SMALL DEBTS (SCOTLAND. (Hansard, 5 August 1836)

The Marquess of Bute
felt it to be his duty to oppose the Bill going into Committee. It was scarcely known of in Scotland; and any Bill for Scotland ought at least to be brought into one or other of the Houses of Parliament in the month of April, so that the people of Scotland should have full knowledge of the course which the Legislature was taking with respect to that country. He must say, also, that in any Bill of this description, he considered it desirable that a concurrent jurisdiction should be given to the magistrates in Petty Sessions. It might be true that a great many persons in Scotland might be favourable to the Bill; but he knew there was a large number that were not, and the more particularly as regarded the fact of not giving a concurrent jurisdiction to the magistrates with that which was given to the sheriff. He would suggest that the Bill should not proceed further this Session; and at the earliest period in the next he should be happy to give the subject his best consideration, with the view of extending the powers of the magistrates. Entertaining these feelings, he begged to move that the Bill be committed that day three months.

§ The Lord Chancellor
had heard noble Lords assigning the lateness of the Session, even so early as June, as a reason for not proceeding with measures—others had objected on certainly stronger grounds, to proceed with measures so late as July and August; but it appeared that a new rule was to be laid down as regarded Scotland, and that unless measures affecting that country were introduced before the last day of April, the parties connected with Scotland had not time sufficient for giving such measures due consideration. What time this Bill was brought into the Commons he could not say, but it seemed that on the 13th of July it was ordered by their Lordships to be printed. The Bill, he had reason to believe, was anxiously looked for by a large proportion of the people of Scotland, who thought that it would be a great improvement on the present system, and be productive of great benefit. The effect of the Bill would be to raise the sum over which the sheriff had jurisdiction from 8l. 6s. to 10l. The object of the measure was to enable the sheriff more effectually to bring justice to every man's door, by 925 empowering him to hold his Court in different parts of the county instead of in one place. It was true, the law as it now stood enabled the Sheriff to do this, but it was wholly inadequate, because it did not provide for the expenses. He put it to their Lordships whether they would deny important benefits to the people merely because certain powers were not given to the justices of the peace. The noble Marquess, indeed, seemed to consider that there was some jealousy on the part of the magistrates as regarded the jurisdiction of the sheriff being extended to 10l., while theirs remained at 5l.; but he thought that was a strong argument in favour of the Bill, because if it worked well it would be easy to extend the jurisdiction of the justices up to the amount now given to the Sheriff. There was nothing in this Bill to prevent a bill with that object being passed through Parliament next Session.

The Earl of Haddington
objected to the measure, because it would create an inconvenient and expensive machinery, and draw away the Sheriff, who was a stationary officer, from other important duties. He did not see why the power proposed to be given to the Sheriffs should not be also given to the justices, as that arrangement would entirely obviate the necessity of the Sheriff travelling from place to place to hold his Courts. A similar power had been vested in the hands of the justices of the peace in Ireland, and he could not see why it should be withheld from those in Scotland. The fact was, this Bill was part and parcel of a system which a great number of people in Scotland were bent upon, consisting chiefly of persons of the legal profession. He thought the details of the Bill required a great deal more consideration than had been given to it. Scotch Bills were generally ill-prepared, because, when they were in the other House, they were generally disposed of in a thin House, and nobody seemed to understand them. Per. haps their Lordships would say, that was not the only place where that was the case. He would support such a Bill as that recommended by the noble Marquess (Bute), but he must oppose this Bill.