The Sun.
London, England, 1862-05-07 00:00:00

COUNTY COURTS PROCEDURE BILL.

Mr. M'MAIION moved the second reading of this bill,
the chief object of which was to give to parties suing in the
county courts the same right of appeal which they had in
the superior courts. In the county courts, where the sum
sued for was under £2O, the decision of the county court
judge was as absolute and irrevocable as the fiat of any
Turkish Pasha, and that was a state of the law which he
considered ought to be altered. It was, in fact, giving the
county court judges a penal power over the person f the
party sued ; and there was a case where a debtor was by
+he judge consigned to prison for thirty days when the debt
was only tenpence. He did not wish by the measure to give
the right of appeal in all cases, but only when the judge
might see it necessary to giro leave to appeal.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL opposed the measure.
The procedure and practice of the county courts were in a
great measure above the observatit n of the bar, or of the
class of attorneys and solicitors, and were in fact confined to
the County Court judges themselves. It, was, therefore,
those parties who were best able to decide as to the work-
ing of that procedure and practice, and having obtained the
opinions of the majority of the judges of those courts, he
was bound to say that they were all opposed to the provi-
sions of this measure. Besides, that five out of the eleven
clauses of the present bill—namely, 2,7, 9, 10, and 11 were
all taken from the Common Law Procedure Act of 1852, and
were in operation at the present time in the procedure and
practice of the county courts. Of the remaining six clauses,
three had relation to interpleaders, as to giving these courts
jurisdiction to entertain equitable defences; and one, the
eighth clause, to give the right of appeal. lie considered
that the adoption of any of these clauses would have the
effect of interfering with the original purposes for which
the county courts were established, and he must, therefore,
oppose them. Ho had communicated with the county
court judges, for the purpose of ascertaining if any amend.
ment could be made in some portions of the county court
procedure, and on receiving their reply it might be
necessary to found a measure on their suggestion,
and in these circumstances he would move that the bill be
read a second time that day six months.
Mr. HENLEY considered that having now almost re-
leased the upper and middle classes of imprisonment for
debt, it was unjust and unfair that the poorer classes sued
before the county court judge should be consigned to pri-
son simply upon the caprice of the judge. He thought
that was an anomaly in the law which ought to be amended.
Mr. AYRTON also condemned the present system of
imprisonment for debt as respected the lower classes. If
a man can manage to contract a debt of £2O or upwards he
would not be permitted to get into a prison, but might
release himself from the whole of his debts, while the poor
man, who could not manage to contract a debt of £2O, was
cast into prison for the small debts he had contracted, and
had the whole of his goods taken from him.
Sir G. GREY said the state of the law was certainly an
anomaly, and would receive the attention of the Govern-
ment.

After a few words from Mr. MWAHON in reply, in the
course of which he stated that were the County Court
Judges consulted, as proposed by the Attorney-General, no
alteration of the law would ever take place, the socond
reading of the bill was negatived without a division.

SMOKE NUISANCES (METROPOLIS) ACTS;

AMENDMENT BILL.

This bill passed through committee, and was negatived
without amendment.

PUBLIC HOUSES (SCOTLAND) ACTS AMEND-
MENT BILL.

On the order of the day being read for going into com-
mittee on this bill,

Mr. CRAUFURD moved as an amendment, "That in
the opinion of this house it is not expedient to sanction
any further legislation on the subject of Public Houses
in Scotland which does not consolidate as well as
amend the present acts." In moving that resolu-
tion, he was not opposing the measure before the house ;
but as there was much uncertainty and difficulty respecting
the existing law on the subject, what he wanted was, that
the matter should be postponed with a view to the consoli-
dation of the existing acts of Parliament, by which the
public-houses system in Scotland was regulated. All he
wanted was, that the House should not be called upon to
add confusion to confusion, which they would most certainly
be doing by adding this confused and unintelligible act to
the others equally confused and unintelligible which already
existed.