THE COST OF LITIGATION [To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.]
SIR,—A man is no more on oath in a post-prandial speech than in a lapidary inscription. Perhaps, therefore, a passage in the Lord Chancellor's speech at the Mansion House banquet on July 5th—in which there was much sancte et sapienter delivered—need not be taken as an official defence of dear law. " Something was to be said for not making law too cheap so as to prevent persons rushing to Court on the slightest provo- cation . . . It was not a bad thing that the fear of costs should deter vexatious litigation " (the Times). But it deters righteous litigation : hundreds of people at this moment will not assert their just rights because of the initial taxes on justice, and if litigation turns out to be " vexatious," we lawyers ought to be ashamed of ourselves if we cannot devise a penalty. No doubt some officials would have a little more trouble, but does that matter ?
Much fine wit has been poured out on " cheap " law, but is not the hourly denial of justice due to the want of it, the only real grievance under which the people of this country still labour, comparable with the great abuses swept away by the Civil War, the Revolution, the Corn Laws, the Emanci- pation Acts, &c. ? Some would have supposed that a Labour Government would .,be favourable to .the removal of all obstacles to the elementary; right of " the people " to- seek legal justice,but it is said that the Treasury insists on the last farthing in fees. The man ,who gives the people cheap law will be as immortal as he who gave them cheap bread.=
I am, Sir, &c., A BARRISTER.. [We deal with the above subject in a leading article.— En. Spectator.]
Previous page
