The Gazette 1910-11

165

DECEMBER, 1910] The Gazette of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland.

notice, but we think that the early revision thereafter provided by our Bill is necessary, and merchants or defendants cannot grumble if they have to pay some small costs for the hearing on renewal, which sum generally falls on the defendant who has obtained the long credit. The first renewal will be within two years from the date of the decree. There is a clause providing for the Court to issue decrees in undefended cases after six days from the date they are pronounced by limiting the time for appeal; this will prevent decrees from being hung up until the termination of a prolonged Sessions. We also give powers to defendants to lodge money in Court in full settlement of claims for debts or for damages, and if on the hearing, the amount tendered or lodged is deemed by the Judge sufficient, that the defendant who has so lodged that money will be indemnified from costs after the lodgment was made by him. There are other matters dealing with the professional side, such as enabling firms of Solicitors to act in Court by any member of their firm, etc. And then there is a clause that the Presi dent of the Incorporated Law Society shall be one of the rule-making authorities, and there shall also be added a member of the Council of the Bar of Ireland, to be nominated by that Council, because we consider that the Bar of Ireland have as great an interest in the carrying on of the County Court business as Solicitors, and that it is not out of place that they should be represented on the court of the rule-making authority. I do not think it necessary to allude to letters which have appeared in the press over the name " A Correspondent," or any other such nom de plume. If it is worth any indi vidual's while to discuss the subject of the Bill in the Publi: Press we always like to see the true name of the writer appended to his letter, it would guide us as to the amount of attention to be given to his remarks. I therefore refrain from making any fur ther reference to them. I am sorry I have kept you so long, but I felt it my duty to go into this matter of County Court Practice in Ireland at some length, and the importance of the subject, especially during the coming year, must be my apology.

may be made and before whom they may be made. We also deal with the question of renewal of decrees. At present a decree must be renewed every year for the six years it is in force. On the first year it is renewed by affidavit of the plaintiff and without -notice to the defendant, and each subsequent year upon notice to him. It was thought by some persons that these renewal proceedings were really matters for putting costs into Solicitors' pockets, and for that purpose alone. Now let me draw your attention to this matter. Judgments in the High Court must be renewed every year and are executed by the Sheriff alone, who is an officer of the Court and amenable to the High Court and answerable for his actions to the Court; and if he made a seizure and was met by a statement on behalf of the defendant that the debt had been paid or almost paid by him since the judgment was marked, the Sheriff, as an officer of the Court, would naturally stay his hand and make some enquiry. But then let us come to the procedure under decrees. A decree need not be execu ted by the Sheriff, but may be executed by the plaintiff himself and his bailiffs. Now it cannot be said that it is not necessary to have a periodical enquiry as to the amount that may be due upon that decree, and that the defendant should not be asked to attend on the renewal hearing with a view to seeing that he is not unjustly treated by the plaintiff. I say it would be a monstrous thing to put into the hands of any pedlar or trader, no matter what his position, a decree against a defendant and enable him to have that in his pocket for six years without being subject to any revision, and that at the end of, say, five years he would be entitled to walk in and seize the goods of the defendant for the entire amount of the decree. Such a pro position, to my mind, could not for one moment be acceded to, and I am glad to have to say that some of the authorities who were consulted upon this Bill were in the first instance opposed to the renewal of decrees, but when they heard our statement as to what actuated us in favour of the renewals and the periodical revision of the sums due on these i decrees they did not press their objection further, we waived the renewal without