The London Legal System in 1900: County Courts

Arthur H. Beavan, while discussing London's legal system in Imperial London, first published in 1901, had this to say about County Courts:

Antiques from London on eBay

925 Sterling Silver London Spoon with Crest Not Scrap
13 Apr 2011 at 9:51am
US $71.10
End Date: Tuesday Feb-07-2012 6:56:59 PST
Buy It Now for only: US $71.10
Buy it now | Add to watch list
SILVER FIDDLE PATTERN SERVING SPOON ENGLISH LONDON 1796
20 Oct 2009 at 8:45am
US $110.00
End Date: Tuesday Feb-07-2012 5:50:40 PST
Buy It Now for only: US $110.00
Buy it now | Add to watch list

County Courts, like the poor, are of a retiring disposition, and are generally located in remote and inaccessible quarters of London.

Those assigned to Bloomsbury, Marylebone, Shoreditch, and Westminster are, it is true, in main thoroughfares, but they are quite inconspicuous; and the Brompton Court resembles a suburban villa, nestling as it does amongst trees and gardens in the semi-ruralness of Whitehead's Grove, Chelsea.

A thoroughly business atmosphere pervades these Courts; there is no romance, or material for romance, about them.

To each is attached a matter-of-fact office where debts can be paid at the counter, or summonses be obtained against reluctant debtors, while the sorely­tired clerks are sparing of words, but what they do say is to the point.

The arrangement of the Courts themselves is rather peculiar.

I will take the one at Brompton as typical.

There is a bench with the Royal arms above, and His Honour the Judge presides in gown and wig, but in an informal manner, more like an old friend called in to decide upon some family dispute than a Rhadamanthus whose decree may not be questioned.

On each side of him, on a level with his desk, are railed stands for plaintiff and defendant, whence they converse with the occupant of the bench.

On his left is the jury-box, in use when any special case is tried by that fundamental principle of the British constitution.

There is no well in these Courts, and solicitors, together with an occasional sprinkling of counsel in stuff gowns, face the bench in front of the general public, who occupy the body of the Court.

Gallery there is none, but along the walls right and left of the Judge, like the sheep and goats in the parable, are ranged the plaintiffs and defendants and their supporters, wisely kept apart until their little differences are arranged.

There are plenty of obliging officials to direct interested parties where to go and what to do, and this is no sinecure, as principals and witnesses get hopelessly bewildered, and wander about in all directions.

The audience, as a rule, is shabbily dressed, and the large rooms, for they are nothing else, bear a striking resemblance, especially in an olfactory sense, to a second-hand clothes shop.

Students of one phase of human nature would do well to watch the proceedings in a County Court.

Those relating to debt - small amounts owing to struggling tradesmen, arrears of rent, money lent, and all thousand-and-one complications arising from the inability of a large class of the community to make both ends meet - are doubtless sordid.

In these cases, His Honour invariably takes account of the defendant's means; and the greatest mistake a debtor, honest or otherwise, can make, is to appear before him clad in a suit of brand-new clothes, and sporting what appears to be a gold watch and chain, or with costly rings on his or her fingers.

The Judge at Southwark Court once observed to a creditor, "I see that when the debtor wrote to you about a loan, he put an important-looking crest on his notepaper, but when he writes to me saying he can't pay, he leaves the crest off."

But County Court Judges have to decide all kinds of matters besides debt summonses; and amusing episodes sometimes occur which materially relieve the monotony of their occupation.

I take a few cases at random.

In the Westminster Court, for instance, a question of privilege from arrest, arose.

Two tradesmen sued a gentleman in the Consular Service, for money owing, who set up as a defence that he was Secretary to a Legation, and so could not be arrested.

He could only prove that he was a Vice-Consul; and as the law stands, though a Foreign Secretary of Legation is privileged from arrest, a Vice-Consul is not, he was ordered to pay £4 a month on each summons, and in the event of non-compliance, to be subjected to committal.

At the Clerkenwell Court, a very obvious joke provoked the usual "shouts of laughter."

A lady claimed damages from a dye-works to which she had sent a jacket to be cleaned, instead of which the people had dyed it coal-black.

The defendant's counsel asked the plaintiff if it was not a fact that she wanted the garment for a funeral.

"No," said the lady indignantly, "I would not want to dye for a funeral."

Of course this encouraged the man of law to suggest that it would be necessary for some one to perform that operation, or there would be no raison d'etre for the funeral.

Southwark is notorious for the good things that emanate from its Judge.

A defendant once set up such a palpably untrue defence that His Honour remarked, "I don't want to describe you by a very little word which means very much, but I will be content with saying that if I saw you standing between Ananias and Sapphira I should recognize you as one of the family."

Sometimes dressmaking cases come into Court, when there is great fun at Southwark.

Not very long ago, a lady was sued because she declined to pay for a dress which she alleged did not fit.

The plaintiff said she had thrice altered the garment, but as the defendant persisted in wearing different corsets each time, it was not much good.

After much had been said on both sides, His Honour suggested that the parties should retire and try the dress on to settle the dispute; so in order not to disturb the barristers, they were ushered into his own room.

When they reappeared it was seen that some alterations might be made with advantage, and the defendant, putting her fingers down the neck of the dress, invited Mr. Farmer, the chief clerk, to feel for himself that something was wrong.

However, he declined, saying, "No, I would rather not, thank you, ma'am;" and the Judge gave judgment for the plaintifff.

Legal recovery of money owing, presumably the chief raison d'etre of County Courts, is an unsatisfactory process at best.

To the wily debtor it has few terrors, because he can always delay, and altogether evade the serving of the summons, and even if run to earth and forced to appear in Court, there are many expedients by which he can postpone proceedings, while should a judgment be actually obtained against him, there is no guarantee that he would continue to pay the instalments ordered to be paid, or that he might not vanish immediately liquidation of the debt was insisted upon.

Next: London's legal system in 1900: Solicitors' Fees