The Sun.
London, England, 1850-12-20 00:00:00

COUNTY COURTS..
(From the Blackburn Standard.)

We mentioned in our last that an order had been
issued from the Treasury directing a large reduction
in the fees in those courts, and a general expectation
prevailed that some public notice would be taken by
the Judge of the circumstance. This proved to be
correct, for, on taking his seat, his Honour addressed
the Court as follows :
Since the last sitting of the Court, the Secretary of
State for the Home Department has sent for my infor-
mation and guidance a copy of an order which, by the
County Court Extension Act, he was authorised, with
the consent of the Lords of the Treasury, to make, al-
tering the fees to be taken in County Courts. It is diffi-
cult to suppose that it could have been the real inten-
tion of the Legislature that the expense of a County
Court summons should be greater than that of a
Queen's Bench writ; yet such was the legal effect of the
last statute with
.regard to demands approaching fifty
pounds•, the former statute having directed that a pay-
ment should be made by every plaintiff for a sum ex-
ceeding forty shillings, of one shilling in the pound of
his demand, towards a fund for providing court-houses
and offices, and paying the principal and interest of
moneys borrowed fur that purpose, and the new Act
having declared that the two Acts should be construed
as one Act. Some representations were made by
the traders of this town, and of Preston and other
places, through their representatives in Par-
liament to the Government upon the subject,
and the consequence is that the Secretary of State
has, by this new order, directed, that the payment to this
fund shall in no case exceeding 201. be greater than
thirteen shillings and fuurpeuce; and in cases under
that amount shall be reduced from a shilling to eight-
pence in the pound. Considering how great a discou-
ragement so large a payment was to parties suing for
demands exceeding twenty pounds, one may be more
surprised that there were any such suits brought in
County Courts, than that their number should be small;
there have, however, been some in almost every part of
this circuit.
The order directs that those parties who have paid
more tban twenty shillings to this fund in any case shall
nave the surplus returned to them upon application at
the clerk's office.
The scale of costs under the former Act contained a
multiplicity of small charges, and it left room for much
difference of opinion as to the amounts properly charge-
able; so that the sums actually charged varied, not
merely between circuit and circuit, but even between
the different courts in the same circuit. The only mode
by which the majority of the parties could pay was by
instalments, and it became necessary for the plaintiffs
to inquire from time to time whether the instalments
had been paid; to answer such inquiries the clerk had to
search the books, and for this search the scale allowed
him a fee. This fee was loudly complained of, as if it
were charged in every instance, though that was very far
from being the case, for many of the clerks charged
nothing for searches. Those clerks who were liberal in
this respect were confounded with those who were, I
will not say rapacious, for they took only what the law
awarded, and many of them were miserably paid, but
less liberal. The new order removes all cause of com-
plaint by the suitors on this score, for it directs the clerk
to give notice, by a prepaid post etter, of every payment
made into court. And as it reduces the number of
charges and regulates most of them by a per-tentage on
the amount sued for, there will be less, if any, room for
differences of charge between one court and another
throughout the realm. I apprehend, too, that this mode
of charging by a per-centage will be considered more
just in itself, and therefore more satisfactory to the par-
ties who have to pay. The satisfaction given by its
application to the duties of customs led, in the last ses-
sion, to its extension to the duties of stamps, and may
be expected to lead to its general application throughout
our taxation.
The effect of the new order will be that the summons
will cost less than it did before, whilst the hearing will
cost rather more. And upon the whole the expense of
litigating small demands will be diminished. In an ad-
dress which I made in this court upon the passing of the
Extension Act, explaining its provisions, I remarked that
the County Courts were not merely self-supporting, but
were contributing a large sum to the public treasury;
and I ventured to say I thought it a mean thing for the
Government of a great country to be receiving any part
of its revenue from the pockets of suitors of County
Courts, most of whom were humble, and many necessi-
tous. In the formation of a new scale I think the Se-
cretary of State has endeavoured to make them merely
self-supporting, without returning a surplus to the Go-
vernment: his men cf business seem to have taken ears
to be on the right side, sad I still expect a surplus. It
was no part of the duty of the Secretary of State to abo-
lish the general fund payment, or the payment exacted
for the judge, though the judges are no longer paid by
fee:., but by salaries; these are questions for the conside-
ration of the legislator. I may be excused for saying I
can see no reason. if it be proper that the judges of the
high courts should be paid their salaries, and have court-
rooms provided for them at the expense of the public,
and not from the pockets of their suitors, who are com-
paratively rich, why the salaries of the judges of the
County Courts and the court-rooms should not be paid
and provided at the expense of the public, and not from
the pockets of their suitors, who are comparatively poor.
If a man have the misfortune to be robbed we do not
charge him a per-centage upon the value of the goods
stolen, when he comes to prosecute the thief, nor do we

fix the amount of that per-centage, so as just to pay the
judges, gaolers, and rural police: so far from it, we con-
sider that he does the State a service by prosecuting,
and we pay him the coats of the prosecution. Whilst
e acknowl« dge that criminal courts are established, and

ought to be maintained for the benefit and a: the expense
of society at large, can we say that civil courts are not
established. and ought not to be maintained in the saws
manner? Does the legal fiction by which prosecutions
for wrongs committei, are said to be carried on in the
name of the Queen, whilst suits for rights withheld are
c aried on in the name of the party, make a real differ-
ence? Are not civil courts established not so much for
the benefit of the few who have the misfortune to require
them in their own cases, as fur the many who by
reason of their existence, example, and sAlutary action,
have no need to apply to thew? If so, ought not these
payments by individual suitors for judges' salaries and
court-houses to be abolished? The other fees exigible
on civil process would be enough to discourage wanton
litigation.
The man indeed who will not do his neighbour right
until he be made to do so by due course of law, has no
right to complain if he be made to pay the reasonable
costs of the proceedings; and by this argument the high
costa of the superior courts are sometimes attempted to
be justified by those who are forgetful of the fact that
the people who rt quire the coercion of the law are al-
most always reckless men in embarrassed circumstances,
little able to pay the plaintiff his debt, quite unable to
pay debt and costs too; so that the payment of the costs
in practice falls upon the plaintiffs in most cases in the
high courts, and frequently, though not so often, in the
County Courts also.
We know that up to the end of 1849 one million two
hundred and fifty-two thousand and seventeen actions
were brought in the County Courts: we do not know
how many debts during that time were paid from a con-
sciousness that if not paid actions might have been
brought in the County Court for them; nor how many
persons have been restrained from imprudently con-
tracting debt 4. I fancy I can discover the efficacy of
the courts in this respect, especially is regard to young
men.

By a return recently published, it appears that the
number of plaints throughout the realm was, in

_ - .
1847 429,215—in this circuit
1848 427,611 do.
1849 395,191 do.
The sums sued for were in
1848 sti 1,346,802—in this circuit X 16,333
1849
The number of plaints will be smaller this year, partly
because the times are better for the-Working classes, and
partly because some of the courts have been to some ex-
tent paralysed by the abridgment of our power to im-
prison.

I cannot but think that if due consideration had been
given to the fact that people are not imprisoned by
County Courts for mere indebtedness, but only for fraud,
or for that wilful nonpayment, being able to pay, which
amounts to misconduct deserving punishment; and that
ascertained by a trial before the judge in open court, the
imprisonment of such offenders in Houses of Correetion
woald not have been objected to. The imprisonments
in this circuit were surprisingly few; but being chiefly
in the House ( f Correction. were exemplary, and proba-
bly, on that account, were few. Though the actirns during
the three ycars were 15,787, the actual imprison-
ments were only MI; and of these a considerable number
were for a day or two only, the parties being let go on
payment of the debt, or part of it.

The most anxious part of the duty of the judge is the
hearing these applications for commitment; that this
duty has not been harshly performed in this circuit is
proved by the fact that there were only 209 actual im-
prisonments, though the judge made 627 orders for
commitment.

The memorial of the Preston traders to the Secretary
of State, before alluded to, prayed also for the restora-
tion of the right of the creditor to imprison his debtor
upon mesne process. I have not heard that the Secre-
tary of State gave them any hopes that this part of their
prayer would be granted. The common gaol of this
great county being situated within this circuit, I have
had to hear the cases of about fifteen hundred insolvent
debtors confined in Lancaster Castle; and I am free to
own that the present system of insolvency law does give
creditors great reason to complain. I think, however,
that the remedy is not to be found in any arbitrary
power of imprisonment of the debtor at the mere will
and pleasure of the creditor; but that imprisonment
should be awarded by the impartial judgment of a com-
petent court, after hearing both parties, or after giving
both parties the opportunity of being heard; and when
once the sentence was passed, there should b- no power
of discharge without payment of the debt, and perhaps
not even ou payment of the debt. It would be an
irksome duty, arid I know no court on which it could so
well be thrown as the County Court of the domicile of
the party.
Some of the traders' memorials pilsyed for the aboli-
tion of our system of payments by instalments, or the
restriction of it to debts under 20!. I take leave to say
that we might as well shut up the County Courts at once
as give up the payment by. instalments; the class of
persons with whom we chiefly have to do can only pay
out of their future earnings. They are, now that wages
are high and employment plentiful, gradually rubbing
off the debts they contracted during the bad times.
Shopkeepers who have debts so contracted, must be con-
tent to have them so discharged. I concur in the opinion
lately expressed by Mr. Jones, the judge of the Garner-
vonstiiro circuit, who said, "As to the propriety-of the
application of the system of paymeneby instalments to
sums above 201., some of the judges of the*County Courtin
seem inclined to draw a strict line in this respect; but
,after having giTen the subject much consideration, I