The Southern Cross PUBLISHED WEEKLY. Invercargill, Saturday, April 21. CONCERNING ARBITRATION.

Southern Cross, Volume 2, Issue 3, 21 April 1894, Page 8

The Southern Cross PUBLISHED WEEKLY. Invercargill, Saturday, April 21. CONCERNING ARBITRATION.

The world, is daily growing more impatient of the middleman. He is regarded as the Jonah of the modern ship of State, wanting whom the vessel will experience immediate relief from many of the difficulties that now beset her. This feeling of impatience is exhibited in all grades of society. With the keen competition that obtains in every department of life—commercial, industrial and professional —it is recognised that there is no place for those who, in a sense, act as drags on the wheels of progress.

As with individuals,so with methods o£ procedure. Let it be shown that these are needlessly cumbersome or expensive, and they at once become fair objects of attack by the social reformer. It has long been admitted, even by many members of the legal profession itself, that there is great need for reform in modern law processes, particularly on the civil side of court work. Much has, it is true, been done of late years (and in many cases at the suggestion of the profession) in the direction of simplification, but much yet remains' to be accomplished. As things are at present a man may succeed in getting justice, but at the same time he runs great risk of being ruined in the process. A stout heart and deep purse must be his who ventures into court with a case in which the issues are at all involved or complicated. His Honour Mr Justice Richmond used a homely but forcible illustration the other day in speaking of the LicensingAct. To enter upon a study of its provisions was, he said, analogous to the cutting of a track "in a dense forest. So, in many cases, with the ordinary litigant. He little knows what lies before him before the end is reached. The great libel action of Speight v. The Age is an object lesson on this point, and so are others that might be cited. Various sugges-

'tions.have been made to deal with the evil indicated. The establishment of arbitration courts is one that has received a good deal of attention. These are actually at work in various places- —notably in the very heart of the commercial world itself—London. How the system works has been well told by a late visitor to our colony, Mr Henry Clarke, a member of the Corporation of the City of London, representative of the City on the London County Council, and the author of the scheme which brought the London Chamber of Arbitration into being. We. cannot do better than give Mr Clarke’s exposition of the procedure followed, as elicited in an interview with a reporter.' He said : —“We place before the parties the choice of either one, two or three arbitrators. If the latter course is accepted, then we made it imperative that the majority should rule. How are the arbitrators appointed P Well, I will tell you. We asked each trade or profession to propose the names of some suitable persons to be appointed or placed on the official list as arbitrators. Then these propositions wei’e placed before the sub-com-mittees of the Chamber of Commerce having a knowledge of the particular trades, with the result that the best men were recommended for appointment. , In London they are appointed by the Corporation, but in other centres of trade the whole matter rests with the Chamber of Commerce. There are now 1,100 on the printed list from which the disputants can select. You will note that Mr A. Sclanders is the arbitrator on the questions of New Zealand wool. Legal assistance can be obtained if required, but notice must be given by the one employing legal assistance to the other side, so that the option is "offered to them also. A bond of submission is required, and then if after the disputants have agreed to refer their case one of them desires to withdrew, the case will still go on in his absence. The award of the arbitrator or arbitrators is equal to a rule of Court, and is enforced by law, if necessary. The Court in London sits every day, except Christmas Day, Good Friday, and Bank holidays, and there is no Long Vacation. The method of procedure is simple. The disputants repair to the Guildhall, where they sigma form of submission. They are then asked by the Registrar whether they wish to have the case decided by one arbitrator, two and an umpire, or three. Then the case is heard, no strangers being present. No forensic display of eloquence is allowed, the Court being strictly one of business. Then, when the case is concluded, the arbitrator’s award is drawn up. As regards the costs, I may tell you that the average fees do not exceed from £5 to £6 per case, and that the time occupied between the lodging of the suhqiission by the parties and the delivery of the award has never exceeded fifteen days.” Mr 'Clarke added that the scheme worked excellently, and expressed his confident belief that these chambers of arbitration would ere long be in vogue in every part of the Empire. So mote it be ! The system has everything—cheapness, rapidity, and certainty—to recommend it, and it is well worthy of a trial in New Zealand, whose people, whatever their faults, cannot be charged with a disposition to follow the paths beaten smooth by the footsteps of their fathers.