gives the original Estimate, the revised Estimate, and the additional sum required.

Mr. YOUNG
I will explain, if I may. The increase under the heading of "Salaries and Allowances" is due to other quite distinct causes. It is simply due to the general circumstances which have involved the necessity of the whole of this Supplementary Estimate, and the increase in litigation, which is the unfortunate result of the trade depression, which has both caused more business in the Bankrutcy Court and is also responsible for more plaints in 318 general, because creditors have got to be more active in the recovery of debts, and debtors are less willing to pay than in better times. Owing to the system of remuneration of registrars and their clerks and so on, it has led to increased remuneration to them, because to some extent their remuneration is by fee and other payments, which depend upon the amount of business. The number of plaints has increased from 445,973 in 1920 to 560,000 in 1921, and the scale of remuneration laid down by Statute increases automatically with that litigation, which is the reason we have to take an additional sum. I explained to the Committee, on previous Estimates, how difficult it is, in dealing with litigation, to make a forecast so accurate as in other circumstances, where increase of business leads to an increase of salaries, in connection with the bankruptcy business, as it depends on the number of cases in the Courts in connection with bankruptcy. That number has increased from 1,414 in 1920 to 3,315 in 1921. Another question the hon. Member asked me was with regard to postage.

§ Mr. RENDALL
Have these additional fees charged under B and D achieved their purpose? Have they enabled the Court to pay their way without throwing an extra burden on the taxpayers? The answer is no, or you would not want this money.

Mr. YOUNG
The answer is yes, but I am coming to that presently. The next question in the order of the questions was with regard to postage. The original Estimate was for £11,000, and we shall need £15,000. The cause of that is the ordinary rise of postal rates in conducting the business of the Court.

§ Mr. RENDALL
My question is, why has all this postage not been free? I do not understand why any postage is paid by County Court Registrars.

Mr. YOUNG
I can only say that is not the way the financing of this particular part of the public service is organised or is conducted. As a matter of fact, I think it would be a retrograde step if we were now to increase the free postage facilities to Government Departments, and to remove any postal restrictions in Government Departments. As regards financial reform and economy, I should look myself rather to a move- 319 ment in the other direction towards reducing unnecessary expenditure. As the final question, I was asked about Appropriations-in-Aid. The increase in expenditure, as the Committee will see, is set off by an increase in the total number of fees received, and this is the answer to the hon. Member's question, that this increase has been more than sufficient to counterbalance the expenditure. When we took the original Estimate we thought we should only get about £300,000 this year, but it turns out that the actual receipts will be in the neighbourhood of £410,000. The increase, of course, is due to increased business, but the Committee will notice that the figure in the Supplementary Estimate is only the token amount of £10, which is taken in order to bring the Supplementary Estimate before the House, and, as a matter of fact, the result of the year's trading—if I may use that phrase —for the County Courts is that the fees are more than required for the expenditure.

§ Sir T. BRAMSDON
Am I right in understanding that comparatively recently a quite new arrangement was made by which registrars have been paid salaries —because my attention has been called to a recent appointment—and, if that be so, I shall be glad if the hon. Gentleman can say whether he thinks there will be a saving on this Vote in that respect?

Mr. YOUNG
Yes, there has been recently a fresh arrangement — a reorganisation, as it were—of the salaries of the registrars, and I think I can certainly, say that both the purpose and the effect of this arrangement are in the interests of economy.

§ Sir T. BRAMSDON
Is it proposed that in future all registrars shall be paid by salary?

Mr. YOUNG
I should be rather sorry to answer a question on what is a somewhat detailed and technical matter, but, generally speaking, the effect of the arrangement is to regularise the salary, and to get rid of what are very old-fashioned anomalies. The full details will be available as to the arrangement.

§ Mr. T. GRIFFITHS
How is the bonus paid?

Mr. YOUNG
Perhaps I should not be justified in detaining the Committee with 320 the details, but I can give the hon. Member any details required as regards the bonus scheme.