PARLIAMENTARY AGENCY. (Hansard, 28 July 1876)

§ LORD REDESDALE
again insisted on the importance of having a qualified and recognized body for the transaction of Parliamentary business. He did not at all assent to the recommendation of the Petition of the Incorporated Law Society as to members of the legal Profession. Formerly the business of Parliamentary Agents was transacted by officers of the two Houses, and it was done most efficiently, and the fees which were awarded for the work were not considered as being more than sufficient for the purpose, and the evidence of Sir Theodore Martin, who represented the Parliamentary Agents, showed that the division of fees between the solicitors and Parliamentary Agents was most objectionable. He (Lord Redesdale) hoped that under all 4 the circumstances their Lordships would agree with the recommendations of the Joint Committee of both Houses. Under the present system he and other Officers of the House had an influence over Parliamentary Agents, and nothing tended so much to the maintenance of due order in the discharge of the Business than that they should have the assistance of qualified Parliamentary Agents.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR
said, that after the time which had elapsed since the subject had been brought under the notice of the public he had no wish to place himself in a position of antagonism with reference to it to his noble Friend, by whom the Private Business of the House was conducted with so much efficiency and wisdom. He had received numerous communications in reference to the Report, almost all of which were directed to the point of the division of profits between the Parliamentary Agents and their solicitors. His noble Friend said that Sir Theodore Martin and the Parliamentary Agents seemed to think the division of profits very objectionable, and if he (the Lord Chancellor) were a Parliamentary Agent he would probably be of the same opinion, because if they were not divided the Parliamentary Agents would get the whole. His noble Friend had not heard what the Law Societies of London and Liverpool had to say on the other side; and if it was a perfectly well-understood thing, as it was, that between the country and the town solicitors there might be a division of fees, he could see no good reason why there should not be a similar division between country solicitors and Parliamentary Agents. There was besides the difficulty, or rather the impossibility, of enforcing any rule which might be made on the subject; for if it were deemed desirable by those concerned that the profits should be divided, a way of doing so would readily be found.

THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN
observed there was no analogy between the case of the country solicitor and his town agent, and that of the country solicitor and the Parliamentary Agent. In the one case only one set of fees was allowed—in the other two sets were allowed. What the country solicitor now asked was to be allowed not only to receive his own charges, but to share in the charges of the Parliamentary Agent. 5 The Order of the House could be easily enforced by striking of the list of Agents any one who contravened it.