This Bill is promoted at the express wish of the Incorporated Law Society. It is empowered to increase the annual fees from £1 to £2. Apparently they have only power to charge poor solicitors £1 a year and this gives them power to charge them £2. There is another provision dealing with Section 1 (b) of the Solicitors Amendment Act, 1923, in which English and Scottish solicitors were allowed to practise here. The idea of putting that provision in the Act was on the understanding that there would be a reciprocal arrangement made between the two countries but that did not happen and now the Incorporated Law Society wishes the facility to be withdrawn. There is a provision in another section to cover the case of a person who has already applied for permission to practise here and he will be allowed to go ahead. I believe there is only one such application and it happened to be from a national here who qualified in England.
Solicitors (Amendment) Bill, 1947—Second and Subsequent Stages.
I do not think the Minister is quite correct. I thoroughly agree with him in regard to Section 1 of the Bill which provides for the increase in the registration fee but my view of the situation arising out of Section 2 is entirely different. I agree the provision was originally inserted in the 1923 Act on the assumption that there would be similarity between our law here and the law in Britain but that did not happen by reason of the Conveyancing Act of 1925 and the Companies Act of 1929 in England. The difference is so great that no English solicitor could be properly acquainted with our basic system here. The provision of this 1923 Act, so far as I am aware, has been availed of by only one solicitor. He was an Irish national who had qualified in England and desired to come back here and practise and he has already been admitted here. So far as this Act is concerned, therefore, it does not apply to him. Sub-section (2) of this section was introduced into the Bill for the purpose of dealing with a further application and I would like the Minister to assure me satisfactorily that he is inserting this sub-section at the request of the Incorporated Law Society. I understand that the position was that the Incorporated Law Society were not, at one time anyhow, favourably disposed towards this application. I would like to be certain that the person concerned for whom a specific exeception is made is an Irish national and that steps are being taken to ensure that he has a knowledge of the law as enacted and administered here and that we are putting in a specific saving clause for the purpose of getting something right that should be right and not for the purpose of permitting the entry of a person who should not be permitted to enter because of the old provision in the 1923 Act.
Senator Sweetman is quite right. The Incorporated Law Society are opposed to the one person who has applied and so far as they are concerned they have refused to consent to his admission as a solicitor in Ireland. He can now apply to the Chief Justice but the Incorporated Law Society are recommending the Chief Justice that this person should not be admitted. As the Minister told us, the provision was inserted in the 1923 Act on the understanding that a law would be passed in Britain giving similar rights to solicitors qualified in Ireland but that has not been done and there is no reason why we should continue to give these rights to English solicitors.
May I be permitted to ask the Minister for Justice with some hesitation, when it is proposed to introduce legislation on similar lines to that in operation in England in regard to solicitors' accounts. I need not go into details. It is legislation to protect clients against what, happily, very rarely occurs in this country.
Hear, hear.
I understand a Bill is in preparation for some time. Perhaps the Minister can say why it has been so long delayed.
I can tell the Senator.
I understand there is a Bill in contemplation which will be a kind of omnibus Bill, the provisions of which are obviously departmental rather than political. I wonder what stage it has reached in the preparation.
For example, the question of education for solicitors' apprentices needs considerable reform. Senator O'Dea will agree with me when I say that the present position is that a student of University College, Galway, pursuing a course of law and apprenticed to a solicitor in Galway, must come to Dublin to the Four Courts to lectures. The same thing applies to a student in Cork. There is a good deal to be said for compelling students to attend lectures but it does seem rather absurd that apprentices from Cork, where there is a university college, or from Galway where there is a university college, have to come all the way to Dublin to attend lectures at half-past four in the afternoon given on, perhaps, three or four afternoons in the week.
Twice a week.
It seems from the geographical point of view and from the point of view of convenience, and even from the point of view of education, quite an absurd arrangement. It is not relevant now but I merely rose to ask the Minister what state that general Reform Bill was in.
I believe as a matter of fact it is in the hands of the Official Draftsman.
This is the Second Stage of the Bill, Senator; only one speech is allowed.
It is an unopposed Bill. Give him a little latitude.
I omitted to state that, of course, there has been a big divergence between the law here and in Great Britain. That was another reason. I do not know if that is the whole reason or that they are as altruistic as all that, that the £2 was no consideration. I thought that was the main consideration. I quite omitted to refer to the other reason, that there has been a divergence.
In regard to this other solicitor, I know the provision was inserted with the approval of the Incorporated Law Society. They are opposed to his admission, but they approve of the provision inasmuch as they do not want to prejudice his case before the Chief Justice. I understand they want to object, but they want to leave it in the Bill so that there will not be any legal obstacles to his admission if it is decided by the Chief Justice to admit him. They were consulted about it and, on that understanding, they approved. It would make it impossible for him to come in if that is not done.
You are leaving a discretion with the Chief Justice?
It can go on its merits now but there will be no legal obstacle to his being admitted. If we pass the Bill in the way in which it was, there will be no case to go to the Chief Justice at all.
As to the other Bill, that has been a very difficult Bill and I do not think all the blame has been on the Government side. There were a lot of interviews with the Department. I think I met the Incorporated Law Society.
I did not suggest that.
I want to explain that for four years we have had it in hands and it is in a very advanced stage now. I think the last difficulty has nearly been surmounted, so I suppose shortly, not earlier than January, I should say, the Bill will be ready.
Which week in January?