§ Bill read 3a (according to Order); Amendments made. Bill passed.
1129LORD BROUGHAMsaid, that he could not help congratulating the House upon the passing of the Bill. He by no means intended to say that further improvements were not necessary; but if the present measure should receive the ultimate sanction of the Legislature, a great benefit would be conferred upon the country. He was happy to observe that his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack viewed the subject in the same light as he did; and he yet trusted that upon further consideration the late Lord Chancellor and the Chief Justice would see grounds for altering their opinions upon some minor matters upon which they were at issue. He was sorry that there was still no provision in the Bill by which a practising barrister should be allowed to go into court uninstructed by an attorney. The prohibition in the Act of 1846 remained unrepealed. Contrary to his own opinion he had at present yielded that point. Differing from those who were opposed to him, he considered that it was a subject which should be left to the etiquette of the profession; and he hoped that his noble and learned Friends would adopt the only course which could be adopted, namely, the removal of the restriction which at present excluded barristers from these courts, thus leaving it to the heads of the profession themselves to settle what should be the etiquette, as it was in every other Court of any description; the County Courts forming the only exception. Of the importance of these Courts, too high an estimate could not be formed. He found, by returns to Parliament, that during the four years from 1846 to 1850, the number of causes which had been brought into the County Courts amounted to 2,400,000, and that 6,000,000l. had been the amount of money recovered under their jurisdiction. It was a singular fact that in actions for sums of money from 51, to 50l., in which parties had the option of trial by jury, the proportion submitted to a jury was only 1 in 45. That was a circumstance which had given cause for great reflection in his mind, whether it would not be just and expedient to give to parties in all courts the same option in matters of debt and contract. He by no means intended to extend this option to matters of tort, as where the action lay for injury to person or reputation, but only to cases of debt and contract. For this purpose he had prepared a Bill; but as he knew that some of his noble and learned Friends differed from him in opinion upon 1130 this subject, he should take further time to consider it.
§ LORD BEAUMONTgave due credit to the exertions of the noble Lord, but he regretted the course he had taken, or had been obliged by others to take, in respect to this Bill. They had now three or four Acts of Parliament, besides the Bill before them, for regulating the jurisdiction of County Courts. Most of those Acts amended one another; and he thought that the noble Lord should have aimed rather at consolidating those already in existence, than at adding the numerous, though trifling, Amendments contained in this Bill, which increased the difficulty of collating, without bestowing fresh powers upon these Courts. But the measure of the noble Lord did not aim at consolidation, neither did it bestow any original jurisdiction on the Judges. It was an attempt to facilitate the operations of the Chancery Courts. The Bill of the noble Lord was merely one to enable County Court Judges to do what is already done in the Masters' Offices. The noble Lord had held out to the public the idea that his object was to give to the County Courts original jurisdiction in equity; but the Bill did not confer any such thing. For his part, he regretted extremely that the noble Lord did not persevere with the 23rd Clause, whereby a barrister was allowed to practise uninstructed by an attorney. As long as it was a question merely of etiquette amongst members of the Bar, he (Lord Beaumont) abstained from interfering; but the public were, as the Bill now stood, also interested; they knew what was best for them, and they should, therefore, have been left a full option to employ a barrister with or without the intervention of an attorney. The client was the proper person to judge what was the best for his own interest. He wished to know whether it was the intention of the noble Lord to bring in any further measures having reference to these County Courts?
LORD BROUGHAM, in reply, said that he had postponed his Bill for conferring equitable jurisdiction upon the County Courts, because he understood a Bill dealing with that subject was likely to be the fruit of the labours of a Commission which had bestowed much attention on the subject. He rejoiced to think that this expectation had not been disappointed. The learned Commissioners had reported, recommending a most important change in 1131 the whole system of Chancery procedure, and this report was adopted by the present Government. It had been announced in the House of Commons last night that the plan of the Commissioners was to be supported by the Government, with the determination to pass it into a law as speedily as possible. By this he meant the whole plan of the Commissioners. With respect to the consolidation of the County Courts Bills, it would take a very considerable time before that could be effected; but he entirely agreed in the necessity of it, as be had stated the first day of the Session.