——I will instance how this thing can happen. On the opening equity day Cork Circuit Court can have 30 applications for payment out of court to minors who want money for specific purposes before attaining full age, or having attained full age, and then there may also be licensing applications which, as the Deputy knows, occupy only a few minutes in court.
There are other matters of a similar nature which mean that in the short hours of sitting, from 10.30 to 1 and from 2.30 to 5 as a rule, one has as many as 50 matters a day, at least in the court with which I am associated. I acted in this capacity myself and I did not consider myself adequately paid for the services I gave to the State and now that I am no longer in that position I may speak on behalf of the people who are doing that work now.
As I have mentioned the payment of moneys in Circuit Court offices, I might mention to the Minister a thing which I know has been lying unattended for many years since the British time. In almost every Circuit Court office throughout the country there are thousands of pounds lying in endowment accounts. Nobody knows who the beneficiaries are, where they have gone to or whether they will ever claim it. These moneys are lying; there to the credit only of a name. Therefore I would ask the Minister to have the accumulation of these moneys examined to see if he could conduct some kind of investigation into who the people are who are entitled to them and, if they are not found after a certain period, the moneys should be put to better use. I am sure that the Minister will find that what I said is correct and that there are several thousand pounds in every Circuit Court office in the country.
There is one other officer in the service of the court to whom I should like to refer. He is often spoken of in rather contemptuous terms and it is for that reason that I specifically advocate his case on this Estimate. I refer to the court messenger or what he is sometimes called the court bailiff. These men perform very distasteful duties and the Minister must know that their salaries are certainly a disgrace to the nation they serve. Everybody knows that at some stage in the course of the administration of justice execution orders must be carried out on unfortunate defendants. It is only just that that should be done; otherwise people to whom money is owed would never get it. These court messengers are sent after the unfortunate defendant who has defaulted and they must either call week after week to collect a shilling or go to the extreme of putting a man's furniture out on the street in the case of an ejectment. It is only by these means that the demands of the law will be finally met and satisfied. Often these men must work for as little as 10/- a day and if the Minister has not taken them into consideration now I would ask that something should be done for them in his reorganisation scheme.
As far as the District Court is concerned, the Minister has informed us that a scheme which will better the conditions of the staffs in District Court offices will come before us by way of legislation and therefore I will get an adequate opportunity of putting my views before the Minister then.
The last time I spoke on this Estimate I also advocated that some effective system for free legal aid for poor persons should be started in this country. In England they have a very generous Act from the point of view of the types of people and the types of cases that are met by free legal aid.
In this country, it is limited to cases of murder, and I suggest that the Minister should take immediate action to see whether he could not extend, to some extent at least, the scope of free legal aid in this country. I have seen people accused of crime, whether serious or otherwise, coming into court and listening to a long list of indictments. Anybody who has listened to these indictments knows that it is difficult for even the experienced practitioner to differentiate between the various forms of indictment referring to a single criminal act. These people, when unrepresented, plead guilty, parrot-like, to every indictment on the sheet, whereas, in many cases, they may not be guilty at all. The judges, of course, have regard to the fact that they are not professionally represented but I suggest that, if they were, that if they could afford to employ a solicitor or solicitor and counsel, in many cases these people might be able to prove, if not that they were innocent, that there was some defect in the indictment, which facility, at present, is reserved for the man who can afford to employ solicitor and counsel. I know that the Minister will say that it is difficult to know where to stop, but I suggest that there are limited cases which the Minister could investigate and have remedied.
With regard to young people detained in Borstal institutions, there is, at present, a very competent visiting committee in connection with the Borstal institution in Clonmel, or wherever the institution is now. A similar committee existed in Cork when the Borstal institution was situated there. These people, I am told, do their best, not only to rehabilitate these young offenders in respect of life later on, but in many cases procure positions for them, suited to whatever trade they may have learned before entering the institution or in the institution. It is very difficult for these boys to find work outside. The fathers often would be in a position to procure work for them, but, when such work is found, the Borstal authorities serve on the prospective employer a dossier on foot of which the employer must undertake to look after the wellbeing of the released subject, if I may so describe him.
I suggest that, in certain cases, where the parents or guardians of such a youngster in a Borstal institution can show to the Minister's satisfaction that they are in a position, if the youngster were at home, to procure work for him, that boy might be released for a defined period, and, if the work was not found for him in that period, the period of release could be terminated. I know that a difficulty has arisen in at least one case to my knowledge, a case in which a father said: "If I had my boy at home, I could get work for him but, while he is in the Borstal institution and the necessity arises for a guarantee by the employer, I am afraid I will not be able to get any work for him."
Another hardy annual which I want to bring to the Minister's attention is the question of expenses for jurors. I mention that matter in particular in so far as it affects my own county and city. In Cork, as I have often said here, the borough boundary is very restricted. The valuations about it are not as high as the valuations in Dublin, and we, therefore, find the same men serving on juries repeatedly because the scope is so limited. Men who served last year during the autumn sessions find, when the next autumn sessions come along, that they are called on again for jury service. It is a severe hardship on many of these men, not so much on men who have their own successful businesses, but on tradesmen and others who are living in houses with valuations sufficiently high to qualify them for jury service and who must attend the court and serve on the jury at their own expense. If the Minister is not prepared to provide expenses for all jurors, I suggest that, in particular cases, such as cases where tradesmen lose wages by reason of jury service, some provision should be made.
With regard to County Cork, everybody known it is the largest county in Ireland and many of the Deputies opposite, when they went to Cork in connection with the West Cork byelection, found, when they reached Cork, that they had only got half-way to the point where they were to speak. Many Deputies on the opposite side expressed their amazement at this fact to me. The city is the only place where the criminal sessions of the Circuit Court are held and jurors are called upon from all over the county. They come from as far west as Castletownbere, which is something like 80 to 100 miles distant from the city. When they come up for service, even though it is a matter of only one day's court, it means at least three days, and in many cases the best part of a week. These men are mostly poor farmers who can ill afford to lose the time lost in attending court or the alternative of a £3 fine. The fine of £3 does not relate only to attendance on the first day, because the judge has power to impose that fine for every day on which the juror fails to put in an appearance. That it is seldom done, I do not deny, but the danger is there and, in these two cases, the cases of tradesmen who lose work by reason of jury service and the cases of poor farmers who have to come unusually long distances, I think there is a strong orgument for the provision of adequate compensation or expenses. There is another case which I intended to put before the Minister but I think I will wait and have it dealt with by private treaty later on.
With regard to the High Court on circuit, for some time there has been an agitation in Cork that the magnitude of the business in the Circuit Court warrants a permanent High Court sitting in Cork. That would probably be asking a lot but, as the Minister knows, the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court in civil cases is only £300 and, in very many cases, particularly cases of car accidents, runningdown cases, as they are generally known, it is almost impossible for the plaintiff to keep his estimated damages within that limit. Therefore, if he wants to claim what he expects to get in court, he must of necessity come straight to the High Court. As everybody knows, it is rather difficult in a running-down action to say who will be the winner or loser. Therefore, in many cases in Cork, to my own knowledge, plaintiffs have restricted the amount of their claim to £300 in order to avoid the huge expense of bringing witnesses and of going themselves to Dublin.
In many cases people who have been successful in getting the full £300 under the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court, feel that if they had gone to Dublin they would have got a great deal more. Therefore, I would suggest that the Minister should examine the possibility of providing, if not a permanent High Court in the City of Cork, at least more frequent sittings of the High Court on circuit.
The present system, satisfactory though it may be, has a great deal of limitations. There is one limitation which is general throughout the country. The High Court goes on circuit in March and July. When cases are decided in July, the appellant or respondent has an unduly long time to wait until the following March before his case will be decided on appeal. On the other hand, in July the judges find that the volume of business is almost one-quarter of what it had been in the previous term.
Therefore, I would suggest to the Minister that he should examine the position to see whether or not he could space the sittings of the High Court on circuit more evenly over the whole year. If the July sittings are maintained, I suggest that the March sitting should be brought forward by a month or two.
I wish now to refer to the land registry staff. The Minister stated, and we all welcome the statement, that at last something has been done to deal with the volume of arrears in the land registry. He has appointed four, if not five, officers, who are legally qualified, to deal with these arrears. I would make a bet here and now that these officers will be temporary as long as they hold the positions. They will never be able to overtake the arrears or, if they do, they will find that four extra staff will be required to keep abreast of the work when the arrears have been dealt with. I suggest that these officers should be made permanent here and now. It is very unfair to take a person, who may not have a very good practice, out of his profession and give him a temporary position for three, five or seven years and at the end of that time to say: "Thank you very much. You have done what we asked you. Now you can go back to your profession." As everyone knows, it is very difficult for a lawyer to take up again where he left off.
I would, therefore, suggest to the Minister that he should make these officers permanent when he is sure that they are qualified for the work for which they have been appointed and also to give them a salary commensurate with their qualifications. I understand that at present their salary is something like £8 a week. These men and women have spent a lot on their education. They have staked all on following a legal career. The paltry salary of £8 a week is very poor compensation for work in such a highly technical occupation as examining land registry titles. I would ask the Minister to investigate the matter with a view to seeing if he could make these officers permanent at an early date and to review their salary scales.
I do not intend to follow the line of some of the other speakers but I do not think I could let Deputy Peadar Cowan get away with his last remark. This repeated blowing about the air of freedom we now breathe is about played out at this stage. There was always freedom in this country, thanks be to God. There is no extra freedom here now. People have begun to realise that the present Government's predecessors worked along the lines that every other Party in the country has now adopted. Parties in the country did not see eye to eye with them. Certain people went off the rails more than others. They were brought back on the rails again. There is no greater air of freedom here now except that people who tried to flout the authority during the previous Government's administration are now following the line of the average nationally minded citizen in bringing the country to the state of prosperity and national integrity that it deserves.
Deputy Peadar Cowan also referred to the present Minister's humane attitude in regard to prisoners. I entirely endorse what he said. I do not think the Minister will deny that his predecessor also had a humane outlook in regard to prisoners. As long as I can remember, there has been a system of mitigation of sentences and fines in the Department of Justice. I do not know how long the Petitions Section has been in operation but it was certainly in existence for many years before the term of the present Minister.
That section worked to a set system which was very fair and which operated very much in favour of the convicted person. A judge, having found a man guilty of a crime, and having felt that he must sentence him, imposed a term of imprisonment which fitted the crime, as the lyric writer, Gilbert, would say. If that man, or his relatives or friends, petitioned the Department of Justice, the machinery was set in motion and I am sure that has been done often during the present Minister's term of office. The Garda are asked for a report. The judge or justice is asked for a report. When the Minister has got all the reports and has evidence, which was not admissible in the courts, as to the background of the prisoner and, possibly, other extraneous matters, he is in a much better position to decide whether or not the judge had been a bit too hard, or possibly too lenient, with the accused. In many cases the judge admits that certain facts which would not be relevant as legal evidence have come to his knowledge and he writes to the Department, I am sure, to that effect. It was in such circumstances that the Minister's predecessor did release prisoners before the expiration of their sentences. If that procedure has been departed from, I would ask the Minister to tread carefully.
Every Minister for Justice, every judge on the Bench, must be assumed to be a humane man. He would not be fit to hold his office if he were not prepared to examine the merits of a hard case, even when sentence has been pronounced, to examine the case having regard to the history of the imprisoned person and his family circumstances. I am sure the Minister would be the last to say that, in the matter of being fair to imprisoned persons, he has adopted any better course than his predecessor adopted in his term of office.