'The magisterial revolt against the [Money Payments (Justices' Procedure) JAct, which came into force January 1, commenced on the very next day, and most emphatically in HLiverpool, where Mr. R, J. Ward, 0 magistrate, discharged thirteen men, convicted "of drunkenness, with a feaution, In doing so he' said "AS magistrates we have no option but to discharge the prisoners under this stupid Act. What would be the sense fof imposing fines of five shillings if it Is going to cost the community £2 {to collect each one?" The Act requires that if a fine is unpaid inquiries, which might cost as much as £2, would have to be made into the person's home life and income. JObviously the magistrate did not Jearry out his duty. If he could conviet, and on his own statement could, then it was his duly to inflict the appropriate fine, leaving the question of its collection to the pr per authorities and procedure. 'Thiit Mr. Ward did not do, but before the 'Act had been put to any real test hho decided that it is unworkable, though probably if he had the fines of £2, such as he suggested would have been proper, most, if not fall of them would have' been' imm diately paid. If magistrates In courts of Petty Session are to be allowed 19 decide what laws are workable and what are not, things will have come fo @ pretty pass in Britain, and the Jsooner such gentlemen have thei: eccentricities curbed the better for the administration of justice, This 1 all the more apparent when the secretary of the Magistrates' Associa ition states that magistrates as a whole welcomed the Act, expressing, the opinion that it meant' more wone [for the magistrate's clerk, but that Several towns had already' appointed their own inquiry ofoers.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.