CLAUSE 4. (Hansard, 25 July 1898)

LORD INCHIQUIN
My Lords, it seems to me that it is very important that the right of traverse should be preserved in this Bill. Under the Grand Juries Act there is a right at present existing, and that right has always existed, to traverse any presentment and get the case heard before a judge of Assize. Under this Bill the right of traverse is proposed to be removed, and it seems to me that this is a mistake, because many decisions may be given, especially by the newly-constituted bodies, that might very fairly be questioned. It may be said that a difficulty would arise in this case on account of the length of time that might elapse before such traverse could be heard, and therefore I have in this Amendment altered the appeal, so that instead of going before the judge of assize it will go to the Local Government Board. The usual practice in Ireland, as I understand it, was that the traverse should be heard at the same assize where the question arose, and therefore there was no delay. Under this new Bill, if the right of traverse was to exist at all it might so happen that several months would elapse before it would be heard before the judge, and therefore, for that reason I have proposed in this Amendment, that it should go before the Local Government Board. The right of appeal exists already in two or three instances in this Bill. In 981 clause 9, section 7, there is a right of appeal to the Lord Lieutenant. In clause 10, sub-section 3c, there is also a right of appeal to the judge of assize. In clause 80, sub-section 2, there is also a right of appeal in questions of the maintenance of public roads, and it seems to me that it would only be right to keep the general law of traverse in existence under this new Bill. The last sub-section of clause 80 appears, however, to remove it altogether. I should like to know whether that is the case. In any case, it is undesirable, in my opinion, to abolish the right of traverse. In counties where you have large interests involved, and where there are light railways, for instance, the right of traverse has been exercised in several cases, and it has been found very convenient. In the county to which I belong there are many miles of light railways, and the question will undoubtedly occur before these new boards as to whether sums of money are to be spent for workshops or for extensions of lines, etc.; and in cases of dispute it would seem right that there should be some reference or appeal to the judge to settle those cases. Therefore, my Lords, I beg to move the clause which I have put before you. At the same time I wish it to be understood that if it is thought desirable that the right of traverse should still be to the judge of assize instead of the Local Government Board I am quite satisfied.

VISCOUNT CLIFDEN
Does my noble Friend, by his Amendment, enable the appeal to be heard speedier than in the old way, when it went before a judge? For my own part, I am very loath to take the right of appeal to the judge away. If I understand the Amendment rightly, my noble Friend wants to alter that appeal and make it an appeal to the Local Government Board and not the judge.

LORD INCHIQUIN
My only reason in making this alteration was to prevent inconvenience, and to enable the appeal to be heard much quicker.

*THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELAND
My Lords, the proposal made by my noble Friend is entirely inconsistent with the whole scope and struc- 982 ture and object of the Bill. Traverses were known to the old system of grand juries, and were appropriate, and worked well, having regard to that system. But when you are setting up popularly-elected county councils you cannot preserve this old mechanism, which was suited to an entirely different state of facts. No such right exists in the county councils of England and Scotland, and it would be entirely inappropriate to the new system introduced in this Bill. If you gave each ratepayer the power to step in and practically put a check on the working of the councils by this obsolete method of traverse, you might prevent the county councils doing any work at all. The proposal contained in the Amendment is an endeavour to graft one incident of the old system upon a perfectly new system with which it is absolutely inconsistent. The appeals referred to by my noble Friend in the other clauses of the Bill have no connection with the old right of traverse. The noble Lord said an appeal was given in section 7 of clause 9, but that refers to the management of lunatic asylums. It only enables the Lord Lieutenant, if there is a dispute between two bodies as to the constitution of a committee, to come in and say how the dispute is to be determined, and how the committee is to be selected. That is an entirely different thing. I hope my noble Friend will not press his Amendment.

LORD INCHIQUIN
In the second instance I gave—clause 10—there is a direct appeal to the judge of assize.

VISCOUNT CLIFDEN
You object to the open court of assize. I should have thought that was the fairest thing you could have in the world. I know everything is going to be altered by this Bill; everything is going to be thrown into chaos.

*THE EARL OF MAYO
The noble Lord raised a question with regard to light railways. Who would an appeal in a case of that kind go before? I think that is very important.

*THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELAND
I was unable to follow that part of the statement of my noble Friend. 983 I have to hear a good many of these cases before the Privy Council.

LORD INCHIQUIN
I find there is usually at every assize an average of one traverse. There is also this to be said: any ratepayer traversing is liable to be mulcted in costs, and therefore this is not a thing that would be lightly undertaken by anybody.