Lords Sitting of 28 June 1928

Preamble
The House met at a quarter past four of the clock, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.

SOLICITORS BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
LORD DARLING: My Lords, in asking your Lordships to read this Bill a second time I should explain that it was introduced in practically its present form by me on behalf of the Incorporated Law Society nearly two years ago. It passed through all its stages in this House but there was no time for it in the other House. Therefore, it fell to the ground. Perhaps I should explain, as I did then, that this Bill is rendered necessary in order to give the Incorporated Law Society a slight addition to the powers which they have to enforce proper conduct among members of the legal profession who hold the position of solicitor. Until 1919, matters relating to solicitors who were guilty of a breach of their professional duty were left to be decided by the Court of King's Bench, but in 1919 an Act of Parliament was passed which transferred all this jurisdiction to the solicitors as represented in the Incorporated Law Society. The solicitors fix the subjects in which candidates are to be examined, they examine them, they admit them to the roll of solicitors, which entitles them to practise, and in fact they are in the same position in regard to solicitors as the Inns of Courts are in regard to barristers.
It was found, after the jurisdiction had been entirely transferred to the solicitors, that there was an abuse in the profession, a very dangerous one well known to all lawyers, and that abuse needs to be cured. That is why the Bill was drawn up by the Incorporated Law Society. It was introduced into this House nearly two years ago and the same Bill has now been introduced into the House of Commons, has passed through every stage in that House and comes before your Lordships for approval. The fault which is aimed at is this. For very grave reasons, and never except for very

777
grave reasons of misconduct, a solicitor may be struck off the roll and so disentitled to practise. When that occurs it is not at all uncommon for the solicitor who is not entitled to practise as a solicitor to engage himself to a person who is a solicitor and become his managing clerk, and, in effect, to carry on business in the name of another person. That is what it often comes to and the danger, of course, as often occurs, is that when nominally managing clerk to another solicitor, he behaves in precisely that way which caused him to be struck off the rolls when he was a solicitor. Under the law he cannot be dealt with unless he commits a criminal offence, when the ordinary law deals with him. He cannot be dealt with in a purely professional capacity because he has ceased to be a solicitor upon the rolls.
What this Bill does is to enact in the first clause that—
"(1) No solicitor shall in connection with his practice as a solicitor without the written permission of the society employ or remunerate any person who to the knowledge of such solicitor is struck off the roll of solicitors or is suspended from practising as a solicitor.
"(2) Any such permission may be given for such period and upon and subject to such terms and conditions as the society may think fit.
"(3) Any solicitor dissatisfied with a decision of the society under this section may appeal to the Master of the Rolls. … "
who in all these matters regarding solicitors is the constituted authority for dealing with them. That is already the law. The Bill goes on to say that if a solicitor acts contrary to the provisions of this Bill he shall be punished in a way that is provided, and if any person who is struck off the rolls hires himself to a practising solicitor and does not disclose that he was formerly a solicitor and has been struck off the rolls and is not entitled to practise, then he is to be subject to a penalty of a fine not exceeding £10.
There follows what I think your Lordships will agree to be a useful provision to the end that this power shall not be abused. Clause 2 says:—
"Notwithstanding anything in the Summary Jurisdiction Acts proceedings under this section may be commenced at any time before the expiration of six months after the first discovery of the offence by the
778
prosecutor, but no such proceedings shall be commenced except by or with the consent of the Attorney-General."
I think your Lordships will see that means have thus been taken to protect those who are entitled to any kind of protection. I have intimated to your Lordships that this Bill was drawn by the Incorporated Law Society, the appropriate body for dealing with solicitors, and it was carefully considered by them. It came before this House some time ago and an Amendment was then moved by the Master of the Rolls which was embodied in the Bill before it went to the Commons. That Amendment is embodied in the present. Bill, which I now ask your Lordships to read a second time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(Lord Darling.)
LORD HANWORTH: My Lords, perhaps your Lordships will allow me to say a word or two in support of the observations of the noble and learned Lord who has just spoken. The importance of this Bill is that it prevents resort to a device which has been used only too often in the past by persons who are deserving of little consideration. It sometimes happens that a man who has been a solicitor has acted quite improperly and has brought upon himself deservedly the penalties that can now be imposed by the Law Society. He is struck off the rolls. Not infrequently he is a man of ability and resource and, in order to overcome the disability under which he suffers by reason of the fact that he is no longer upon the rolls, he induces some nominal solicitor to allow him to become managing clerk, and under the cloak of that solicitor's name he continues to carry on the business of a solicitor. It may often happen that a man who has been struck off the rolls is a man of ability, while the man into whose service he goes is a mere name and nothing more. The ex-solicitor is thus able to adopt a stratagem which really defeats the purpose of the disciplinary action of the Law Society.
This Bill stops a gap that has been felt for some time. When it was in your Lordships' House a year or so ago I moved an Amendment which has been incorporated in the present Bill. It provides in a subsection that in this kind of case there shall be an appeal to the Master of the Rolls. The Master of

779
the Rolls is the persona designata to whom an appeal is allowed from decisions of the Law Society as to matters of practising certificates and a number of other things, and it is my duty from time to time to hear cases in which both solicitors and the Law Society are represented. This is no idle pretence; there is a real and effective appeal and a number of cases actually come before me. Accordingly this provision is in accord with the present practice, which is by no means obsolete but is constantly used and with which I have to keep in touch. When this Bill was last before your Lordships I said that, although it might seem that the powers that it gives have a somewhat wide range, yet I was quite sure—and I repeat that assurance now—that those powers can be safely entrusted to the Law Society. They have a Committee which deals with these matters and includes the ablest solicitors. All their powers are exercised with judgment, consideration and great toleration and mercy. I am satisfied from an experience that is now not a short one that the Law Society may be safely entrusted with these powers. With these observations I beg to support the Second Reading of this Bill.
LORD PARMOOR: My Lords, I should like to say a word in support of this Bill, because I agree that it provides a jurisdiction that is really urgently needed if those solicitors who have been struck off the rolls are not to be allowed to recommence their business under another name. I am also strongly of opinion that the appeal to the Master of the Rolls is right, since the Bill provides the same appeal in these cases as in other cases concerning solicitors. This is an evil which ought to be dealt with, and it appears to me to be very adequately dealt with in this Bill.
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

DOGS (AMENDMENT) BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE EARL OF CRANBROOK: My Lords, this Bill has passed through another place without opposition, and I think it may now be fairly described as a non-
780
contentious measure. It corrects several anomalies in our present law. Clause 1 extends the liability of the owner of a dog which does damage to poultry to an equality with the liability of one whose dog does damage to cattle. In view of the present increase of poultry farming as an adjunct to the farming industry, I feel sure that your Lordships will agree that it is highly necessary that the legal position of the owner of a dog which kills poultry should be the same as that of the owner of a dog which kills cattle. Clause 2 provides that any person who finds a stray dog shall either return it to the owner or take it to the nearest police station, when, if he wants to keep it and signs an undertaking to do so for at least a month, he may be allowed to do so after the police have taken full particulars. If he does not desire to keep it, the dog is dealt with by the police under the same law as obtains at present.
Clause 3 is to prevent carcases of cattle being left in fields where dogs can gain access to them, and here there is an anomaly in the present law which this clause corrects. At the present moment the owner of the cattle is legally responsible, and this clause extends the responsibility to any person having control of the cattle. As your Lordships are aware, at the present moment many farmers feed and keep cattle on their land which are the property of other owners, and it has been found that it is impossible to apply the law in these cases. This clause will make it possible. This is the first Bill that I have had the honour to present to your Lordships, and I feel it is a useful Bill and one which will correct several anomalies in the present law. I hope your Lordships will give it a Second Reading.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a—(The Earl of Cranbrook.)
THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY OF THE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES (THE EARL OF STRADBROKE): My Lords, I only wish to say on behalf of the Government that we view this Bill with approval, and hope that your Lordships will give it a Second Reading. It is a very short measure, but one which may be usefully added to the legislation of this country. It does away with several anomalies in the present law. I would like to congratulate the noble Earl on his clear and lucid explanation

781
of the Bill. He has told you that this is the first Bill he has introduced, but I hope it will be by no means the last occasion on which he will take an active part in the deliberations of your Lordship's House, in the same way as some of us remember that his grandfather did.
LORD PARMOOR: My Lords, this is a non-contentious Bill in every way. It is an extremely useful measure, because it covers difficulties which have been found in applying the law in farming districts, owing to the fact that the present Act is not wide enough in scope and jurisdiction. I would like to endorse what the noble Earl has said as to the clear and able way in which the measure was introduced by Lord Cranbrook.
VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME: My Lords, there are one or two discrepancies between the principal Act and this Bill which I would like to point out. In the first place, under subsection (2) of Section 3 of the principal Act where a dog is seized, even although it has no collar, and the police know to whom the dog belongs, they are under an obligation to inform the owner. In the case of a found dog there is no such obligation, and so a disagreeable finder may say to the police: "You are under no obligation, and I forbid you to inform the owner." Under subsection (5) of Section 3 of the principal Act, no dog so seized shall be given or sold for the purposes of vivisection, but found dogs under this Bill are not protected from vivisection. Then under subsection (8) of Clause 3 of the Act, there is a provision for a dog found by the police being properly fed, but there is no such provision in this Bill. I have simply raised these points on the Second Reading in order to give the noble Earl notice of them, and I shall move Amendments in Committee which I hope he will see his way to accept when the time comes.
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

MILITARY MANŒUVRES.
THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (THE EARL OF ONSLOW): My
782
Lords, I beg to move, That an humble Address be presented to His Majesty, praying His Majesty to make an Order in Council under the Military Manœuvres Acts, 1897 and 1911, a draft of which was presented to this House on the 20th March last. It is proposed to hold Army training this year in the same way as last year; that is to say, there will be no Army manœuvres, but all Regular Divisions will carry out divisional training, and the 1st Cavalry Brigade and the 1st and 2nd Divisions will have inter-divisional manœuvres under the direction of the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Aldershot Command, divisional concentrations being held for the 1st and 2nd Divisions in Sussex, for the 4th Division in Essex, and for the 3rd Division on Salisbury Plain, where they will again have the advantage of co-operation with the Armoured Force and the 2nd Cavalry Brigade. To enable this training to be carried out recourse is necessary to the Manœuvres Act, 1897, which provides that military manœuvres should be authorised by Order-in-Council, and that the draft Order shall not be submitted to His Majesty in Council until it has been laid before each House of Parliament for thirty sitting days, and until each House presents an Address to His Majesty for the Order to be made. The draft Order has been laid for the requisite number of sitting days, and it is now necessary to move the Resolution which has been placed on the Order Paper. The Resolution is in the usual terms and if it is agreed to the draft Order will be laid before His Majesty in Council.
Moved, That an humble Address be presented to His Majesty, praying His Majesty to make an Order-in-Council under the Military Manœuvres Acts, 1897 and 1911, a draft of which was presented to this House on the 20th March last.—(The Earl of Onslow.)
On Question, Motion agreed to, and Address to be presented to His Majesty by the Lords with White Staves.
House adjourned at twenty-five minutes to five o'clock.