his foot into Galway, that he should be | been kept out of sight. Where was the involved in litigation. He must have Civil Bill Courts Bill? They called for bought a lawsuit. The moral to be ad- it. What had happened to that Bill? duced was, that a man should be very Why was it not brought forward before slow to buy a fishery in the county this measure? The English Judicature Galway. As for the Act, which laid Bill was not passed until the English down that the costs should not be higher people had first secured to them a rethan the damages, he might remark formed County Court system. Why that it contained a clause enabling the was not the same course followed with Judge to certify that higher costs might regard to Ireland? It was not until the be given; this power was exercised at basis of a County Court system was laid the trial against the hon. Member for that the superstructure of a Supreme Galway, and the inference suggested was Court of Judicature could be built up. that the hon. and learned Member for He could not understand the action of Limerick did not look after the interests the Government in this matter, unless of his client. The statistics given by the they were prepared to defend it on the hon. Member for Galway (Dr. Ward) had principle of the Ulster Grand Jury a been often exposed, and did not throw any century ago, who having passed a prelight on this subject. It was not fair to sentment for a bridge, when told that there measure the work of the English Judges was no river at the place, said next year against the work of the Irish Judges, they would pass a presentment to give because the latter did all the work them- the bridge a river. There was no use selves, and were not helped like their in hiding the fact that there was a English brethren by referees and abitra- mutiny against Lord Cairns. When he tors. Indeed, the Irish people would attempted to deal with the Irish Judicial not be satisfied unless their cases were system, the hand of the Government was tried with the fullest sanction of pub- stopped, and the Civil Bill Courts Bill licity in open Courts. With regard to was put aside, not to satisfy public the administration of justice in Ireland opinion in Ireland, but to placate certain by the Judges, he believed it was above powerful interests. Considerable disall suspicion. It was true that the satisfaction had been felt by the Irish Judges there, before their elevation to Judges and Bar at Lord Cairns's prothe Bench, had held political views and posals. He (Mr. Sullivan) was present belonged to political parties; but when at a public banquet, the right hon." the judicial ermine was assumed, they Baronet the Chief Secretary was also administered justice in a way that won there, and he advocated, not with bated the confidence of the public and of the breath and whispering humbleness, but members of their own Profession- with candour and honesty, certain refearlessly, without favour, and without forms. He was dropped upon instantly, affection. and he got a wigging on the very spot by one of the Judges. His Lordship plainly hinted that the Judges did not want their preserves poached upon by any Government, Whig or Tory. It was a dangerous thing for any Government to deal with. Why? Because it was confessed that the whole legal system was an anomaly. It was out of joint with the times. A Conservative newspaper, The Belfast News Letter, said that two-thirds of the Bar were Con

LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH thought that, whatever might be the merits of the Bill, its passing was endangered as long as the Government withheld any overture in regard to the objections which had been raised. If the Government would only give a pledge to consider these objections next Session, he thought he could say for his own political friends that they would not interpose any more obstacles in the way of the present measure being pro-servatives, and, as they had been kept ceeded with.

MR. SULLIVAN said, it was exceedingly unfortunate that they were hampered in discussing the question by the fact that there had been no adequate discussion of the Irish Judicature system at any previous stage. There were great questions underlying the Bill which had

out in the cold for 25 years by their enemies, they ought not to be kept out in the cold for the rest of their lives by their friends. An hon. and learned Gentleman on the other side had said that while the Irish Judges did their duty, the English Judges did not. Well, he had heard the same thing said before;

within his recollection; but it had been | Receiver Master in Chancery. It moreabolished, and the duties which were performed in it were thrown on the other Judges. In the same way the Court of Probate, the High Court of Admiralty, and the Jury Court had been abolished, and the work thrown on the remaining Judges. The House might think that just as they diminished the number of Courts in Scotland, they would have to increase the number of Judges in the Courts which were left, and that, therefore, there would be no saving. But was that really the case? By no means. After all these duties had been imposed upon the Court of Session in Scotland, instead of increasing the number of Judges, it was reduced by two. What they gave the Scotch Judges £42,300 for doing, by the present Bill they proposed to pay the Irish Judges £90,000 for performing. The expenditure was injudicious. The salaries of the Judges would only be increased slightly, he admitted, and he was not prepared to contend that the salaries of ordinary Judges were too large; on the contrary, he thought that the salaries which the Scotch Judges received namely, £3,000 per annum-might very well be increased. That was not the question before the House, but it was that the Irish Courts were underworked, and if that were so, why should they not cut down the number of Judges before they increased the salaries? In Scotland there were a great many more mercantile cases heard than in Ireland, and the Judges were worked harder having probably double the quantity of work to perform for less than one half of the pay-and it would, therefore, be unfair to carry out the proposal contained in the Bill.

SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH, in reply, said, that the proposals with reference to the rules were not substantially different from those adopted in the English Act. The hon. Member for Louth spoke at length upon what he considered the excessive number of the Irish Judicial staff, and objected to the mode of dealing with them in this Bill. Now, the proposals for reduction in this Bill were considerable. With regard to the Judges, the Bill proposed to reduce a Judge in the Court of Exchequer, one in the Court of Common Pleas, and one in the Admiralty Division, and an important legal official, the

over proposed measures by which considerable reduction might be effected in what he might call the excrescences which grew up around the Judicial Courts when they were divided into separate divisions, and which, when these Courts were amalgamated, it would no longer be necessary to retain. These would be substantial reforms, and, he confessed, it was strange to him that the hon. Member, and those who agreed in wishing for greater reforms, should obstruct the progress of a Bill which, at any rate, did something to effect their object, merely for the idea that it did not go far enough. That was the surest way of preventing all reforms whatever. The hon. Gentleman complained that the Government had not pressed forward the Civil Bill Courts Bill. That Bill was introduced at an early period of the Session in common with the Highways Bill and the Valuation Bill. It had hitherto failed from want of time to obtain the attention of the House; but he must say there had been other reasons why it had been found impossible as yet to proceed with it. Not the least of these was the fact that a right hon. and learned Gentleman opposite (Sir Colman O'Loghlen) gave Notice of his intention to move that it should be read that day three months, thereby preventing any stage of the Bill being taken after half-past 12, and then absented himself in Ireland almost for the time he mentioned in the Notice of Motion. He hoped to have an early opportunity of proceeding with that Bill, of the importance of which he was fully conscious. He felt bound to say, however, that the enthusiastic support which it had received in the course of the debate from hon. Members opposite came somewhat late in the day. If such expressions of opinion had been heard earlier in the Session, they would have had their weight with the Government and the House, and the Bill would probably have made substantial progress. The Bill now before the House came down from the House of Lords. It had been carefully sifted by those competent to deal with this great question, and in the fusion of law and equity it was a necessary supplement of legislation already on the Statute Book with reference to England. In other matters it proposed a real and substantial reform in

the direction that hon. Members opposite | the rules of the Judges, the Governdesired; and he trusted that the House ment would be glad to consider it, of might now be allowed, after spending course on the understanding that the four or five hours in almost unnecessary Bill was allowed to pass this Session. discussion, to proceed with the Bill in Committee.

MR. BIGGAR said, that this duel in the House between the Judicature Bill and the Civil Bill Courts Bill seemed to represent a fight between the barristers and attorneys and the general public of Ireland. He certainly thought the Civil Bill Courts Bill was deserving of consideration as conferring great advantages on the general public. He thought the proposition of the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Limerick raised a thoroughly pertinent issue. It really was preposterous that this House should delegate to any number of Judges its authority to settle what should be the law. The rules of procedure ought to be settled in that House. He agreed with the hon. Member for Edinburgh (Mr. M'Laren) that the Scotch Judges got about half as much money as the Irish Judges, and did quite as much work. He should vote for the Amendment.

MR. BUTT said, he would not conceal from the Government that on going into Committee he intended to set about trying to remedy the great grievance inflicted on the administration of justice in Ireland in the last division by bringing forward a series of Amendments, clauses which would go as far as the Act of 1873, in laying down the principles necessary to guide the Judges in the preparation of the rules.

MR. MITCHELL HENRY thought the Bill ought not to pass until the Civil Bill Courts Bill had been considered.

DR. WARD declared his determination to throw every obstacle in the way of the Bill until the other Bills dealing with the administration of justice in Ireland were discussed.

MR. LAW pointed out, as to the complaints made in connection with the Civil Bill Courts Bill, that no good would be done to anybody by the passing of that Bill as it stood, without any adequate provision for an official staff to assist the Chairman. Before they passed the Civil Bill Courts Bill they must make up their minds to supply something better in that respect than was attempted by the Clerks of the Peace and Crown

Bill which the Government had introduced, but appeared to have abandoned.

SIR COLMAN O'LOGHLEN was also of opinion that the Civil Bill Courts Bill, while containing important provisions, would not in its present state meet the approbation of the House. It had nothing to do with the Bill before the House.

MR. MELDON asked leave to say that if the Government did not adopt the principle upon which the House had just divided the fault would be theirs if the Bill were lost. He suggested that the Government should agree to introduce into the Bill in Committee a provision that the rules of procedure should be considered by the Irish Judges and then submitted to Parliament for approval. The date at which the Bill came into operation could be altered very conveniently to November, and thus what he proposed could easily be done. THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. PLUNKET) said, the provision in the Bill at present was that the rules should be laid on the Table of the House, and he was quite prepared say that if his hon. and learned Friend proposed such an Amendment as he now suggested in Committee-namely, to alter the time at which the Act should MR. O'CONNOR POWER declined come into operation so as to give Parlia- to act upon this suggestion, and moved ment the opportunity of first reviewing the Adjournment of the Debate.

to

Sir Michael Hicks-Beach

SIR MICHAEL HICKS - BEACH doubted whether the discussion was in Order, and would point out that it was impossible to proceed with two or three measures at once. He would therefore suggest that the discussion of the Civil Bill Courts Bill should be left for the proper time, and that the House should go into Committee on the Bill which was before it, when the Government would be prepared to give the most favourable consideration to any proposals which might be made by any one possessing such knowledge on the subject as the hon. and learned Member for Limerick.

Motion made, and Question prnposed, afterwards. I am also anxious, if there "That the Debate be now adjourned." should be time, to take the second read-(Mr. O'Connor Power.) ing of the Public Loans Bill, which is not a measure that need lead to much discussion, but upon which my right hon. Friend the President of the Local