SECOND READING. (Hansard, 8 May 1885)

§ LORD FITZGERALD,

in moving that the Bin be how read a second time, said: This is a short Bill which, I hope, will 3 receive your Lordships' assent. It is intended to end a controversy of long standing in reference to the conditions of admission to the Bar of Ireland. There is an old Act of the Irish Parliament in the Reign of Henry VIII., which provides, among other things, that before a student can be admitted to the Irish Bar he shall have passed a certain number of terms, studying at one of the Inns of Court in London. Without that, admission to the Irish Bar cannot be obtained. That, I admit, was a very wise provision in the Reign of Henry VIII.; because the Acts passed in his Reign, and that of his Predecessor, especially the Statute of Henry VII., familiarly known as Poynings' Law, introduced large changes into the law of Ireland. Besides, at that time there was no other School of Law, so far as these countries were concerned, except that which existed here; and there were advantages in the arrangement, inasmuch as it enabled Irish students to become familiar with the law of England, and the manner and justice of its administration. During the last 40 or 50 years, however, the provision to which I allude has been regarded as a grievance. Several Bills have from time to time been brought in to remove it; but they have all failed. This Bill, I may mention, has passed in the House of Commons, but with a modification. The effect of this modification is that the Bill does not repeal the Act of Henry VIII. It leaves students free to keep terms in London if they please; but it relieves them of the compulsory obligation to do so. In the altered circumstances I think this proposed alteration in the law cannot be resisted logically. We have now an excellent School of Law in Ireland. We have an excellent teaching system, and the Irish Bar and the teaching body should be able between them to regulate admission to the Bar. The Benchers of the King's Inn do not object to the Bill, provided that in place of repealing the Statute of Henry VIII. it is merely made a permissive measure. The advocates at the Scotch Bar do not require to come to England—they receive their education in Edinburgh, and are at once admitted to the Scotch Bar, and there is no reason why the same rule should not be applied to Ireland. To some extent I regret this Bill—though, of course, I 4 think it ought to pass—I regret it, for the reason that to some extent the existing practice promotes a homogeneous administration of the law, and gives Irish students fan opportunity of seeing the administration of the law in this country, and I am happy to say of sometimes inducing them to remain here for life. They, in the past, have often become the great prize-holders, and the English Bar has been strengthened by the introduction of men who have shed lustre on both the Bar and the Bench of England. I should be sorry if this chance should be taken away. One very remarkable instance of what I say occurred in the case of the late Earl Cairns. He at one time was on the point of being called to the Irish Bar; but he was induced to remain in England. But for that chance he would never have been Earl Cairns or Lord Chancellor of England. I am unwilling that Irish law students should be shut out from these chances; but, at the same time, I should be reluctant to see the existing state of the law, which renders it compulsory for our law students to come here, continue. There is no logical answer to this Bill, which is supported by the leading representatives of the Profession in Ireland. I have to invite your Lordships to read the Bill a second time.