Committee Reports > List of Committees > Joint > 1930 > Committee on the Courts of Justice Act 1924 and the Civil Jurisdiction of the Courts > Report - Courts of Justice Act 1924 and the civil jurisdiction of the Courts

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Déardaoin, 30adh, Eanar, 1930.

Thursday, 30th January, 1930.

The Joint Committee sat at 12.15 p.m.

DEPUTY MORRISSEY in the Chair.

Mr. J. D. MacCarthy, County Registrar, Carlow, called and examined.

3283. Chairman.—You are County Registrar in Carlow?—Yes.

3284. How long have you held that position?—Between the position of Clerk of the Crown and Peace and of Registrar I am 35 years in office.

3285. You had previously been a solicitor?—Yes.

3286. How many years were you in practice as a solicitor?—Just six.

3287. I understand that you favour the present jurisdiction of the Circuit Court? —Yes.

3288. Your view is that if it is to be reduced it should not be reduced below £200?—Yes, and that only in contract cases.

3289. Will you explain why that should be only in contract cases?—The reason I give is my experience in the Courts since the jurisdiction originated. Most of the cases tried in Carlow are cases of accidents, accidents through motor-cars, and people want a ready and expeditious trial, and they can get that very effectively in the county. In contract cases, however, there are so many points of law at issue that it is desirable possibly to go to a higher Court, but if the jurisdiction be reduced, it should be reduced only to £200. Most of the solicitors hold that in cases of contract it is desirable that it should be reduced to £200, and that cases of a higher amount should go to the High Court. There are so many points of law involved that they think it is desirable to have the case tried in the High Courts.

3290. You are satisfied that the Circuit Court is quite competent to deal with cases up to £300?—That is my own personal opinion. Apart from any question of the traditions of the law, people want an expeditious trial, and they want it at home. From my early experience I know that a great many people who had a legitimate case to bring before the Court funked the ordeal of going to the High Court by reason of the fact that if they lost their case they were damned with costs.

3291. You consider the present system of appeal a failure?—An absolute failure.

3292. And you favour a re-hearing?— Yes.

3293. Before one or two Judges?—I do not know whether it will meet with the favourable opinion of the Committee or not, but I say that if there could be a rota of Circuit Court Judges with a Superior Court Judge, it would be a very competent Court of Appeal.

3294. Sitting in the county town?— Yes. If there is to be a Court of Appeal, it should be constituted of at least two Judges. I think Mr. Wolfe will agree with me that the custom in West Cork long ago was that we generally knew the Judges who were coming to hear appeals. If they were certain Judges the appeal was withdrawn, and if they were certain other Judges the appeal went on.

3295. How often would it be necessary for them to go round?—The old custom was twice a year, and I think that would be quite sufficient. The pomp and ceremony with which the old class of Judges went round certainly added to the dignity of the Courts. It had a great effect. I think the same pomp and dignity should appertain to our own Courts.

3296. Do you think you could spare out of the ten Circuit Court Judges sufficient Judges for your purpose?—Well, I know that Judge Wakley is overwhelmed at present. He comes to Carlow. He cannot reach his work at all. He has a great many counties, and some counties are more litigious than others. Judge Sealy is able to deal with his work as far as I know.

3297. Deputy Little.—He is a bit short on the statistics anyway.

3298. Senator Dowdall.—What was the witness’s suggestion in regard to a rota of Judges?—There are ten Circuit Court Judges at present. I suggested that two of these should be taken by rota in their spare time, and that a Superior Court Judge should sit with them.

3299. Two Circuit Court Judges and a High Court Judge?—Yes.

3300. Chairman.—You think that the High Court and the Circuit Court should not hear cases which are within the jurisdiction of the District Court?—I am very strong on that, because of my own experience. I shall make a suggestion in connection with Land Commission cases. I think you will see from the return I have made at the Committee’s request that a very large number of cases that should be triable in the District Court are now tried in the Circuit Court. A lot of the Judge’s time is occupied in hearing cases that should originate in the District Court. If these cases are originated in the District Court, you will have a Court of Appeal in the Circuit Court, and you will avoid appeals from the Circuit Court to the Court of Appeal. In that way, you will save a great deal of time and costs and expenses. People do not want to bring their cases to the Superior Court.

3301. You favour compelling people to do that?—Yes, compelling cases that should be tried in the District Court to be tried there.

3302. You favour people being compelled to bring cases within the jurisdiction of the Court in that Court?—Yes. Of course, the Judge has an option in the Circuit Court at present to send certain cases to the Superior Court.

3303. You mentioned the matter of the Land Commission annuities?—I do not like to make any reflection on the State Solicitors who are very competent, but after all they are solicitors, and they are out for their own ends. They are representing the State in their own ends. I have a very wide experience; I am Sheriff at, present, and I know how the matter is dealt with by me as sheriff. State Solicitors bring their cases, at least the State Solicitor in Carlow brings all his cases in the Circuit Court. It is a great convenience to him, because he has as many as 200 at a Court. Judge Wakley will not hear any case which is within the jurisdiction of the District Court, but Judge Sealy says that they are at liberty to come there until there is a definite Rule made. If these cases were brought in the District Courts, it would save me, as sheriff, considerable trouble, as the decrees of the District Court would be lodged for execution month by month, and I could deal with them. At present, I get them in big batches after a Circuit Court sitting, and it is very inconvenient to have decrees sent into the sheriff in that way when they could be dealt with from week to week if the cases were heard in the District Courts. In the interests of the farming community, I think it is absurd to have cases brought in the Circuit Court by the Land Commission against tenants, because their last state is worse than the first, as the costs are very often more than the amount sued for. I think that the certificate of the amount due by the Land Commission should have the force of a decree, and be executable by the sheriff immediately. There might in some cases be a question of the amount to which the Land Commission is entitled. Suppose the Land Commission had sent out several notices to a tenant and that they at length informed him. “if you do not pay up, we will hand it over to the sheriff.” The sheriff then gets the certificate and he communicates with the party, and says, “The Land Commission have sent me the certificate for execution. There is so much due, and I would be very glad if you would send me the amount within the next month.” If he did not send it, it would be his own fault if the certificate had to be executed. In case the figures were questioned, the sheriff could refer it to the Judge to have the matter rectified. If you will be good enough to look at the return I have made, I have just taken those cases brought by the Land Commission at the last Sessions against a number of people. An action was brought against a man to recover £4 17s. 11d. The costs were 18s. 6d. The decree was sent in for execution to the sheriff. Being the sheriff, I communicated with the defendant, and he paid within a fortnight —including 7s. 6d. sheriff’s fees—a total of £6 3s. 11d. Supposing I was a sheriff —without reference to the fact that I had nothing to gain—and that I ordered execution forthwith, in addition to this amount, there would be 1s. in the £, making 5s.; the Court messenger’s charge for execution would be 15s. for himself and 15s. for an assistant, in addition to poundage fees. The whole amount would have to be levied off the unfortunate man, and would be more than the original debt.

3304. Senator Brown.—With costs and expenses?—The costs and expenses of execution. If the man were to be nursed my whole interest would be to serve the interests of the unfortunate farmer as best I could. Knowing his circumstances, I would not execute, because the Land Commission were protected by reason of the fact that the land was to the good.

3305. Chairman.—I would like you to give some information as to the length of time it would take the Circuit Judge to dispose of Land Commission cases that are brought before him. I understand from you that the State Solicitor brings a large number of cases to the Circuit Court. Do they take long?—What we do in Carlow, by reason of the time they take, is that the State Solicitor sends in certificates to me, and I check them with my assistant, comparing the amounts in the certificates with the amounts in the books. I simply mark the case “correct.” Then the cases come before the Judge, and I tell him that the certificates agree with the amounts claimed, and he gives decrees without any further delay. The cases are usually undefended, except in so far as a request may be made for time or when there is some error.

3306. You are of opinion that, as things are at present, they ought to be brought in the District Court rather than in the Circuit Court?—I am very strongly of that opinion. Seeing that the farming community is the mainstay of the country, they ought to be protected from the enormous imposition of costs, as it is absolutely needless.

3307. There would not be many cases over £25?—In the list I have there are only five out of fifteen.

3308. Senator Dowdall.—What is the largest sum claimed?—About £40. Some go to £100. In the case of £40, the costs would be £4 6s. 9d. The sheriff’s fees on lodging a decree for execution would be 8/6. Under the old circumstances, if the decree were executed by the sheriff forthwith, seeing that he maintained himself on his fees, the commission would be 1/- in the £, making £2, and in addition there would be 15/- for the Court messenger and 15/- for his assistant. There would be also poundage fees and auctioneer’s fees.

3309. What are the poundage fees?— When he seizes stock he puts them into the pound.

3310. Chairman.—I do not want to go too closely into that. I would like you to explain if there would be a saving to farmers if cases were brought in the District Courts instead of the Circuit Courts? —There would be absolutely no saving to the farmers, because they would be mulcted in any event in costs. Practically the same costs apply in the District Court and in the Circuit Court.

3311. What we really want to know is if the case should be brought in one Court or in the other. We cannot, for the moment, concern ourselves with the costs and the sheriff’s fees. That does not come within our terms of reference. If these cases were brought in the District Court, instead of the Circuit Court, would there be a saving to the State, and a saving of time?—It is a great convenience to the State Solicitor to have them all lumped in the Circuit Court.

3312. I am thinking of the State rather than of the State Solicitor?—The State is represented by the State Solicitor.

3313. Would there be a saving to the State?—I do not think there would be any saving. It would be the same thing one way or the other.

3314. It really makes very little difference to the defendant or the State whether the cases are brought in the District Court or the Circuit Court?—Absolutely none. I know that farmers would be very pleased if the certificates of the Land Commission had the force and effect of a decree, as they would rather be dealing with the sheriff, who is a permanent officer, than be dealing, as at present, with the State Solicitor. I know of one instance that arose, not in my county, so I am not reflecting on anyone by referring to it. A State Solicitor took proceedings for a small amount. The defendant was engaged on the Shannon Scheme. A decree was granted and it was handed to the sheriff for execution. At the time, the man had let the land for eleven months. The sheriff marked the decree “No goods.” Proceedings were taken under the Enforcement of Court Orders Act, on the grounds that the man was competent to pay. The man was served with notice and had absolutely no defence. He was working hard on the Shannon Scheme. An order for two months’ committal was made by the Judge for non-payment of the amount. The defendant’s friends came to his rescue and paid. The costs exceeded the amount of the original debt by £2.

3315. Deputy Little.—How would you propose to deal with cases like that?—I say that the certificate of the Land Commission should have the force and effect of a decree, after notice being given to the defendant that it would be sent to the sheriff for execution, except payment was made within a month. In the ordinary course, the sheriff communicates with the farmer, because there is no need for rushing and salting him with the costs of execution. I would ask the farmer to pay the amount and save the costs of execution. A man, by reason of consideration being shown to him, would be more inclined to meet his obligations than if you were to press him.

3316. Senator Dowdall.—You give him notice?—Yes. If he has any question to raise the sheriff refers the matter to the Judge.

3317. Chairman.—If what you suggest were adopted, giving the Land Commission certificates the force of decrees, in effect it would only mean a saving in Court costs?—It would serve the general interests as the real asset of the country is the farming industry. If the ate mulcts the farmer in expenses and in the costs that are at present imposed, it is not giving him an opportunity of meeting his obligations. But by giving the certificate of the Land Commission the force of a decree, you save all the costs.

3318. The Court costs?—They are considerable.

3319. But not as considerable as the other costs?—If you take a case for £40, the costs amount to £4 6s. 9d. You save that money by sending in a certificate.

3320. Senator Brown.—I think what Mr. McCarthy means is that you save the Court costs and you give a better chance of avoiding seizure?—When a man is nursed, he recognises the fact that he is getting every facility to pay.

3321. Have you had cases going to the last extremity, where the only thing would be to save Court costs?—Yes.

3322. Do you know what the State Solicitor’s costs are in these cases?—They are the same as ordinary costs. He only produces the certificate in Court. There is never a defence. On the certificate, a decree is pronounced.

3323. You favour giving the Land Commission certificate the force of a decree?— Certainly; the same as the Income Tax authorities, who have their own power of execution, without reference to the decree. I would apply that to Board of Works charges and to tithe rent charges.

3324. Senator Farren.—That applies also to the non-payment of rates?—The local authorities have the very same power for non-payment of rates.

3325. You suggest the same procedure in land annuity cases?—Yes.

3326. You spoke about nursing small farmers in these cases. Supposing a small farmer owed his annuity to the Land Commission, if you get the certificate or a decree, have you power to take the amount payable by instalments?—I have power only to execute.

3327. Do you take it that way?—I always do so. If I know the farmer, and if he keeps his word, I will nurse him as long as I can. I will not send out the Court Messenger.

3328. Deputy Little.—Do you go to the Judge to get power to do that?—I take it on myself. I act on my own authority, and if the State wishes to challenge me they are at liberty to do it. I take it on myself to give time.

3329. It throws a good deal of responsibility on the Sheriff?—It is only in Land Commission cases I have done it, because there is a safeguard there, the land.

3330. So you really want to give power to the Sheriffs to do so?—I think they will exercise the powers in the Land Commission cases.

3331. Senator Brown.—You suggest that for the Court of Appeal on a re-hearing you might have a rota of Circuit Judges?—Yes.

3332. You would have two Circuit Judges and one High Court Judge?—Yes, to make a Court of Appeal constituted of three.

3333. There is a sort of arithmetical objection to three. If you had a Court of three differing, two of them going one way and one the other, and if the one agreed with the Court below, you would have two Judges against two, and the decision of the inferior Court would remain?—Let the majority of the Court of Appeal decide, no matter what the decision.

3334. I know there would be a majority, but you might have two and two, if you count the Judge below?—I did not follow that.

3335. That is a rather objectionable thing. It would be better to have only one Circuit Court Judge and one High Court Judge for that reason?—Possibly.

3336. Deputy Wolfe.—As to the Land Commission annuities, you spoke about retaining the right of the defendant to be heard in Court if he so required?—Certainly.

3337. That would be essential, I take it—if a man wants a trial he must get it? —If a man wants to raise any question, he can first of all raise the question with the Land Commission, and when it goes to the Sheriff, if he chooses to raise it, the Sheriff can communicate with him and say he will bring the matter before a Judge with his consent.

3338. Your suggestion is that the certificate of the Land Commission should be equivalent to a decree and should only issue after notice to defendant?—After notice to the defendant that it is being sent to the Sheriff.

3339. And in the absence of notice from the defendant stating that he requires a trial, it goes to the Sheriff?—Yes. If he has any question to raise he can always question it and get the Land Commission or the Sheriff to refer it to the Court.

3340. You give him, if he insists, an opportunity in every case of being tried in open Court?—Yes.

3341. At his own risk as to costs?— Yes.

3342. You made a suggestion that all cases triable in the District Court should originate there?—Certainly.

3343. Have you considered whether that would be feasible or practicable?—I do not see why it should not be.

3344. Take Castletownbere, where a District Court is held, I think, on the first Friday of every month. If you compel all the cases to originate in the District Court you may have two long cases there which will take the day. What is going to happen to the remaining forty-eight, if there are fifty?—Have three days if necessary.

3345. You cannot at present?—Let it be arranged.

3346. The District Justice must leave Castletownbere that night and get away to his next appointment?—My answer in connection with an isolated district like that would be, that there should be every convenience given to the poor. There are very poor people there, and every convenience should be given to them to originate their cases at home in their own town, instead of having to travel to the Circuit Court, which is sometimes held in Skibbereen and sometimes in Bantry, one a distance of 32 miles and the other 48. In practically every case tried, more particularly in West Cork, it is their very existence to fight the case. They take as much interest in the case as they do in life itself. They want ready justice and at home. They do not want to travel to Bantry or to Skibbereen.

3347. At present they have their option?—I admit that.

3348. If you made it compulsory to originate all cases in the District Court, here and there you will find a good deal of congestion?—You may have congestion, but that should be relieved in the interests of the people, because you are trying to serve the interests of the people, and that should be your first consideration.

3349. Even in the district to which you refer there has been considerable congestion at one or two Courts, particularly owing to the economy stunt of having one Justice to do the work of three?—When you originate the cases in the District Court there is an appeal to the Circuit Court and you avoid the appeals which would be taken if the cases originated in the Circuit Court. In giving a man the option of taking one Court or the other. he has an appeal to the higher Court. That should not be, and it is very inconvenient. From your experience you will admit that a great many people who have legitimate actions hesitate to bring them by reason of the costs, particularly in poor areas.

3350. By originating the case in the District Court you can get an appeal on fact, which there is not at present?—Yes. you will have an appeal to the Circuit Court.

3351. When you want an appeal on fact, or see it possible, or think you have a good case, you originate your case in the District Court so that you may bring it before the Circuit Court on the appeal, if anything goes wrong?—Is not that what they want?

3352. That carries out your point. You select the District Court because it gives you an appeal on fact?—I think if some of the Committee were in West Cork, as you are, they would realise the point I am making about the District Court, because in some impoverished areas the people are “funky” about incurring the enormous expenditure of travelling and the cost of going to the High Court, but if they have it at home they will get ready justice and that is all they want. If there is any question about it, there can be an appeal.

3353. Would you give the District Court jurisdiction in title cases?—I do not think I would. I think it would be much better to confine them to the Circuit Court. A title case in any place is a tremendous issue for the parties concerned and they certainly like to have it tried in the Circuit Court as against the District Court.

3354. Senator Brown.—Apart from Land Commission cases, are there many other cases which might have been brought in the District Court brought in your court now?—There are a great many cases of shop debts and other things. Shopkeepers and others who desire to bring cases, prefer to go into the Circuit Court because they can deal with their volume of business in one day every quarter.

3355. Chairman.—Would you favour raising the jurisdiction in contract in the District Court?—I certainly think if you leave the present jurisdiction in the Circuit Court it would be no harm to raise the jurisdiction in the District Court to £50.

3356. Do you think it would be an advantage to traders and others in country towns?—I really could not express an opinion as to what would likely ensue if you did change the jurisdiction.

3357. You are against the present system of appeal. What are your reasons for that?—The very best reason of all is that at the present time the Judges have the transcript of the shorthand notes read for them by counsel for the plaintiff, and it is most wearying to follow a person reading like that. I suppose they have the transcript before them already, but I think it is absolutely impossible for any man to determine a case on mere shorthand notes of the evidence. You have no opportunity of seeing the witnesses, and cases are mostly decided on the attitude of the witnesses in Court. At present you have no opportunity of seeing the witnesses. The biggest ruffian in the county may appear on the notes as the most honest man, and the Judge might be affected by reason of his evidence, whereas if he sees him he will certainly agree with the Court below.

3358. Do you consider that it is physically possible for a stenographer to sit in Court all day and take an accurate verbatim report?—Our present stenographer finds it almost impossible. He becomes so weary in the evening that he is absolutely hopeless by the time the Court is finished. He has to get up next morning and begin again. If the system of appeals were changed, I think it would be desirable to retain the stenographer for the purposes of appeal, so that there could be no “heel-tapping.” In the old days, a man went for “a run” before the County Court, if he found a weakness in his case he could “heel-tap” on appeal by another witness. He generally did it before the Judge of Appeal, with the result that the reversal often happened on new evidence given. To prevent that, the stenographers should be continued in civil cases for the purposes of appeal. The cost is very little, and certainly it would be very desirable in order to have a fair hearing on appeal.

3359. Are you of opinion that the present system of appeal is more costly than the old one?—I saw that recently in an appeal that went from Carlow the cost was £75.

3360. Senator Dowdall.—What was the amount involved?—It was an accident case. I think the amount was £200, but the decree was for £45.

3361. Chairman.—You are satisfied that if you had an appeal by way of re-hearing and still retaining the stenographer’s notes it would reduce the cost?—I believe it would. Any man who has a case for appeal without shorthand notes, wherever he was weak in the Court below, will take care that that weakness will not happen in the Court above. If you have shorthand notes, it will prevent the possibility of people taking an appeal who are desirous of winning it in that way.

3362. Do you think the system you suggest would be less costly?—There is no doubt about it, because in the old days in the Court of Appeal there was a schedule, a fixed amount of costs, and you knew what you had to incur if you went for an appeal—there was a scheduled fee and you paid it, and knew what you were incurring. At present you do not know what the result will be.

3363. Would you favour having a stenographer in all the Courts?—I would not favour it in the District Court. I do not think there is any need, except he were a whole-time officer and you could get him to do the work of two Courts.

3364. Deputy Little.—You mentioned two Judges in Carlow. Is Judge Sealy your Judge?—Yes.

3365. Does Judge Wakely try any of your cases?—Queen’s County comes into Carlow—the river divides them—and he sits in Carlow for Queen’s County jurisdiction.

3366. Have you to act for both Judges?—No. The County Registrar for Queen’s County acts for that county.

3367. You have an opportunity of comparing notes with him?—Yes. I know Judge Wakely for a number of years.

3368. There is a great contrast in the amount of work—Judge Wakely has considerably more to do than Judge Sealy? —He has. There are some counties more litigious than others. Anyone who has experience of Ireland knows that one county differs from another as much as the arctic from the torrid regions.

3369. There is the question of area— the area of Judge Sealy is small?—I think the population is about the same.

3370. If you take away a number of cases from Judge Sealy’s jurisdiction, you would not have a very large amount of work?—When the machinery is properly going and everything is fixed and settled as regards costs, there is no doubt that there will be a tremendous difference in the outlook of the people. At present the country is economically in rather a parlous condition. When a country is economically sound, you will have much more law than when it is in a poverty-stricken condition. At present that is the real secret of the matter, that we have had lean years, and the result is that you have very few cases. I know that if the country were more progressive and more prosperous you would have a great many cases for the Circuit Court, a great deal more than at present.

3371. We have got statistics* showing the number of actions tried by the various Circuit Court Judges. There is a curious result here in the case of Judge Sealy’s Court. Of the 7,894 civil bills, an enormous number of these were undefended Land Commission cases which occupied practically no time?—They occupy practically no time. It is only a question of having them there. They are brought to the Circuit Court for the convenience of State Solicitors, who have them in bulk. If the cases were taken to the District Courts the State Solicitor would have to go to perhaps twenty Courts, instead of having the cases all heard in the one Court as at the present time.

3372. There is a great deal of difference in the pressure on some Judges as distinct from other Judges?—There is no doubt about it.

3373. It would not be unfair to ask Judges in districts where there is not considerable pressure to do other work as well?—What other work would you ask them to do?

3374. You mentioned a rota. You said that we might be able to use some of the Judges from districts where there is less pressure and put them on a rota for appeals?—If you had a rota it would have to be a general one. You would have to take Judges from each Circuit in turn. You could not differentiate between the various Judges, and you would have to give them all an opportunity of hearing appeals. Why not increase the number of Circuit Judges altogether for the purpose of appeals?

3375. Instead of appointing High Court Judges?—Yes.

3376. If you were to increase the jurisdiction of the District Courts—and the tenor of your evidence was in favour of bringing the law as close to the homes of the people as possible—and if you were to insist on the District Courts trying all the cases which came within their jurisdiction, and not allow the Circuit Court to do that work, it would give very considerable relief to the Circuit Courts?—Most undoubtedly, very great relief.

3377. Even if there were congestion in the District Courts, would you think it better to appoint more District Justices? —Most undoubtedly.

3378. In that way there would be a saving on the Circuit Judges?—Senator Brown suggested that there might be two Judges. If that suggestion were approved of I would be in favour of one High Court Judge and one Circuit Court Judge. There is a great deal of glamour about a High Court Judge, and if he were to go through the country it would create a very definite impression in the minds of the people. A certain amount of pomp and ceremony might not be out of place. For one thing, it would add dignity to the Courts.

3379. In the old days there were complaints that some Judges would get an edge on certain practitioners, and this often did the practitioners so much harm that they were obliged——?—To clear out of the Court? While you have human nature as it is, you will have men with prejudices, and even Judges are human.

3380. Would it be possible to avoid that by arranging that Judges would have to change their districts from time to time? —You could have the Judges going on different Circuits each time if you wished, but I think that that thing can be overdone. You will never find a Judge entertaining a prejudice against a man except he has good grounds. In the old days I agree that the High Court Judges were filled with their prejudices, too. Some Court officials were in fear and trembling in case they might be committed for contempt of Court for the least offence. That will happen as long as the world goes round, and human nature will be the same to the end.

3381. You stated that the reason for suggesting a reduction of the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court to £200 was that in cases over £200 questions of a difficult nature usually arise?—In contracts.

3382. Do you think that if the Circuit Court Judge had power to state a case it would meet that difficulty? Is it not a very exceptional case?—Very exceptional.

3383. And he could state a case?—Yes.

3384. Do you find the general public satisfied with the present jurisdiction?— If the new rules were in operation and the costs determined, there would be no doubt about it. All the people want is to have their cases heard near their own homes. If they are beaten they are satisfied and they do not care how rough and ready the Justice may be. They are not anxious to have to go to Dublin. Even in the old days a man funked going to Dublin because if he won he lost.

3385. Owing to a ruling we are not dealing with the question of the amalgamation of the offices of sheriff and registrar, but I would like some information on your suggestion about giving power to the Land Commission to issue certificates. That would put certain powers into the hands of the sheriff which the sheriff had not before. It would give him a more responsible position?—At present I act without reference to my obligations. I simply will not execute in a Land Commission case without first giving the defendant notice. I had the case recently of a man who owed £100. The decree was sent to me for execution. I told the man I would like him to arrange the matter as I did not wish to put him to the enormous cost of execution. His Reverend Pastor came to me and said it was exceedingly kind of me to do it and he wanted to make arrangements. I gave the man a month and the thing was paid within a fortnight. His friends came to the rescue. If I were a sheriff getting fees I would have sent out bailiffs and executed the decree and the man would have been considerably upset by reason of the execution; it would do no good and it would only pile up costs.

3386. So it is going to have a very direct bearing on any change in the law in reference to the collection of debts especially in the case of the Land Commission—the change of the position of the sheriff to that of a permanent official?— If a man is a permanent official he has no desire to execute a decree on a decent man. He gives him an opportunity of paying. At present he has no discretion to do that.

3387. And he ought to get it?—Yes, in the Land Commission cases.

3388. If necessary with the permission of the Judge?—The defendant is at liberty if he questions the certificate to go before the Judge.

3389. Senator Hooper.—Do you consider you have more discretion than the sheriff had?—I have, for the simple reason that being a permanent officer I am only responsible to the Department and I certainly ought to be allowed some discretion. I am not allowed it, but I take it.

3390. The impression I had was that the sheriff exercised a larger discretion than the County Registrars now do taking the country as a whole?—The sheriff in the old days was paid on fees. The moment he got a decree for execution he levied it in his own interests. The County Registrar has nothing to gain and he does not like to execute a decree immediately except where he has to.

3391. Is it actually so that a sheriff executed a decree immediately?—In some cases some sheriffs did; some did not. Some sheriffs exercised a wide discretion but they were running a grave risk in doing it. He runs no risks in connection with the Land Commission but in other cases he must execute by reason of the fact that he is liable to an action if there are chattels removed. If he did not execute immediately, he gave an opportunity to others to get away with the goods.

3392. Senator Hooper.—Do you think that the County Registrars now are any less willing to exercise discretion in the matter of decrees than the sheriffs were? —As a matter of fact, the sheriff who is a permanent officer has nothing to gain from making a seizure. He, therefore, exercises discretion. He sends out the court messenger. He gets information from him as to whether the man against whom there is a decree is in a position to pay or not. When the court messenger gives me that information, I use my discretion.

3393. Do you think that that is the general attitude of the County Registrars?—I do not know. I speak for myself.

3394. You said you had a very competent clerk who attended to the sheriff’s work?—Yes, I have.

3395. Are you fully staffed in your office?—At present I am, but I was not.

3396. You can cope with the work?—I can.

3397. Deputy Little.—Circuit Court Judge Wakely is your Judge?—No, Judge Sealy.

3398. In cases involving questions of law, has the Court any difficulty in the matter of law books—has it access to law books and to a law library?—A number of young barristers attend the court and there is rarely a case of importance that has not a barrister in it.

3399. Where points of law are involved, do they bring down their authorities?— They get their briefs in advance and they have the law library to consult. If I were a barrister, I would take my chance of having the jurisdiction as it is. There is as good an opportunity under the present system as there was in the past and with the country more prosperous the Bar will be better off in the future than in the past.

3400. Counsel are now employed in cases that previously were conducted by solicitors?—I think if the old order prevailed the conditions in the High Court would be worse than at present, because if the old system still continued there would not be a case going on there at all now.

3401. You are in favour of keeping cases that are now in the District Court in the District Court?—Yes.

3402. Would you apply that to cases in the Circuit Court?—The Judge, upon the application of either party, is at liberty to send the case to the Superior Court.

3403. Yes, but you are not in favour of allowing anyone who had a case within the District Court jurisdiction to bring his case in the Circuit Courts in the first instance?—Yes, and for this reason, that the District Court has the Circuit Court for appeal, and a man whose case is tried in the District Court has an opportunity of having it before another competent Court if he is dissatisfied with the decision in the District Court. But where it comes within the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court I would give an opportunity to the plaintiff to go to the Superior Court in any case where the parties desire it. But they will not do that as a matter of fact.

3404. You would not apply the same rule to the Circuit Court as to the District Court?—The discretion is at present given to the Judges. I can speak from experience. A solicitor will incur heavy responsibility if he originates in the Superior Court a case that he can originate in the Circuit Court. He will incur that responsibility with his client. There is always the fear of losing his case. It is only at the absolute direction of his client that, in my experience, he will originate a case in the Superior Courts when he could originate it in the Circuit Court. He takes a very grave risk in doing otherwise.

3405. You have machinery in the Circuit Court for marking judgment by default?—Yes, there is a certificate, and the Judge has to sign the order.

3406. There has been some evidence given here advocating the signing of that order by the County Registrar?—I understood that the new Rules intended to make the procedure in the Circuit Court the same as in the Superior Courts. That is to say, that in a case where a man issues a civil bill, and where there is no defence entered, he would get a decree the same as in the High Court. At present the Circuit Court Judge is only quill-driving for four or five days, signing decrees for civil bills that could issue from the office without going to the Court at all.

3407. What is your opinion with regard to the registration of judgments in the Circuit Court?—There is no registration, but there is a book kept for the entering of decrees granted by the Court.

3408. Would you be in favour of central registration of decrees by the Circuit Judges for amounts over £20?—I have not given that matter any consideration, but it could be met by having a special department for the Circuit Courts. That would be an admirable idea, because if there was a judgment given in County Carlow and another judgment given in Co. Cork it would be well for the man in the one county to know about the judgment in the other. I think that could be done in the Records Office in Dublin. A special department could be provided for recording the decrees from each county.

3409. On the matter of interlocutory motions, would you have anything to say? —It is only in equity cases these arise. We have never had any in ordinary civil cases.

3410. You agree that there is a possibility of much inconvenience in this way? —There are times when a solicitor will have to wait for the sessions, when he ought to have an opportuity of getting an interlocutory motion by applying to the Judge for a particular order. But I understand that the Rules that are being drafted provide for that matter.

3411. That means following the Judge around?—Well, as a matter of fact, in an interlocutory motion the man need not appear at present. He can send in to the Registrar the papers and give notice to the other side, who can reply. The papers can then be sent on to the Judge and he need not be sitting for that purpose.

3412. Is there not a practice when people want an interlocutory motion to have an application made to the Judge in some other town where he may be sitting? —Well, it never arose in our county except in one case, and the result was tragic for all the parties. In that particular case, the solicitor applied on motion, on the discovery that the amount was over the jurisdiction of the County Court, and he had it transferred to the High Court. If the case had been left in the County Court, the plaintiff would have got his own out of it. In the High Court, the case was so long drawn out that it was like the case of Jarndyce and Jarndyce before it was finished.

3413. Do you think there is any improvement in respect of this?—Well, if a man wishes to have an interlocutory motion he can make an affidavit and the solicitor on the other side can reply and the Judge, if he thinks it necessary, can ask him to appear before him. In most cases, however, there will be no necessity for appearing before the Judge, for so long as the Judge has the papers and affidavits before him he has all he wants.

3414. Do you think it revolutionary that there should be some central machinery established in Dublin to deal with these interlocutory motions?—I think so. You would be interlocking the Courts by having it.

3415. There was a question of pleadings in the Circuit Court; would you be in favour of them?—I would be in favour only of the plaint and the reply, and that in some simple form. That is very desirable. The Judge at present hears the solicitor who makes a statement of the case and the Judge will always have to await the defence. I think a few facts as to what the defence is in the case of a Civil Bill would be of great assistance to the Judge, because he would know then where he is and what he is dealing with. It often prevents the possibility of a long hearing. If the Judge will see the defence, he may be in a position to say: "That is no defence at all." There is sometimes a good deal of time wasted, for very often the Judge does not know what the defence is, and there are cases where there is no defence.

3416. You mentioned a case where there was a decree given for £45 and where the costs came to £75. Could you give any idea of what the costs would be in a case like that under a system of re-hearing?— You could easily refer to the old schedule of costs before the Judge of Assizes. In that case, it would not be more than £10 plus counsel’s fees.

3417. Senator Brown.—At present the costs on appeal are taxed by the Taxing Master?—Yes.

3418. And we know that they are substantially higher?—We know they are outside the bounds.

3419. Would you be in favour of a scale of costs?—Yes, and to have the appeal, if there is an appeal, heard in the county. People want to know what the appeal will cost them and they want to know beforehand whether they are inviting ruin if they go on with the case.

3420. The costs should be in proportion to the amount of the decree?—Yes, at present we have no fixed scale of costs at all. I sent out, with the approval of the Judge, a scale of costs to the solicitors and they adopted that scale as a general scale. Under that scale, the costs in the case of undefended Civil Bills were for £50 and over £5 14s. In the case of defended Civil Bills, costs of decree from £50 to £100 were £7 7s. and counsel’s fee £3 3s.; from £100 to £150, £8 8s. and counsel’s fees £4 4s.; £150 to £200, £9 9s. and counsel’s fees £5 5s.; cases between £200 and £300, £10 10s. plus £6 6s. counsel’s fees. In cases under £50 the old scale plus 50%. In that Schedule it was laid down “The expression ‘defended Civil Bills’ does not include cases in which the defence is merely an application for time.’ That was because whenever there was a defence at all they charged the full costs. In the case of defended civil bills costs of dismiss from £50 to £100 were £6 6s.; £100 and up to £150, £7 7s.; £150 to £200, £8 8s., and £200 to £300, £9 9s. The counsel’s fees were the same. That scale was sent to the solicitors and they all approved of it. It works out very satisfactorily.

3421. Chairman.—You mentioned in reply to a former question that you would be in favour of giving the right to the County Registrar to mark judgment?— Yes.

3422. Apart from the constitutional aspect of that, do you think it is desirable that that should be so, in view of the fact that the County Registrar will be also the Sheriff—that he will be marking judgment and executing it?—That was one of the arguments advanced in connection with the appointment of County Registrars as Sheriffs. There is another difficulty about the Sheriff, that he will have to execute his own orders. As a matter of fact, my clerk is absolutely trained now, and if he were made a permanent officer he could act as Sheriff just as well as I could. All I have to do is to supervise the work and sign the documents. He would be as well able to do the work as I am. At present he is acting under my directions.

3423. Chairman.—But you are responsible?—I am solely responsible.

3424. On the question of the present system of appeal, would you say that the unpopularity of that system amongst litigants is due to the long delay which is involved?—The long delay is one of the causes of its unpopularity. When a man has a case he wants to get a ready decision. If he is plaintiff, he wants to know whether he is going to win or not. If the appeal is held up for twelve or eighteen months, he does not know what is going to happen.

3425. Do you believe that is the principal cause of the unpopularity of the present system?—The second cause is: Under the old form of appeal, the appellant went before the Judge with his own case, backed up by his own appearance, and perhaps with the suggestion that the other fellow was not all he ought to be. He wanted to have a re-hearing of the evidence in the hope that the impression made on the second Judge might be entirely different from the impression made on the first Judge.

3426. Senator Dowdall.—I understood from your evidence that the third reason was the excessive cost of the present form of appeal?—The cost is absolutely prohibitive. There are people who would appeal at present if they thought the appeal would be an economic proposition. Then, a solicitor, if he wants to get time for his client, lodges a month’s notice of appeal.

3427. Senator Brown.—A bogus appeal?—If one litigant is a stronger man than his opponent, he is probably anticipating that the other man will not indulge in the luxury of an appeal on account of the cost, so that the big man wins all the time. If there were a fixed scale of costs, the litigant would know where he was.

3428. Senator Dowdall.—The present system entails a denial of justice?—Yes.

3429. Senator Brown.—There is no appeal on fact at present?—No. There are a couple of matters that I would like to bring to the notice of the Committee, if they would permit me. I may say that I speak absolutely impartially on the matter I am about to mention, because I was a Clerk of the Crown and Peace under the old order, and my own position is absolutely settled. If it comes within the terms of reference of the Committee, I think it would be desirable to make a recommendation on behalf of the County Registrars because of the obligations of their office and the large amount of work that they do. The County Registrar at present must be a solicitor of eight years’ standing. I think that eight years should count for pension purposes. If you compel a man to serve eight years as a solicitor before he can be appointed County Registrar, that period should count for pension purposes.

3430. Senator Brown.—As added years? —You might not have them counted as added years; they should count in the ordinary way. When a man is compelled to serve eight years, he is really training for the position, and he should be in the same category as a Civil Servant who is graded.

3431. Chairman.—His apprenticeship, so to speak, should serve for pension purposes?—Yes.

3432. Senator Hooper.—Would you limit the period to eight years?—You cannot go beyond eight years, because that is the period of service laid down. There is another matter that, as President of the organisation of County Registrars, I should like to mention to this body, which represents the two Houses. The late Mr. Kevin O’Higgins said, in introducing the Courts of Justice Act, that the County Registrar would not get a smaller salary than £1,000 a year. For reasons best known to itself, the Department of Finance has fixed the amount at £750 with bonus. That bonus is a very irritating thing to an officer who is discharging responsible and semi-judicial functions. I think the County Registrar should be put in the same category as the Judge and District Justice. His salary ought to be a fixed sum without reference to bonus.

3433. Senator Brown.—You put that request on the ground that he has semi-judicial functions to discharge and that probably he will have more duties of a responsible, character to discharge in the future?—Yes. His salary ought to be on a permanent basis. At present, he gets £4 less than usual one quarter; £1 more the next quarter and perhaps less the following quarter. That is very irritating and annoying to men with families who are trying to make provision for them. They have to make provision by insurance.

3434. Senator Hooper.—Would £750, plus bonus, bring the salary up to £1,000? —No. At most, it would be about £980. But it is not a question of the amount. What we want is a fixed salary. I think that that arrangement would enable the Registrar to fill the position in a proper way and it would redound to the credit of the Government. Men who are occupying a semi-judicial position ought to get recognition in some way. In the old days, they were the premier officers of the county and took precedence of all others. At present they are nobodies.

3435. Deputy Wolfe.—Do you get any remuneration from the position of sheriff? —No.

3436. Senator Dowdall.—You said the County Registrars were nobodies. I think we have come to the conclusion very definitely from our experience here that they are somebodies?—Their position has been altered and changed and they are no longer what they were.

(The Witness withdrew.)

Mr. George M. Porter, Solicitor, called and examined.

3437. Chairman.—Mr. Porter, I understand that you are a solicitor practising, particularly in Dublin?—Yes.

3438. You are a member of the firm of Messrs. Porter, Morris and Co.?—That is right.

3439. How many years’ practice have you had?—Almost 23.

3440. Your firm act as agents for English, Scottish and Colonial solicitors?— Yes, for quite a number.

3441. You are solicitors also for various trade protection societies?—Yes.

3442. And I understand that you are prepared to produce evidence as to their views on the working of the 1924 Act?— When I was asked would I give evidence before the Committee I wrote to various trade protection societies asking for their views. When writing to them I said that any statements they would make to me I would treat as confidential, meaning that I would not disclose the names or addresses of the writers. I am quite prepared to give to the Committee extracts from the letters which I received if the Committee are satisfied with that.

3443. The Committee already have had before them letters from trade protection societies which were produced by Dr. Quirke?—I supplied these.

3444. These letters in the main, consist of complaints as to (1), delay, and (2) costs?—Yes.

3445. The complaint is that the delay has been caused by the plaintiff suing, because he felt obliged to sue, in the Circuit Court?—In some instances. yes.

3446. Why the Circuit Court only?— Do you mean as distinct from the District Court?

3447. Or any other Court?—Most of the delays which we experienced were certainly in the Circuit Court, particularly in Dublin.

3448. So that so far as Dublin is concerned, you think there has been a lot of unnecessary delay?—Undoubtedly. Of course, that has to a great extent been remedied by the appointment of additional Judges.

3449. Has the delay been confined to Circuit Court cases?—That has been my experience.

3450. You say that at one time the delay was very great?—Yes.

3451. So much so that one firm in Manchester had to wait two years before they could get a hearing?—Approximately.

3452. Are we to understand from you that as a consequence of that this firm now declines to do business in Ireland?— So they say. I do not know whether they will carry out that threat or not.

Senator Dowdall.—If their trade here pays them, they will not. I lived in Manchester for a number of years, and I know.

3453. Chairman.—Would you explain to the Committee what you mean by the phrase “before they could get a hearing”?—What I mean there is, before it would come to hearing in the Circuit Court. I was thinking of that one particular case of the firm in Manchester. They had a claim against a Dublin company for £70 or £80. We knew perfectly well that if we issued a writ the chances were that they would move immediately to remit or transfer. Accordingly, we issued a civil bill. They served notice of intention to defend, and as I say it was the best part of two years before the hearing took place. Our clients were very dissatisfied indeed. I think at one time they were under the impression that we had received the money.

3454. Do you think that at the moment there are any grounds for complaint in regard to delay?—In the Dublin Circuit Court, no. As I understand it, most of the arrears are now cleared off. There are some arrears still, but not to any great extent.

3455. Have the costs allowed to successful plaintiffs been reduced?—I take it you are now speaking of the Circuit Court. The scale allowed under the old County Court has not been altered at all so far as I am aware.

3456. Has the scale of costs in any of the Courts been reduced?—Yes, in the High Court. I cannot say at the moment whether or not the present scale of costs is allowed in cases up to £300. But in cases that are undefended, I know that the costs the Master allows are based on the profit costs that would be allowed if the proceedings had been taken in the District Court or Circuit Court plus portion of High Court outlay.

3457. Is that because he considers that these actions should be instituted in the Circuit Court if they came within its jurisdiction?—I suppose he feels he is bound by the Rule that directs that where proceedings are taken in the High Court for amounts up to £300, he can only allow Circuit Court or District Court costs, as the case may be.

3458. Have the Court fees been increased?—Yes.

3459. So that solicitors have to protect themselves by insisting on fees over and above those to which they are entitled?— I do not know that you would be correct in using the word “insist.” If you want to do that class of work at all, or if it is offered to you, you cannot make it a paying proposition on the fees that you get at the present time from the defendant.

3460. And rather than pay these fees these firms will cease to trade with this country?—Some say they will, and others have. If you refer to the extracts from the letters that I sent to the Secretary——

3461. I am putting the question to you because you state in your précis that you know of some who, “rather than pay these extra charges, have also ceased to do business with this country”?—That is correct.

3462. And you say that the credit of the country has, as a result, been damaged? —I have not the slightest doubt about it.

3463. Would you explain to the Committee how you arrived at that conclusion?—Take the case of a manufacturer in any part of England or in Northern Ireland who supplies goods to a man in this country for £30 or £40. His net profit is very small. He is forced to take proceedings to collect his account, but he only gets allowed a certain portion of his costs as compared with what he got prior to the 1924 Act. When I mentioned the sum of £30 or £40, I should have said for a sum under £25. That man has to pay solicitor and client charges. Assuming that he does recover his claim, by the time he pays solicitor and client charges his profit is gone. It is not worth his while to do business with this country.

3464. Was that on account of this: that so far as the solicitor’s costs were concerned the grievance of the foreign firm was not against the system, but against the solicitor’s charges?—I was speaking of the amount of the expenses so far as the Circuit Court is concerned.

3465. I am putting the question that it was against the solicitor’s charges, rather than against the system, that the foreigner complained?—It is the system that has forced solicitors to make certain solicitor-and-client charges. I think I have given an instance of that in my précis. Take the case of a summons in the High Court for any amount between £10 and £25; where the costs used to be £3 10s.——

3466. Senator Brown.—Is that the cost of the writ?—Yes.

3467. I did not think it was as much as that?—Yes, in cases over £20. In Northern Ireland, it is £3 13s., for, in Northern Ireland they allow for additional stamp duty; but here, instead of £3 13s., we get 30/-; we pay a higher stamp duty often for service. There is a case where the costs were considerably reduced—

3468. Chairman.—Arising out of that, will you tell me why clients are summoned for sums up to £20 in the High Court?—So far as the District Court is concerned, we use it up to £25. We find it most efficient, but in cases of over £25 you have to employ the Circuit Court or the High Court. Take the case of a Dublin trader who sues a man in Cork, claiming £26. The Circuit Court Judge there might not be sitting for a period of three months.

3469. Senator Brown.—That does not happen in Cork?—Perhaps Cork is a bad instance. Take Tipperary. A trader wants to get his money in as quickly as possible and he sues in the High Court.

3470. Chairman.—But the instance you gave in your précis is where cases of sums of £25 had been taken to the High Court. Is there any good reason why an action should be taken to the High Court for a sum under £25 in Dublin?—No, not in Dublin.

3471. Or in any part of the country?— Yes, there is.

3472. Would you explain?—Because, first of all, you would have to send it down to a country solicitor, and months might pass. Suppose a firm wants to sue a man in some part of Ireland for £20. They cannot get judgment by default in the District Courts, except in Dublin, Cork and Waterford. They have to wait for the Circuit Court, and that may mean that they have to wait a considerable time. They take the risk that the claim is not likely to be defended, and they issue a High Court summons.

3473. In that case, if you proceed against the person in the High Court for a small sum, and that person is living in the country, is it not conceivable that although he may have a very good defence it would be cheaper for him to pay the amount rather than go to the expense of meeting the case in the High Court?—I do not agree.

3474. Will you explain why?—You are speaking of claims now between £10 and £25.

3475. Or less. We have had evidence before this Committee of cases much less than £10 that were brought before the High Court?—I do not think that that is so since this Act came into operation. The defendant’s solicitor would write to the plaintiff’s solicitor and tell him he had a defence, and ask him if he would consent to transfer it to the local Court. If the solicitor knew his job at all he would consent at once to that transfer. The matter then comes before the Master for the Court and the action is transferred.

3476. How is that a benefit from the point of view of the plaintiff?—It is not, in a case like that. If the plaintiff had known it was going to be defended he would not have been advised to issue a High Court summons. It is only done in cases where, according to instructions, the man has no defence. I am only speaking of my own experience. I do not know what others do.

3477. It amounts to this, that if a claim for a considerable sum is taken to the High Court the defendant will, in most cases, instruct his solicitor to have his case remitted to the District Court?—Yes, if he wants to fight the case.

3478. Arising out of that, is it your opinion that the jurisdiction of the District Court, in contract, should be increased?—No, I do not think it should, but I shall tell you what might be done. I think now, with District Court Clerks possessing a good deal of experience, all over the country, it might be well worth considering extending the special jurisdiction for small sums outside Dublin, Limerick, Cork and Waterford. Under the District Court Rules, there is what is known as the Special Default summons. You issue your summons and, after serving it, and by filing an affidavit in the Court Office, you can get judgment in ten days, and the matter does not come into Court at all. That only applies to Dublin, Limerick, Cork and Waterford and I think that jurisdiction might very well be extended.

3479. Is that done in the office of the Clerk or is it signed by the Judge?—It is done in the office and the Justice is handed a bunch of decrees and he signs them as a matter of form.

3480. Senator Brown.—But it is a judicial act. He does not do it as a matter of form?—When I said as a matter of form, I meant he has not before him the affidavit of debt or the application for judgment. It is handed to him prepared by the Chief Clerk and, presumably, he signs on that.

3481. Is it your suggestion that the Clerk should be allowed to do that without the Judge interfering?—No. My suggestion was that that procedure should be extended to places outside those I have already named.

3482. Chairman.—Are you satisfied with the working of the District Courts so far?—Speaking of Dublin, I find they are very satisfactory.

3483. With regard to the Circuit Court, what are your views as to its present jurisdiction?—Are you speaking of the Circuit Courts all over the country or are you confining your question to Dublin?

3484. Chairman.—I am asking the question in so far as your experience goes?—I think the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court should be decreased.

3485. Will you explain why?—I am only judging now from Dublin. Up to recently there were three Judges who occupied the position that the Recorder occupied formerly. That is due to the extended jurisdiction and not to an increase in business generally. I think that if the jurisdiction of the Circuit Courts were decreased to £100, at any rate, the business would be much more efficiently carried out, because there is a good deal of delay even still, with three Judges.

3486. You are speaking for Dublin now, I think?—Dublin is the place where I have had most experience.

3487. What are your views regarding the present system of appeals from the Circuit Court?—I have had very little experience of appeals. I have not mentioned them in my précis for that reason. I have had only one appeal, and that was a curious one. It was a case in which we took proceedings to the Circuit Court and won our case. We were served with notice of appeal, and the case came before the High Court. In answer to one of the questions, where we should have said "No" it was reported that we said "Yes," and we lost our case.

3488. Senator Dowdall.—Was that because of the note?—Yes. The witness gave the exact opposite answer, from the evidence in the notes, to what he should have given.

3489. Senator Brown.—Is not the delay you complain of at present, and that you think would justify a decrease in the jurisdiction in Dublin, due to the fact that one of the Judges was ill for twelve months?—I suppose that would have a good deal to do with it.

3490. Since then, has not that very serious delay disappeared in Dublin?— Yes.

3491. On the question of costs, do you not recover from the other side your increased costs in the High Court?—To what amount?

3492. We will begin with this: Suppose you had issued what is now called a summons, instead of the old writ, for a sum under £25?—Do you mean outside of Dublin?

3493. In Dublin. Suppose you issue a summons in the High Court for moneys where you could go to the Circuit Court for recovery?—Yes, for sums over £25.

3494. In these cases you complain the costs had been increased?—The costs have been decreased. For instance, the cost of the summons in the High Court for £25—that is, over the District Court jurisdiction used be up to £3 10s. It is now £3, with the possibility that you may, if it is contested, have to take purely Circuit Court costs. There is an increase in the outlay as compared with what the figure was when the cost was £3 10s.

3495. In cases where you get judgment by default the only outlay is 10/-?—It is more than that, because the present scale of costs is based on whatever profit costs you may now get, either in the District Court or the Circuit Court, plus the higher outlay.

3496. That is the difference between what you now get and the old amount? —We do not get the difference. What we do is we charge our clients a small fee, which goes towards helping to pay the difference. We merely ask them to pay some portion of the losses.

3497. In your opinion, has that frightened off English commercial men? —I gave you an instance in one of the letters I have quoted. A big hardware association in London told me of it. They say in the letter that there are plenty of their members who recover their accounts, and by the time they have paid our charges and the charge of the association in London they have no profit left at all.

3498. Have you any idea of what a similar case would cost if a Manchester man sued in the High Court in London? Take a man in Bristol who wants to sue a creditor in the east side of England. He issues a writ for a liquidated sum in the High Court in London? —For how much?

3499. For £25?—I cannot remember the amount in England for which you issue a writ. I think somewhere about £40.

3500. Would he be in any better case in suing a debtor in England than here? —Yes, he would get more costs in England than he would here, and he would not be confined to County Court profit costs.

3501. He could get a judgment from the Master not by default, but on a motion for judgment?—You will appreciate that I do not know a lot about it, but I think after they issue a writ in the District Registry and when a certain time expires they go in and get judgment in the office. If an appearance is entered it comes before the Master, and if the Master does not want to take it, it is put in the Judge’s list.

3502. What occurred to me was: it seemed a very small difference to stop trading for?—Periodically, I meet the secretaries of these affiliated bodies in London and it is one constant source of complaint.

3503. Senator Hooper.—That our law is cheaper?—Our law is cheaper for the debtor to a certain extent.

Senator Brown.—The amount you can recover from either side is less.

3504. Deputy Little.—Would it remedy your grievance to a considerable extent if the District Courts had the power of marking judgment?—You mean in the country.

3505. Generally?—Yes, it would in cases under £25.

3506. It would be an advantage, then, if that system were working to increase the jurisdiction of the District Courts to £50?—No, I think you would over-burden them then.

3507. If they were default cases?—Yes. I think that with default cases they would be overburdened.

3508. It is only a question of signing the judgment?—Yes, but my experience shows me that at least half of the claims that go through my own office would be under £50.

3509. Most of those would be undefended?—Yes.

3510. I cannot see how you could consider that it could over-burden them?— If you had to transfer from the High Court or the Circuit Court to the District Court half of the undefended work that goes through these Courts, in my judgment you would completely over-burden them.

3511. A large percentage of those cases are disposed of in the cities of Dublin, Cork, Waterford and Limerick?—Which class of case are you speaking of?

3512. These same cases?—They are all over the country.

3513. You could not give us an idea of how they are distributed?—North, south, east and west? You mean where the amounts would be?

3514. The big flow of business would be in the cities and the big amounts would be in the cities?—It is not my experience.

3515. Could you give us an idea of what percentage of those cases would go through the four cities?—You are speaking of cases under £50?

3516. Yes?—I am afraid I have no statistics to guide me but, roughly, it would certainly be not more than a fourth.

3517. You gave us a reason for reducing the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court. Was it that the Circuit Courts had too much to do?—In my opinion, the Circuit Courts have too much to do at present. In saying that, I am judging from Dublin.

3518. Since things have been screwed up, there is not much delay in Dublin?— Nothing like the delay that there was.

3519. If you had the Circuit Court Rules in operation, they would probably facilitate things for you?—Certainly, so far as Dublin is concerned.

3520. You do not think that the Circuit Court Judges are not capable of dealing with the work?—I think they are most capable men.

3521. I would suggest that the conclusion you would draw is that it would be better to give the Circuit Court Rules a chance before touching the jurisdiction? —I do not think so. My experience is that, so far, the Act, to put it very bluntly, has been a failure.

3522. We are all speaking from the painful experience of not having these Rules in operation?—Yes. When the rules have not been in operation there is nothing to guide us.

3523. Senator Dowdall.—You gave an example of traders across the water who refused to trade in this country. You gave us as an example a Manchester firm which refused to trade in this country, the reason for refusal being delay in the trial of an action against a Dublin Company?—That is right.

3524. You knew that the Dublin Company was a first-rate company?—They must have known it themselves.

3525. Yes, because you know as know that some of the most important directors of the Company live in Manchester?—I do not know that.

3526. They do?—I have no doubt you are right.

3527. Do you tell us that a responsible firm because of delay in the hearing of an action against such a company refuse to trade in Ireland?—I can only tell you that he said he would not do any more trade with this country. Whether he carried it out or not, I do not know. He may have said it in a fit of temper.

3528. What he said in a fit of temper we are not to take notice of. Did your company win against the Dublin company? —They did not.

3529. I suggest that is the reason but you gave us some other statements?—I have them here.

3530. At the periodical conferences with the Trade Protection Agencies which you have in London, it is a general complaint? —Did I use the word “general”?

3531. “Constant complaint,” I think you said?—There is no doubt they constantly complain.

3532. You wish us to infer that it has injured and is injuring the trade of the country?—I do. I have not the slightest doubt.

3533. Have you looked up the imports from Great Britain to this country in recent years?—No.

3534. Do you know that there has been no considerable falling off of the imports?—I do not know.

3535. If the imports were maintained, would it not go to show that the credit of the country has not been injured?— I suppose that is a very fair inference.

3536. Senator Hooper.—You have a large knowledge of cases arising out of trading between the two countries?— Yes.

3537. In what proportion of such transactions do you think actions for recovery of debt arise?—I am afraid I could not answer that question, because I have only experience of cases that come to us, whether they come as disputed or because people cannot or will not pay.

3538. You have a large knowledge of this cross-Channel trade?—Yes, we have a large amount of commercial practice arising out of breaches of contract.

3539. Generally, the vast majority of people in this country pay their debts to the people on the other side?—I suppose they do.

3540. Do you know, then, that the percentage of those who do not pay their debts is infinitesimal as compared with the whole?—I have no data to guide me, but I know that there are plenty of people who never pay until they are sued.

3541. Taking the whole body of the cross-Channel trade, the number of cases in which disputes of the kind arise must be infinitesimal?—I have no data and I cannot give an answer to that.

3542. When you say that the credit of this country has been damaged tremendously, would it not be important to consider what percentage of cases there are in which these cross-Channel merchants are not paid until the debtor here is forced to pay?—It is impossible for me to answer a question like that, because I have no material to guide me.

3543. That is a rather strong and serious statement to make, and I suggest to you, as has been suggested here before, that the credit of the country really depends on the people who pay their debts rather than the people who do not?—I should think that is right.

3544. You spoke about the Dublin Circuit Court, and I think you suggested that if the jurisdiction were reduced to £100 it would be a more efficient Court? —I think I said that the business could be done more efficiently.

3545. Apart from the fact that the Judges may be overworked, have you any defect to indicate in the system itself?— You mean the existing system?

3546. There is no procedure at the moment until these Rules are ready?— That defect has been pointed out.

3547. These things are in process of being remedied and when they are remedied is there any serious defect in the system which you think is likely to continue?—You mean in Dublin?

3548. In the Circuit Court system?—I can only speak for Dublin.

3549. Can you give me an answer in respect of Dublin?—That is, you ask me if there are other defects that cannot be remedied by these changes that are now in contemplation. I should think that probably the new Rules that are coming in will get rid of a lot of the delay.

3550. There is no outstanding defect? —Not that I can think of at the moment.

3551. You are against the jurisdiction of the District Court being raised to £50?—Yes.

3552. Do you think that there is any strong opinion among the business community on that point at all?—Well, I have never heard any client express a wish that the jurisdiction should be increased, and personally I do not think it would be of any general benefit.

3553. Deputy Wolfe.—We have had some evidence before us at an earlier date in which it was suggested that prior to 1924 the practice had grown up to a very considerable extent of issuing writs in the High Court against persons resident in the country for very small amounts?—So I heard.

3554. Do you think that that practice did exist?—To a very limited extent.

3555. Would you agree that if the practice were there, it might become, as was suggested here, an abuse of the process of the Court?—Do you mean in the future?

3556. I will talk of the past first. Was there, prior to 1924, what amounted to an abuse of the process of the Court by reason of the issuing of writs for small sums—for £4, £5, £6 and £7—against people throughout the country?—I have known people to be sued for over £5 and up to £10, but I never saw one under £5 in my life.

3557. Deputy Wolfe.—I put it to you that the issue of a writ for £7 against a man in the country is an abuse of the process of the Court, and was so prior to 1924.

Chairman.—In the High Court?

3558. Deputy Wolfe.—Yes?—I say yes, but I would qualify it to this extent, that where there were no possible means of getting a decree from the County Court Judge for a long time, to that extent a man was justified in taking proceedings when he knew there would be no defence.

3559. The Chairman put a question to you as to the position of a man, say, in County Tipperary who was sued for £4 or £5 in a High Court action and he thought he had a good defence to it. Was he not in practice very often compelled to pay rather than face High Court litigation, even though he had a perfectly good defence?—I should think he probably would have to do it, but I have had no experience of it.

3560. I put it to you that these trade protection associations that you represent were largely responsible for what I call the abuse which existed prior to 1924, and that they brought in large numbers of these small writs against people to force them to pay, whether they had a defence or not?—I would not say they were done in large numbers.

3561. You are only dealing with your own clients. I do not want to be personal in any way, but do you not think that the trade protection associations for which you appear largely resorted to that practice prior to 1924?—They were anxious to get judgment quickly.

3562. And get judgment by all means?— What do you mean by “by all means”?

3563. Put yourself in the position of a country trader who is sued for £6. If he came to you with a writ for £6 from one of these trade protection associations, what advice would you give him?—If I were satisfied he had a good defence I would probably move to remit it, and I would teach that firm a lesson.

3564. What would that have cost prior to 1924?—He would probably spend about half the debt if he was not successful.

3565. What would the costs of a motion to remit be?—In a case under £10?

3566. Under £50 if you like? If you are moving to remit in an action of £8, would not the costs of your client be as much as if you moved to remit in an action of £48?—There would be a difference in Counsel’s fees to start with, and there would be a difference in the amount of the costs the solicitor would be entitled to.

3567. Where does it come in?—I am merely speaking from memory now, but I should not think that the cost of a motion to remit would be more than about three guineas. I am speaking of a case under £10.

3568. Now, Mr. Porter, be serious. The cost of a motion to remit under £3? —I said under £10. The costs of a motion to remit would be somewhere about £3 or £4.

3569. Do you suggest that seriously? Remember I have been in the Circuit Court?—I know very well who you are, and I have the greatest respect for you.

3570. Did you ever see a motion to remit the costs of which were taxed at £3?—I cannot remember one, I must admit.

3571. I will put it in another way. Did you ever see the costs of a motion to remit taxed to £6?—I certainly have.

3572. I am not talking about being measured, but taxed?—I should think they would be, but I do not think they would be taxed to £6 where the claim is under £10.

3573. I put it to you that they would be taxed to £8 or £10, no matter what the claim was, and that the amount of the claim does not in any way alter the remuneration which a solicitor gets for work done in the High Court?—My recollection is that it did make a difference.

3574. If this practice did exist, will you agree that it ought to be stopped?— I quite agree. I would not allow a writ for £10 to be put upon the file.

3575. Having got that far, will you come a step further with me? Would you agree that your trade protection societies were the chief offenders in issuing what I call these very oppressive writs?—I find it very hard to answer that question.

3576. You will not say that they were not offenders?—I will not say that they were not, and I will not say that they were, either.

3577. As regards the future, in your first recommendation you recommend that “Where a plaintiff and defendant do not reside, or carry on business, in the same Circuit Court jurisdiction, the plaintiff should be at liberty to adopt the procedure provided for by the Rules of the High Court prior to “1924”?—Yes.

3578. Prior to 1924, could a foreign plaintiff issue a writ for £3 in the High Court?—I thought I was going to be asked questions on that, and I intended to qualify it in exactly the same way as I have qualified your other question.

3579. Do you agree that it requires qualification?—I do.

3580. What figures do you suggest English trade societies should issue writs for in this country?—You are speaking of the members of these societies or Dublin firms?

3581. I prefer for the moment the English trade protection societies?—Well, I represent both.

3582. Do you think they should issue writs for under £20 in the High Court? —Yes, with this qualification: where the defendant does not reside in places like Dublin, Cork, Waterford and Limerick. Where the plaintiff could use the District Court to get a judgment in the office, I would say he should do so.

3583. You would still leave the unfortunate man residing in a country district open to that action which in the past may have proved a method of oppression to him?—Under the present system you get 30/- costs in such a case, but if you sue him in the District Court you get 29/-.

3584. You take from him all reasonable chances of defending himself at anything like a reasonable price if he is to be sued in the High Court?—No, indeed. You represent a defendant in County Cork——

3585. And I get a writ from Messrs. Porter, Morris & Co., for ten guineas?— You write to me saying that your client has a defence. I accept your word the same as I would anybody else’s.

3586. You remember that prior to 1924 the application had to be brought within eight days?—We must speak of the present now, surely.

3587. Would you restore the evil that existed prior to 1924?—No, certainly not.

3588. But you would allow writs over £10?—In certain circumstances, yes, and very limited circumstances too.

3589. You have suggested that the special default system should be extended in the case of the District Court?—Yes, I think it would be very useful.

3590. Have you considered the feasibility of it?—Do you mean on the ground of expense?

3591. No, I am not talking of the ground of expense. Do you think that the present District Court clerks in country districts are suitable officials to mark judgment on their own initiative and free from the supervision of the District Justice?—They would not be entirely free from the supervision of the District Justice, because the decree would be signed by him.

3592. Do you not know that the District Justice only sees some of these clerks once a month in the country?—I did not know that.

3593. That would perhaps alter your view as to whether it was possible to extend the special default process?—It would get rid of a lot of the trouble you spoke of if it could be done, and that was the only reason I suggested it. I can see considerable difficulties in the way of the nature you mention.

3594. As regards this question of solicitor and client costs, which is a very burning question to you and me, is there any real necessity now for solicitor and client costs in a Circuit Court action, be the client English or Irish?—Let us forget the English and Irish now.

3595. Should he be charged solicitor and client costs in the Circuit Court?— Are you speaking of the scale of costs below £50 or over it?

3596. I will take below £50, say £45. Is not the solicitor fairly paid at present? —I should think he is.

3597. Then you would not charge solicitor and client costs in that case?—I would not like to say that.

3598. Turn to the District Court. Does not the scale in the District Court fairly pay the solicitor?—Yes, it does.

3599. What are these charges that these foreign clients of yours are objecting to—the solicitor and client charges?— Let us take a case that is not in any city, the case of a man down in the wilds of Clare. You serve him with a summons for, say, £20—a High Court summons for any amount between £10 and £25—and for the reasons which I have given you cannot get judgment in the office in the Circuit Court.

3600. When you are speaking of solicitor and client costs, you are speaking of solicitor and client costs in High Court actions brought to recover small sums. Therefore, the system you advocate would leave the English trader open to solicitor and client costs. Under the Circuit Court system, he is immune?—If we went back to the old Rules, under which we would get better costs, as you get in Northern Ireland to-day, for £23 or £24—in cases like that your costs pay you admirably.

3601. But so far as the Circuit Court system is concerned at present, so far as the Circuit Court costs are concerned, and so far as District Court Costs are concerned, they are fair enough to the solicitor?—Yes.

3602. When you speak of solicitor and client costs, you only speak of them in reference to High Court actions brought for the recovery of small amounts?—It depends on what you mean by small amounts.

3603. I call £15 a small amount. If you do bring that action, which you think you ought to be allowed to bring, it will necessitate your charging the English trader costs not allowed against the defendant?—No; the difference between the costs you recover and what you formerly recovered—a small sum to recoup for the additional outlay.

3604. In that case, you would have to charge solicitor and client costs, you would say?—Yes.

3605. What you are advocating in your first suggestion is the restoration of the system which will make it necessary for you to charge your English client solicitor and client costs?—You are surely misunderstanding me, or I am misunderstanding you.

3606. Does it not work out at that? I do not think that I misunderstand you? —Then I misunderstand you.

3607. Does it not work out at that?— That if the old Rules were gone back to it would still amount to our being able to charge solicitor and client costs?

3608. No. In the case of writs in the High Court you are not allowed the full costs?—You are allowed 30s., but that is not the same as it used to be.

3609. And as a result you have to charge solicitor and client costs?—Yes.

3610. Do you think that that is desirable?—No.

3611. As long as you keep to the District Court system your English clients are immune from solicitor and client costs?—Yes.

3612. When they bring High Court actions for small amounts you run them to solicitor and client costs?—Yes.

3613. Do you not think that it would be well for the credit of the country to obviate that?—Yes. That is why I suggest going back to the former scale of fees. Prior to the Act we did not charge that.

3614. A good many English traders and trade protection societies have been good enough to criticise the Courts of Justice Act. Have you ever made a comparison between the cost of the English and the Irish systems?—Are you speaking of High Court?

3615. High Court and Circuit Court? —An action in London is more expensive than here. The stamp duty on a writ is nearly four times as much as it is here.

3616. So that an English trader coming here gets cheaper litigation?—There is an extra outlay on the part of the English solicitor.

3617. When he brings a small action in the Hight Court, do you not think that he ought to be penalised?—He is penalised at present. The present scale of costs allowed by the Master in marking judgment only represents the costs that he would recover in the District or Circuit Court plus the High Court outlay.

3618. Senator Hooper.—I would like to get your opinion as to procedure suggested here for the District Court. Assuming a trader in Manchester wants to recover a debt in Mayo, he has to send witnesses there to prove his claim?—Yes, if it is defended.

3619. The suggestion was made that, instead of having to send down his witnesses, he should make an affidavit setting out his case and it would be within his option to rely on his affidavit without sending witnesses and to put on the defendant the onus of disproving his claim. How would that procedure appeal to you?—It is done to some extent in Dublin where you get judgment by swearing an affidavit. You mean where a defendant would enter an appearance and where it would be analogous to final judgment in the High Court?

3620. The case would go into Court and the plaintiff, instead of having his witnesses there, would provide his evidence in the form of an affidavit and the Judge would put the onus on the defendant to disprove his claim?—I think that that would be a very good way of doing things.

3621. Deputy Wolfe.—The suggestion made was that the affidavit in a default Civil Bill should be evidence, notwithstanding the fact that the defendant gave notice of defence?—I know. It is turned into an ordinary Civil Bill. I think that that would be an excellent idea.

3622. Senator Dowdall.—If a trader in England sues for a debt here in the High Court, say, against a trader in Mullingar for £25, is the English plaintiff compelled to give security for costs?—He could be asked to give security for costs. We have been asked for it repeatedly and have given our own personal security.

3623. Is that in the Circuit Court?— No, in the High Court. I have not come across a case in the Circuit Court where an order has been made against us for security, but where we have been asked for it I have given our own personal assurance.

3624. At your own option?—Yes.

3625. If an Irish trader sues in England for recovery of debt is he not compelled to give security?—Yes, in the High Court and, I think, also in the County Court.

3626. Senator Farren.—I understood you to say in regard to the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court that you are in favour of its reduction to £100 and that you said that the Courts were a failure from the point of view of manufacturers? —I do not think that I said that they were a failure. It was never my intention to suggest that they were a failure. I said that so far as Dublin was concerned there was considerable congestion at one time and there is still congestion.

3627. I think that congestion is limited now and that it occurred largely owing to the illness of some of the Judges?—I would attribute it to the increased amount of jurisdiction.

3628. I think your evidence pointed to the fact that from the point of view of manufacturers, British and Irish, they were not satisfied with the present procedure?—No.

3629. That astonished me because we have had evidence here on behalf of the Associated Chambers of Commerce, the Limerick Chamber of Commerce and the Dublin Chamber of Commerce, all of whom represent traders in the country, and they expressed complete satisfaction with the working of the Circuit Court and said that they got speedy and cheap justice?—I would not say that it is speedy, but it is comparatively cheap.

3630. That is their evidence?—I will give you an instance. We had a case a few days ago where a client of ours, a manufacturer in Dublin, heard that a man in Clonmel was selling his premises and going to America. He asked us to get a writ served to the amount of something like £30 or £40. If we had been obliged to sue him in the Circuit Court under the existing system the debtor would have been to America and back ten times before we got a decree. The Circuit Court Judge sits only three or four times a year.

3631. That cannot be avoided?—It can be avoided to this extent, that if you penalise a plaintiff like that from proceeding in the High Court you must assist him proceeding in some other way.

3632. He is not prohibited?—He is in the way of costs.

3633. But we cannot legislate for traders and farmers only?—Admittedly, but it is the manufacturers and traders to a great extent who keep up the credit of the country.

3634. To some extent. The difficulty we have is that the ordinary shopkeeper and farmer must be taken into consideration and the Courts of Justice Act must be framed to meet their requirements as well as those of traders and manufacturers?—Yes, I admit that. I had another peculiar instance the other day, and it shows how attempts are made to side-track a plaintiff. A Scottish firm asked us to recover a debt in Donegal for £180. The first thing we got was a request from a country solicitor to have the case transferred. That, of course, was refused. He had no defence.

3635. That is the work of lawyers and you cannot blame the shopkeeper for that?—I am not blaming the shopkeeper, I am blaming the Act. In the old days he could not move to remit and you could apply for judgment.

3636. I read in your précis of evidence something about somebody objecting to a solicitor in Dublin acting as agent and issuing a summons?—We wanted to know how the procedure of getting a judgment in the office would work out if it were adopted, as provided under the new Rules. We therefore thought of issuing default summonses in Limerick and we did so, but the Court officer wrote to us stating that he had been told by the local Bar Association that he must not take these summonses into the Court. The country solicitors complain if you use the High Court instead of the District Court, and then throw obstacles in your way. It makes it difficult for your client.

3637. Deputy Wolfe.—Are they not right?—That is hard to say. The system in the District Court is for the Court officer to issue summonses in triplicate.

3638. Then he is doing solicitors’ work? —I do not think so.

3639. Senator Brown.—Would it satisfy your cross-Channel clients if a system of this kind were adopted: they issue a writ in the High Court for a sum over £50. There is an appearance entered. If they move for final judgment and if there is an affidavit put in on the motion for final judgment which shows that there is a real defence, it shall thereupon go down to the Circuit Court automatically?— Most certainly, I quite agree.

3640. And the costs of that action shall be in the discretion of the Judge, or shall follow the ultimate decision?—I am quite in favour of that. I would go still further, and in cases where a solicitor is not properly instructed, that the plaintiff shall not be allowed anything more than Circuit Court costs—no High Court costs.

3641. Deputy Little.—In reference to the case of the man in Clonmel who sold out and went to America, could you not have followed him? Even if the Judge was not sitting in Clonmel, you could have followed him in one of the other towns in which the Judge sits in the Circuit Court?—Mr. Wolfe will know that in a place like Cork, for instance, the Court sits only about four times a year.

3642. Deputy Wolfe.—He sits in various places. He is there almost the entire year?—He will sit in a district about four times a year. There are so many sittings of the Judge.

3643. Deputy Little points out that you could take him into Court in any other town within the county?—You mean that if the defendant resided near Clonmel you could bring him up before the Judge in Tipperary? That is quite possible, but the Judge might not be sitting in Tipperary for a month later.

3644. He may not be sitting there, but he would be sitting somewhere else in the area, in Kilkenny perhaps. It would be only a question of corresponding with some local solicitor?—You could not bring him to Kilkenny, which is in another county. You could not bring it up outside the county in which the defendant resides.

3645. Deputy Little.—It is all within the Circuit. Judge Sealy’s Circuit covers Tipperary, Kilkenny, Waterford and Carlow. You could bring him up anywhere within the Circuit?—That is point that has not occurred to me before.

3646. It meets your difficulty?—To a certain extent it does.

(The Witness withdrew.)

The Committee adjourned at 4 p.m. until Tuesday, 4th February, at 11 a.m.

* Appendix 2.