The Gazette 1958-61

incubus militating against the prompt and efficient discharge of legal business. Most sections of the Irish community—farming and business— have en deavoured to gear their own work so as to produce maximum efficiency. They find it difficult to under stand why legal transactions move at such a dilatory pace. Besides being an irritant to the general public the delays which arise from cumbersome procedure occasion financial loss to the legal profession. The solicitor is paid to bring a transaction to a con clusion. It is in his personal interest to perform his work expeditiously. The statutory rules of procedure which relate to litigation and title are not the only aspect of our legislation which need to be revised if legislation is to keep abreast of the ever-developing outlook, civilisation and business requirements of our nation. Some of our legislation is so antiquated and out of harmony with present day requirements as to be a possible source for chicanery. Much of it has been enacted to meet temporary necessities and overcome temporary difficulties. No blame for this unsatis factory state of affairs rests with our Government nor with the Department of Justice. In a democratic community, where the Government is inundated with a maze of problems requiring legislation, it is human and natural that priority will be given to the demands of the most vocal sections of the com munity. In other countries there is a law reform committee of experienced practical lawyers who keep the Government advised on laws that need amendment or consolidation so that the evolution of legislation may keep pace with the constantly changing nature of the country's development and obviate injustice. Any expense incurred by the establishment of such a law reform committee would not be more than a very small fraction of the loss in money and time at present caused to the general public by the existence of archaic laws and cumber some procedure. Much of the statute law still applying to this country was passed at a time when we were not a free nation and does not make provision for the altered social order which ensued from our libera tion. We are young as a free nation, but we boast an ancient culture, tradition and civilisation innate in our people and of which we are proud. The laws under which a nation lives should be a reflection of the public conscience of the people and should contribute to the nation's moral and spiritual strength. The respect for justice under law is vital and abiding in a country only when the roots of the laws are grounded on the traditions of social justice, ethics and philosophy and indigenous to that country. Can we truthfully say that our laws are an

example of our philosophy and way of life and that they reflect our national culture and tradition ? Are they frequently a pale reflection of something found suitable to our neighbouring country where social and economic life are completely different ? Does far too much of our legislation continue unamended since it was passed by an English Parliament to suit different circumstances -in our country ? Is too much ofwhat has been amended in the nature of patchwork without adequate order or system and badly in need of proper codification ? Those are deep and involved questions, but they go to the roots of our national life. They could be properly answered only by people skilled in jurisprudence who have a wide practical experience in the application of our laws. It would be unfair and unreasonable to expect any Govern ment or even any Government department whose lawyers would not have an extensive practical experience to deal with them efficiently. There is a legal maxim which says that " ignorance of the law is no excuse ". This dictum is rather hard on lay men and lawyers alike in so far as certain branches of our law are concerned, which, owing to lack of consolidation are a morass lacking unifying principles and making it impossible for any lawyer to express a confident opinion as to the legal position regarding many matters of every day occur rence. No one can give a, satisfactory estimate of the amount of public money that is wasted by this unnecessary complexity occasioned by the lack of consolidation in some branches of our legislation. It must certainly be enormous. To exemplify my point, I shall take just one instance of the grave difficulties which arise from having a patchwork legislation superimposed on old statutes and statutory orders which were handed down to us since the days of English rule in this country, namely, the law relating to local govern ment. In one case involving a claim against a local authority the High Court judge in the course of his judgment stated :— " Both parties to the action were bewildered at the trial in their efforts to discover and interpret the actual laws in force in the years 1942 and 1946 though the subject matter is quite simple and easily regulated ". A more clear and impartial condemnation than is exemplified by these words it would be difficult to get. If a local authority wishes to have a lawful exercise of its powers relating to any of its employees it must first consider whether under the various statutes and statutory orders the employee is " per manent " ; " casual " ; " temporary " or " quasi- permanent ". All these terms are referred to in various local government acts and orders as being distinct classes of employees ; but nowhere in the vast maze of local government legislation can one J