IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT 3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 Ui liii 
 
 2.0 
 
 us I 
 
 U 
 
 140 
 
 1.8 
 
 
 1.25 1.4 1.6 
 
 
 .„ 6" 
 
 ► 
 
 Va 
 
 vl 
 
 "-} 
 
 
 
 ^^ '^\^ 
 
 '"^J" 
 '> 
 
 Phott^phic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^<i> 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WiBbliK.N.Y. i45S0 
 
 (716) 8734503 
 

 CIHM/ICMH 
 Microfiche 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical IVIicroreproductions/ Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
 1 
 
 s 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Notas tachniquas at bibliographiques 
 
 The Instituta has attamptad to obtain the bast 
 original copy available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographicaily unique, 
 which may altar any of t^le images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 rr^ Coloured covers/ 
 
 I ^1 Couverture de couleur 
 
 r~n Covers damaged/ 
 
 Couverture endommagie 
 
 rn Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 I I Couverture restaurie et/ou peilicui^e 
 
 n Cover title missing/ 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 □ Coloured maps/ 
 Cartes giographiques en couleur 
 
 D 
 
 n 
 
 n 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 r~~| Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 
 Planches et/cu illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reiii avec d'autres documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La re iiure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distorsion le long de la marge int^rieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissain dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque ceia Atait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas iti filmies. 
 
 /* dditional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppldmentaires; 
 
 L'institu* a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplairs 
 qii'il lui a eti possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet excmplaire qui sont peut-^t/e uniques du 
 point de vue bibliograpiiique, qui peuvent modifier 
 una imege reproduite. ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la mithode normale de filmage 
 sont indiqu^n ci-dessous. 
 
 □ Coiour«d pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 □ Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommag^es 
 
 I I Pages restced and/or laminated/ 
 
 Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculies 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages decolorizes, tacheties ou piquees 
 
 □ Pages detached/ 
 Pages ditachees 
 
 r~^Showthrough/ 
 I I Transparence 
 
 ["~n Quality of print varies/ 
 
 D 
 
 Quality indgale de I'impression 
 
 Includes supplementary material/ 
 Comprend du materiel supplementaire 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seuie Edition disponible 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata. une pelure, 
 etc.. cnt iii fiirt.^es d nouveau de facon a 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiqu^ ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 14X 18X 22X 
 
 y 
 
 26X 
 
 30X 
 
 UA 
 
 IDA 
 
 ^A 
 
 ^4A 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
The copy filmed here hes been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 L'exemplaira fiim^ fut reproduit grdce A l« 
 g^nirositA de: 
 
 Archives of Ontario 
 Toronto 
 
 The Images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Archives of Ontario 
 Toronto 
 
 Les images suivantes ont AtA reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin. compte tenu de la condition ot 
 de la neneti de I'exemplaire filmi, st en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover whan appropriate. All 
 other original copies are *ilmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres* 
 sion. and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol —^(meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Les exempiaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprim^ sont filmis en commencant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 derniire page qui compone une empreinte 
 d'Impreasion ou d 'illustration, soit par ie second 
 plat, salon le cas. Tous les autras exempiaires 
 originaux sont filmte en commenpant par la 
 premiere page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la derniire page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 Un des symboles 3uivants apparaitra sur la 
 demiire image de cheque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symboie •»»• signifie "A SUIVRE", le 
 symbols V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be 'iimed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure arc filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand comer, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tablasux. etc., peuvent etre 
 film^s (k des taux de reduction dif fdrents. 
 Lorsque le document est * o grand pour etre 
 reproduit en un seul clic> ' est filmd A partir 
 da Tangle sup^rieur gau de gauche d droits. 
 et de haut en bas, en prendnt le nombre 
 d'images nicessaire. Las diagrammea suivants 
 illustrent la m^thode. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 

 p- j , 
 
 
 .-( 
 
 •I 
 
 
 
 ■■] 
 
 /tr/^'f 
 
 
 ^ --A. 
 
 
 "ar 
 
 
 
 
 -■■■^ 
 
 HO>*. ATTCttlKEY^OENEirAL MOWAt 
 
 ■--!/ 
 
 
 ^r6J'}tS«ttle^ 
 
 "^"V 
 
 r-,; 
 
 -AKI>- 
 
 a 
 
 =3=a: 
 
 I' 
 
 
 y^ 
 
 ■Bt-^ 
 
 r 
 
 Oausiiig him a loss of $18,947.19 in fifC^i^ri : 
 l.yeaps for.his t^itieHty'in eJtpositig acts, sq 
 unliaWfal, committed by some members of 
 the LegeTI Prpf^^ioD* that \\ sipnilar aet3 
 were committed by any other class of the 
 community, they wpuld be seva^ly punished 
 by the Strong arm of ithe law. 
 
 ; j^) i "ir « r i T i S'j"f'i i n'i!li^ri i v 
 
 r f- .:■ 
 
 ^1 
 
 1 h 
 
 'K- 
 
,„'' 
 
l-'^- 
 
 *:■* 
 
 '.' IV 
 
 Hon. Attorney-General Mowat, occasioned all the 
 losses sustained by Sheriffs, on the non-serving of 
 Writs of Summons and other Process since 1874, as 
 shown by the following facts :— 
 
 1 St. The first session of the first ParUament of Upper 
 Canada, met at Niagara on the 17th of September, 1792, 
 and prorogued on the 15th of October following. 
 
 John Graves, Simcoe, was Lieutenant- Governer : 
 
 From 1792 to 1822 Sheriffs served all Process, and 
 were paid by salary. 
 
 The second session of the eighth Parliament of Upper 
 Canada, met at York, now Toronto, on the 21st day of 
 November, 1821, and prorogued on the 17th January, 1822. 
 Sir Perigrine Maitland, K. C. B., was Lieutenant-Governor : 
 
 Tn this session an act entitled "An act to repeal part 
 of, and amend the law now in force respecting the practise 
 of Her Majesty's Court of King's Bench in this Province 
 was passed. In Section 45 of the Act, authority is given 
 the Judges to establish fees to be taken by all officers of 
 the Court." 
 
 In the same session an act entitled "An act to reduce 
 into one act, the several laws now in force establishing 
 district courts, and regulating the practice thereof ; and also 
 to extend the powers of said District Courts, was passed. 
 Section 27 reads as follows : "And be it further enacted 
 by the authority aforesaid." That it shall and may be lawful 
 for the persons hereinafter named to demand and receive 
 the following fees. Then follows a table of fees for Judge, 
 Commissioner, Attorney, Sheriff, Clerk and Crier. 
 
 Both acts passed January 17th, 1822. 
 
 Since 17th January, 1822, Lawyers have been paid by 
 fees for issuing all writs and other Process out of the High 
 Court of Justice and County Court. Sheriffs have been paid 
 by fees for serving all Writs and other Process issued out oj 
 the said Courts requiring a personal or substitutional service. 
 
 The following is the tariff of fees for issuing and serving 
 Writs of Summons in the High Court of Justice and County 
 Court, as given to me by Inspector Winchester in 1885. 
 
 What mockery it was to give the Sheriffs the tariff, 
 while the Lawyers pocketed the fees. ' 
 
\' 
 
 Ki 
 
 "7^- 
 
 '.■^A 
 
 ATTORNEY S FHKS FOR 
 ISSUING. 
 
 Instructions 
 
 Summons 
 
 Special Endorsement . 
 Copy ofWrit, including 
 
 all notice 
 
 Two Notices allowed 
 
 in County Court. .. 
 
 suf'r 
 
 COUNTY 
 
 COURT. 
 
 COURT. 
 
 $cts. 
 
 $ cts. 
 
 3 oo 
 
 2 oo 
 
 2 oo 
 
 I oo 
 
 I oo 
 
 75 
 
 I CO 
 
 o 50 
 
 o oo 
 
 50 
 
 $7 oo 
 
 $4 75 
 
 SHERIFFS FEES FOR 
 SERVING. 
 
 Receiving and Filing 
 Serving each Defendant 
 Drawing Affidavit. 
 
 Commissioner 
 
 Return 
 
 sup'r 
 
 COURT. 
 
 $ 
 
 cts. 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 I 
 
 so 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 50 
 
 $2 
 
 70 
 
 COUNTY 
 COURT. 
 
 $ Cts. 
 
 10 
 
 1 00 
 
 o 30 
 
 $1 55 
 
 There is another tariff for issuing and serving Subpoenas. 
 
 I gave the following decisions of the Courts in proof that 
 the serving of Writs of Summons and all other papers issued 
 out of the High Court of Justice, or County Court, requiring 
 a personal or substitutional service, should be served by a 
 Sheriff or his officers : 
 
 1st — Landrigan vs. Cullahin. 
 
 "Service ''not having been made by a Sheriff or his 
 officer the Court set "the service aside for irregularity, with 
 costs," vide Hon. J. H. Cameron, digest. 
 
 2nd — Whitehead vs. Fothergill <fc Brown, 1, Old 
 Series of Drapers' Reports, page 200. * 
 
 "The Court set aside the service of the Process in this 
 "cause because it had beer, served by a person not a Sheriff's 
 "officer. The Statute 2, George IV., Chap. 1, directs that 
 "the Process shall be served by the S.^eriff, his Deputy or 
 "his lawful Bailiff. In this case the service had been made 
 "by a clerk of the Plaintiff." 
 
 '^Button vs. Ashford. 
 
 "A Writ Ga Sae, not bailable, must be served by the 
 "Sheriff or his officers though the Deputy-Sheriff be a party 
 "to the suit ; 3, Old Series, Drapers' Keports, page 302. The 
 "Writ bailable, was in this cause directed to the Sheriff, but 
 "served by the Coroner without any authority from the 
 "Sheriff, probably conceiving this the more proper way of 
 "making the service. Motion made to set the sej^'vice aside ; 
 "Boswell for Plaintiff, Whitehead for Defendant. Per Cur. 
 " — The Provincial Statute positively directs that the Writ 
 "shall be served by the Sheriff or his lawful Deputy or 
 
 . 
 
 2 
 
. 
 
 "Bailiff, and we have frequerUy held that service of Process 
 "made in any other manLer is irregular. The Cotirt, 
 "therefore, made the Rule absolute, or, in other words 
 "granted the motion and set the service aside." 
 
 These decisions of the Court show clearly that the 
 serving of Process should be done by Sheriffs or their ofticers 
 and not by Solicitors or others. 
 
 The foregoing decisions of the Courts were given from 
 1822 to 1853. The Sheriff did the serving from 1792 to 
 1853, a period of 61 years. 
 
 In 1853, 16th Vic, Cap. 175, was enacted by Solicito:- 
 General Richards, who was reputed to be a Reformer, Sec. 
 14 of this Act practically gave the service to Lawyers. It 
 reads as follows : — 
 
 Sec. 14— Upon the delivery of a Writ of Summons or 
 a Writ of Ejectment at the office of any Sheriff to be served 
 by him, he, his Deputy, or Clerk, shall endorse thereon the 
 time it was delivered, and in case the Writ is not fully and 
 completely served within ten days after such delivery, the 
 Plaintiff, his Attorney, or Agent, shall be entitled to receive 
 back the same, and the Sheriff, Deputy-Sheriff, or Clerk, shall 
 endorse thereon the time of the delivery ; and the costs of 
 mileage and service of the Writ (by any literate person after- 
 wards) shall, in case the person to be served was at any time 
 during such ten days within such County, be allowed in 
 taxation of costs as if the service had been made by the 
 Sheriff or his officer. If the Sheriff, being applied to, neglects 
 or refuses to return the writ, after the expiration of ten days, 
 the Plaintiff may issue a duplicate or concurrent writ on the 
 praecipe already filed, or may procure another copy of the bill 
 of information, and the costs of the first writ or other writ or 
 copy not returned, may be charged against and recovered 
 from the Sheriff, by the Plaintiff or his Attorney. 
 
 I wish to draw special attention to the wording of 
 the first part of this Section. There is nothing in it requiring 
 the delivery of a Writ or any other paper at the Sheriff's 
 office, and the working of the Act proves that was the inten- 
 tion. ' In the second part of this Section the Sheriff is sub- 
 jected to a penalty if he refuses or neglects to return the Writ 
 
tJ 
 
 f1 
 
 when asked to do so, after he has had it ten days. I am not 
 aware that anv Sheriff has been subjected to this penalty, 
 and for the very good reason that he received very few 
 Writs to serve, and the few that he did receive were served 
 and returned long before the ten days had expired. 
 
 In 1854 the Sheriff's held a meeting in Toronto and 
 presented their case to the Government in a strong memorial, 
 showing how unjust the Legislation (Sec. 14) was to them 
 who had the serving of Writs and other Process as clearly 
 secured to them by the Provincial Statute, and the decisions 
 of the Courts, as was the issuing of Writs and other Process 
 secured to Lawvers. Sec. 14 was in force only 6 years, 
 when it was carried into the Consolidated Statutes, Upper 
 Canada, 1859, where itremained a, dead jett^ y uptil J.874, 
 a period of 15 yearsr 'Secri4riust"liave been an unjust 
 law, when at the expiration of 6 years it was 1^ aside. 
 Vv^hile Sec. 14 remained adead ietter . three Parliaments 
 were elected and expired, and all gave it the go-bye, believ- 
 ing^ no doubt, it should for ever remain where it was. 
 
 A lady in Hamilton tells me that, in 1854 she occupied 
 a seat from Toronto tq, Hamilton in the same carriage with 
 Sheriff Grange, of Guelph, Sheriff Thomas, of Hamilton, and 
 Sheriff Kingsmill, of Simcoe, on their return from Sheritts 
 meeting, and that on the way the chief topic of conversation 
 related to some new law which they declared would ruin 
 them if continued in force. No doubt Sec. 14 was the law 
 refured to. From 1859, when Sec. 14 ^s carried into the 
 Consolidated Statutes, till 1874, a period of 15 years the 
 Sheriffs did the3jacirig.^ga^^ 1792 to 1874, 
 
 'tTJTShSnS'^Trthe servmg'during 76 years. In 1874 Hon. 
 Mowat, another Reformer, enacted 37th Vic, Chap. 7, 
 and for reasons which I call upon him to explain to the 
 public, he transferred Sec. 14 from its place of repose and 
 inserted it in 37th Vic, Chap. 7, as Sees. 83 and^S^ I 
 need not reproduce the section as you have it on a preceding 
 page, but will show the working of it :— 
 
 I entered on the duties of my office on the (1st August, 
 1875 ) The net receipts of the office for the whole year 
 was $3,692.11. Of this amount the receipts for serving 
 Writs, etc, was $2,118.91, being $272.86 more than half the 
 
net income. In 1876, the first whole year I was in office, 
 the net receipts were $3,618.19 ; of this sum $^682. 88 was 
 for serving Writs, etc. The receipts for serving Writs in 
 1876 was $436.03 less than in 1875, clear proof that otlun.s 
 than Sheriffs were making services. 
 
 As the Ontario Legislature met early in January, 1877, 
 I thought the speediest and best way to ascertain the extmit 
 to which the serving of Writs and other papers was carried 
 by process-serving Attorneys would be through a return 
 asked for by the Legislature. With this end in. view, 1 gave 
 my friend, Mr. Sinclair, M. P. P. for Nortli Bruce, a motion 
 asking for a leturn of the number of Bills in Chancery and 
 Writs of Summons that were issued out of the Superior and 
 County Courts during the year 1876, and also a return of 
 the number of such papers as were served by the Sheriffs. 
 I did not appreh^wl -position to the motion, for tVie 
 
 cost of obtaining thf 'on I asked for would be trifling. 
 
 On the evening, n ■ •- January, 1877, Mr. Sinclair 
 
 brought up his moti. -trary to my expectation it 
 
 was met in the most ho. fit by a number of the mem- 
 
 bers of the Legal Profession, *. tio spoke as follows : 
 
 Mr. Lauder. M. P. P. for East Grey, said : "I object to 
 compelling persons making services through the Sherifi" when 
 the Attorney would make the service for r.jthing." 
 
 Mr. Deacon, M. P. P., said : "If services were made by 
 the Profession it was at the expense of the Profession itself." 
 
 Hon. Mr. Hardy, Prov. Sec, said : "That in Brantford it 
 was an exceptional case that a Writ was served by another 
 than the Sheriff; the law was plain that no gentleman could 
 make a charge for the service of Process." 
 
 Mr. Meredith moved : "That the motion be amended by 
 adding the following words, viz : 'and also the* cases, if any, 
 in which fees for service of Process have been taxed, where 
 service has not been affected by the Sheriff, and also the fees 
 paid to the Sheriff for service in each case.' " Mr. Sinclair's 
 motion was not granted. 
 
 In the Globe of the 6th February, 1877, a letter appeared 
 over the signature, "A Practicing Lawyer" (I discovered his 
 name is Charlie Durand) ; he said, " Now I know as a lawyer 
 
V- 'I 
 
 that lawyers are in the habit of serving many papers, includ- 
 ing Writs, and they do it for two reasons, first, to expedite 
 business (for if the papers go into the Sheriff's hands they are 
 likely to remain there a long time), and secondly, to decrease 
 the disbursements of the suit; lawyers cannot charge and do 
 not for servinor Writs and Subpoenas." 
 
 In the Globe of 16th Febrnary, 1877, a letter appeared 
 over the signature of Fiancis Rye, of BaiT-'e, who said, " 1 
 have never known a case of a Solicitor charging his client 
 with a Sheriff's fee, or with a fee equal to what a Sheriff's fee 
 would be, for service of a Bill of Chancery where the Sheriff 
 has not^ been employed, and as to charging Sheriff's fees 
 oesides his own fees for the service, (which would be a fraud- 
 ulent overcharge), this, I need hardly sav, is a practice entirely 
 unknown to my profession." The existence of such an officer 
 as Taxing Master ajppeara to have been forgotten by the wriier 
 oj this article. 
 
 This is what the Lawyers said; "Even if the services 
 are made for nothing the Sheriff loses his fee as effectually 
 as if the money were taken from his pocket, and if the services 
 are made as an act of charity to save costs to the litiaant 
 that could much better be done by the Solicitor himseff as 
 shown by the following figures. The fee for issuing a Writ 
 in the High Court of Justice is $7.00 less $1.00 for stamp 
 and one cent for blank form ; thus on an outlay of $1.01 the' 
 Solicitor has a clear profit of $5.99. The fee on a County 
 Court Writ is $4.75 less 60 cents paid clerk, and one cent 
 for blank form; thus on an outlay of 61 cents the Solicitor 
 has a clear profit of $4.14. The fee for a Subpcena is $1 00 
 les^. one cent for blank ^orm ; thus on an outlay of one cent 
 the Solicitor h^^ a cleai profit of 99 cents. These are larger 
 profits than are made by merchants, farmers, manufacturers, 
 tradesmen or mechanics ; even under the fostering care of the 
 National Poiicy. 
 
 A number of anonymous correspondents wrote in the 
 newspapers, all declaring that my sole object in asking foi^ 
 the return was to increase Sheriffs' fees, and add to the burdens 
 of litigants. These untruthful statements, coupled with the 
 refusal of the Government to grant me a return, convinced 
 me that in the public interest the returns should be had. I 
 
therefor resolved to get it. The return could have been got, 
 as I obtained one in 1889 by applying to the officials who 
 issue the Writs ; but to save time, I asked Mr. Eckhart, 
 Assistant Provincial Secretary, if he would allow me to use 
 his name to the form ot return T wanted ; he consented. T 
 V»ad the forms printed and ])aid for in Hamilton ; I sent them 
 to Mr. Eckhart who in due time returned them Ulled up 
 Here they are, and they show whose fees are increased, and 
 who addfc' to the burdens of the litigants. 
 
 The number of Writs issued in 1876 waq 20,380. 
 
 Sheriff's fees for serving 20,380 Writer S 42,094 25 
 
 Lawyer's fees for issuing 20,380 Bir: -r J Writs 117,358 00 
 
 Total for issuing and serving 20,380 Writ8...S159,452 25 
 A return from the Sheriffs showed that of the 20,380 
 Writs, they only . .rved 11,066, which gave them $22,1 35.25 
 Of the 20,380 Bills and Writs the Sheriffs were deprived 
 of the serving and fees of 9,314, viz : — 
 
 Lawyers served 3,511 Sup'r Court Writs at $2.70, $ 9,479 70 
 1,291 Bills in Chancery at 2.70, 3,485 70 
 ^,,512 Co. Court Writs at 155, 6,993 60 
 
 « 
 
 u 
 
 C( 
 
 9,314 $19,959 00 
 
 The $19,959 was within $1,088.12 of being half the 
 Sheriff's fees if they had served the 20,380 Writs. 
 
 But if Process-serving Attorneys made the services for 
 nothing, or at the expense of the profession itself, as we were 
 told verbally and through the colums of the press was the 
 case, then the $19,959 taken from the Sheriffs was saved to 
 the litigants, and neither the litigants nor the pu olio had any 
 cause of complaint. 
 
 So strong v/as my conviction that there was wrong doing 
 in the practice of serving ProceoS by Attorneys that I 
 determened to use all lawful and proper means to ascertain 
 the facts of the case, and 1 succeeded. I had the tariff of 
 Process-serving Attorneys iu' the Superior Court long before 
 I got them in the County Court. Here they are : this is 
 what the lawyers did. 
 

 •>J 
 
 ^: 
 
 
 ^:':-- 
 
 4#:v^ 
 
 
 I 
 1 1 
 
 ;'^ 
 
 Style of Cause 
 
 or Name 
 of Attorneys. 
 
 
 ?>5 
 
 
 •40 
 
 rO 
 
 »i 
 
 s^ 
 
 <to 
 
 rs 
 
 >» 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 -^ 
 
 <4; 
 
 
 
 Samuel McNair ^ 
 
 Georing&Whipple ; 
 
 1. Lauder & Proctor 
 
 2. Thos. Deacon 
 
 3. Hardy, Wilks. ) 
 
 & J ones ) 
 
 4. Meredith & \ 
 
 Meredith j 
 
 5. Charles Durarid... 
 
 6. Francis Rye 
 
 
 .30 -.'^ 
 
 a^ 
 
 00 
 
 to 
 
 10 
 
 13 37 
 
 10 20 
 
 7 00 
 
 10 40 
 
 10 09 
 
 8 50 
 
 7 48 
 
 2 
 
 7 00 
 
 4 75 
 4 75 
 
 4 75 
 
 4 75 
 
 4 75 
 4 75 
 
 53 67128 50 
 
 3 
 
 2 70 
 
 1 55 
 1 55 
 
 1 55 
 
 1 55 
 
 1 55 
 1 55 
 
 9 30 
 
 >» 
 
 
 4 
 
 3 67 
 
 3 90 
 
 70 
 
 4 10 
 
 3 79 
 
 2 20 
 1 18 
 
 Sup.Ct. 
 
 CV Ct. 
 
 C'y Ct. 
 
 C'y Ct. 
 
 C'y Ct. 
 
 C'y Ct. 
 C'y Ct. 
 
 15 87 
 
 Column No. 1 in the foregoing t&,ble shows the amount 
 charged by Lawyers for issuing and serving Writs of Sum- 
 mons in the H. C. J. and C. C. 
 
 Column No. 2 shows the Lawyers' legal fee for issuing 
 a Writ of Summons. 
 
 Column No. 3 shows the Sheriffs' legal fee for serving 
 a Writ. 
 
 Column No. 4 shows the amount wrongfully taken from 
 the person served. 
 
 Add $7 in column 2, the Lawyers' fee for issuing a Writ 
 of Summons in the High Court of Justice, and $2.70 in 
 column 3, the Sheriffs' fee for nerving it, making $9.70 for 
 issuing and serving; substract $9.70, the Lawyers' and 
 Sheriffs' legal fee, from $13.37, the amount charged by the 
 Solicitor for issuing and serving, (as shown ia column 1), and 
 you have a balance of $3.67 wrongfully taken from the per- 
 son served. Again add $28.50. and $9.30 at the foot of 
 columns 2 and 3, making $37.80, being the Lawyers' and 
 Sheriffs' legal fees for issuing and serving 6 County Court 
 Writs of Summons ; substract $37.80 from $53.67, the amount 
 
 8 
 
charged by the Solicitors for issuing and serving 6 County 
 Court Writs, (as shown in column 1), and in column 4 you 
 will find $15.87, wrongfully taken from the person served; 
 the Solicitor who issued the Writ in the High Court of 
 Justice, pocketed $2.70 belonging to the Sheriff and $3.67 
 belonaing to the person served, in all $6.07. The 6 bohcitors, 
 who i^'ssued and served the 6 County Court Writs, pocketed 
 $9 30 belonging to the Sheriffs, and $15.87 bibngmg to the 
 persons served, in all $25.17. All the Solicitors said they 
 made the services for nothing, or at their own expense. 
 
 It will be observed that 6 Lawyers, who said they made 
 the services for nothing, issued and served 6 County Court 
 Writs and in addition to their' own fee of $28.50 for issuing 
 the 6 Writs, they collected $9.30 belonging to 6 Sheriffs, 
 and they collected $15.17 wrongfully from the persons 
 served, in all $25.17. 
 
 If 6 burglars had at the peril of their lives broken into 
 one of our Banks or elsewhere, and taken $25.17 or less, 
 and were caught, they would be sent to the Penitentiary ; 
 why should men who take the money without imperihng 
 their lives not be treated in the same way ? 
 
 Hon A S. Hardy who is a pompous and revengeful 
 man said* "the law was plain that no gentleman could make 
 a charge for the service of Process", but if a man who is not 
 a gentleman makes the service the Sheriff loses his 'fees. 
 The law firm of Hardy, Wilks & Jones of which Hon M,, 
 Hardy is senior partner, charged and collected $10.4U tor 
 issuing and serving a County Court Writ in addition to their 
 own fee of $4.75 for issuing the Writ, they collected $1.55 
 the Sheriffs fee for serving it, and wrongfully collected $4 10 
 from the person served. Both sums make $5.65 collected 
 that did not belong to them. Instead of using his official 
 ' position to stop such wrong doing ; he was furious and 
 commanded all the taxing-masters who tajcedthebJUa^lt^ 
 tin7rm^[inQe l bre "E ii a j3h | li)btjy^ imd -itrThreatoned them 
 with immeTliate dismS^iOfoTaSng to tax the bills of costs ; 
 of course he did not wish the public to see the tariff of fees 
 at which his law-firm made services. 1 ask the public, 
 should this man be continued in the public service at an 
 annual cost of $4,600.00 ? 
 
 ■ -*"'',¥ 
 
 1 *s>*fl 
 
 Hsfeg 
 
 I 
 

 
 A. ^ 
 
 i' 
 
 r '' 
 
 It will be observed that for every $2.70 taken from the 
 Sheriff for services in the H. C. J., $3.67 is taken from the 
 person served ; and for every $1.55 taken from the Sheriff 
 for services in the County Court, $2.64 is taken from the 
 person served. The loss to the Sheriffs from the serving of 
 9,314 Bills and Writs by Lawyers was as follows : — 
 
 Lawyers served 3,511 S. C. Writs at $2.70 $9,479 70 
 
 " 1,291 Bills in Chancery at $2.70.. 3,485 70 
 " 4,512 County Court Writs at $155 6,993 60 
 
 9,314 Amt. taken from Sheriffs, $19,959 00 
 
 The Lawyers charge the persons served the following 
 rates for serving the same 9,314 Bills and Writs, viz., rates 
 shown in column 4 of the table : — 
 
 Serving 3,511 Superior Court Writs at $3.67 $12,885 37 
 
 1,291 Bills in Chancery at $3.67 4,737 97 
 
 " 4,512 County Court Writs at $2.64 11,911 60 
 
 9,314 $29,535 02 
 
 Add amount taken from Sheriff.,. 19,959 00 
 
 Total taken by Lawyers from Sheriffs and per- 
 sons served, for serving 9,314 Writs $49 ,494 02 
 
 I have shown that the cost of serving 20,380 Writs by 
 Sheriffs would be $42,094.25, therefore the Lawyers, at their 
 tariff of fees, received $7,399.77 more for serving 9,314 
 Writs than the Sheriffs would have received for serving the 
 whole 20,380 Writs. 
 
 When I laid such astounding figures before the public> 
 was it not reasonable to look to the Government to make a 
 searching enquiry into the truth or falseness of my statements, 
 and if found false to punish me, or if found correct to repeal 
 the law. 
 
 The loss of the $19,959 was an average loss of $539.43 
 to each one of the 37 Sheriffs then in Ontario. In 1876, llie 
 first whole year I was Sheriff, my office was worth $4,157.62, 
 but the loss of $539.43— my share of the $19,959 lost to the 
 Sheriffs in that year — reduced my income to $3,618.19. It 
 was the same in 77, 78, 79 and '80— five years. The yearly 
 
 lo 
 
<( 
 
 (( 
 
 « 
 
 loss of $539.43 during the same five years is $2,097.1^', 
 occasioned by Mr. Mowat's Sec. 83, 37th Vic, Chap. 7. 
 
 In 1879, 35 of the 37 Sheriffs then in Ontario signed a 
 petition to the Ontajio Legislature entering a protest against 
 37th Vic, Chap. 7, Sec 83, but nothing was done for us. 
 
 In 1881 the members of the Ontario Government were :| 
 Hon. 0. MowAT, Attorney-General. 
 " Adam Crooks, Minister Education. 
 T. B. Pardee, Com. Crown Lands. 
 C. F. Eraser, Com. Public Works. 
 S. C. Woods, Prov. Tre-isurer. 
 A. S. Hardy, Prov. Secretary. 
 Five lawyers and one layman. 
 
 Judging from the legislation that follows, it was 
 evidently decreed by a majority of the members of the 
 ^ ^vernment^thariofmy temerity in exposing the plundermg 
 (orT^^fPSuIcTsay robbery) practised by a large number of the 
 members of the legal profession on Sheriffs and litigants and 
 the overcharges on Writs of Execution, IJx^lst_beJiums^ 
 or what wo uld be better s tiU^^xuifted. 
 
 m j ^ention orx^^J^o^^ ^mrQf^^^^- was camec 
 others, they would" l\ol VeuLifiTtodo it themselves? 
 done in the following fashion : On 19th January, 1881, Mr. 
 Mowat introduced an act entitled "An Act to consolidate the 
 Superior Courts ; establish a uniform system of pleadings 
 and practice; and make further provision for the due 
 admimstratTon of justice. Who would believe that Sheriffs 
 had anything to do with the pleadings and practice, but they 
 had. The act is also called "The Ontario Judicature Act" 
 and in it all the Sheriffs are dumj)£dJntoJhe^nds^the 
 Judges of the HighCour t of JiS ice, 
 ""^ H^rrirthe ordeTorlaw regulating the serving of Writs 
 
 of Summons : 
 
 ORDER VI. 
 
 Service of Writ of Summons. 
 (First mode of Service.) 
 "ist. No service of Writ shall be required where Defemlant by his 
 Solicitor accepts service, and undertakes to enter an appearance." 
 Under section i all Lawyers are made Sheriffs. 
 
 "2nd Where Service is required, the Writ of Summons may be served 
 in any County in Ontario, and ser-ice thereof, whenever praaticable, shall be 
 personal ; but if it be made to appear to the Court or Judge on affidavit that 
 
 
 II 
 
the substhutifn ToTs^Wce of note Z 'TT'''''^ "^ "^^'^Y ^"^''^«' °^ f- 
 seem just." °"" ^^ advertisement or otherwise as may 
 
 .ff.n,^A '^^" i?r .'^'''''' ^^'^ ^^^« new and novel law has 
 effected myself during the last ten yek:""^Trarowina are 
 my yearly receipts since 1880 :-■ ^ 
 
 " Year. Amount 
 
 1 88 J Received. 
 
 1882 .'.".'.'■.'. $1,41015 
 
 1883.... 1.50330 
 
 1884.... 1.59590 
 
 1885 (Mr. Mo;;;';iBill m'ade'thVs inc'r^^sV) 2,49^3 g 
 
 1887 ."!.'.*!!'.'. 2,783 13 
 
 1888 ! 2,700 26 
 
 1889.... 2,82767 
 
 1890 V.V.V.V.V.VV.*. ^'^^° °^ 
 
 Arrearages collected in '1890V. V. '.*.'.*.* ^'499 3° 
 
 $22,931 56 
 
 <^9 oQ^^^^P'^^^•!^ J"^' ^'''^" °^^ ""'' average ye^income of 
 
 $2,.93.18during the lasttenyears,beingSl!325.041ess yearly 
 than It was prior to 1881. My loss sine; 1880 ten yea « 
 
 Jrl'^lS Pafd V' f ^^'^r-lVmyloss inlTey'Zll 
 pnoi to 1881 and it makes my loss in 15 years $15 947 19 
 and without fear of successful contradiction I assort that * 
 nion. Oliver Mowat has occasioned me these heavy losses 
 as my reward for exposing practices that would send any 
 
 practices to the Central Prison or Penetentiary. In further 
 proof of the united onslau^ mad^^^^nn^/r submit he 
 
 seiving Writs and other process was $2,118.91. Sheriff 
 ihomas, my predecessor, paid his Bailiff $1,000 a year 'which 
 taken from $2,118.91 left the Sheriff a profit ofX'r8 91 
 Since the enactment of the Judicature Act in 1881 I havp 
 
 suppoit a fami y and keep a horse in a large city. Moderate 
 as the income is, it is more than I make from sJ ving W^^^^^^^ 
 and other process. In 1890 the gross receipts from Wr its 
 
 process i^^ ^"'' 'u'^ '^' receipts,^ for serving 
 
 process in 1875. I shall now show that oth^r Sheriffs are 
 
 12 
 
 y 
 
suffering as well as myself. There are 43 Sheriffs in Ontario. 
 5 of them are in Muskoka, Parrey Sound, Algoma, Thunder 
 Bay District and Rainey River ; these being new districts, 
 the Sheriffs are partly paid by the Government. The remain- 
 ing 38 in old Ontario should be self-sustaining but they are 
 not : 49, being one-half, have incomes ranging from $1,955.10 
 down to $583.09. Their incomes aggregate $28,261.68, which 
 gives the 19 Sheriffs an average yearly income of $1,482.19, 
 of the other 19 Sheriffs— Sheriff Mowat receives $8,840 46* 
 Sheriff Widchfield receives $5,436.16, and the other 17 Sheriffs 
 have incomes ranging from $3,500 down to $2,000. Shortly 
 after the Sheriffs were hand ed over to the Judg.e s. they held 
 a meeting in Toronto and 'ctp^jouited SherilfSavis' Secretary- 
 Treasurer; they contributed $200 to retain a Solicitor to 
 appear before the Judges in their behalf. A Solicitor was 
 retained but he never did anything. Was it reasonable to 
 expect that the Solicitor would work to deprive himself and 
 other solicitors of the fees Mr^JlowatluutjilamL^^ 
 reach. M' . Mowat appointed me, and if he is unwifling or 
 unable to protect me, the n I sh^U appeal to the PiU.o.t nr^^f 
 ^ Ontario who have removScl many an abiisemthe last fifty 
 years, aud they will remove the wrongs to which Sheriffs and 
 litigants are now subjected to also. That the public may fully 
 understand . why the Government dealt so un j ustly J ;a-mvse1f 
 and other Sheriffs, I submit the following factrTOnenterintT 
 on the duties of my office in 1875, I noticed it was almost 
 the invariable practice of solicitors to endorse upon Writs of 
 Execution, as their fee for such Writs, the sums of $8, $10 and 
 $12 in the High Court of Justice, and $6, $8 and $10 in the 
 County Court'. I soon discovered these charges were too 
 high. I obtained returns from the Sheriffs, and found that 
 $59,108.48 of illegal fees were collected annually by the 
 Sheriffs for the Solicitors. I determined not to be used for 
 awh evil and illegal practices. I obtained a copy of the legal 
 tariff of fees for issuing Writs of Execution in the Superior 
 and County Courts, and collected the fees under that tariff 
 and no more. I never robbed for myself, and I failed to see 
 why I should rob to enrich others. I told the Government 
 of this evil practice, and suggested the appointment of an 
 Inspector as the best means of ending the wrong-doing. An 
 Inspector was appointed, and found that what I had stated 
 was true. Here is what he says : — 
 
 ' ^•"J 
 
 
 ^ ' 
 
 
 13 
 
SiV.-l have the honor. ' r ^'""^^^ "^^^' ^--^o. Oct. 8th. ,884. 
 
 So hctors to endorse upon Writs nfFvT°'-^^^ ^variable practice with some 
 
 n t'h?H- '^7"^'^ '^"Zh:ZsV$7oT; ffi'in ''''^' ^"^ L-d" - 
 in the High Courts of Justice and «fi S *'?'J^"fJ.'n some cases even more) 
 
 similar sums for renewals -and tJ.'.)? cf"^ i'° J" the County Court and 
 
 collecting such sums, believing it to L^^^^^'". ^^^' ^''"" '" ^^^ ^abit of 
 
 I have the honor to be. sir 
 To , 
 
 Your obedient Servant 
 *^.^^^A./^^^.^^,,^^, JOHN WINCHESTER 
 
 HAMILTON. , --ii-lX, 
 
 1 qU„]1 . » ^"^Pf<-(or 0/ Offices. 
 
 men Uo l^dT'ef nTade ^hf «^.°' '"'. "'"'''^^'^ ''^ ^"^ good 
 High Court of SicetL «„).•' ^"L "°"''"g- I" the 
 
 tl'e Sheriff, and W 67 beJona n!^[o tt '' ^''^^ "^'""g'-^ '° 
 sums make $6 37 wronrfn Iv fol •"'f™ '^'■^''<* ^ both 
 
 The Solicitor^n addZ"ft"4'ot:Ve^ft ?r7'^ ^ 
 "hi'pttrn Sttf"^ tolhe^'S.td'S 
 take,, by ?he SolTc tor T '"""' ""''' **-^» ^^^ongfully 
 evidenc^to prove the 1 ^f '"''^^'^ ^'"^ docume'ntary 
 before a co^S HhrL^ Srf of:/"T'''» '^^"- 
 the men who made these dmlTMr Mo™7'' '"'' .'" 
 servjces.; and it was for >t,v to™ltv • "^"^at gave the 
 charges on WHta^T^S^^^?"'*^ '" exposing the over- 
 
 Mttr^^^p^aVr-rBr/t^^ 
 
 services o"^- noth n^I 1 'i!, '"^" "''" ^^^ "^ey make^he 
 
 The enactment of eViceha^ fr^ ""^^ T'" P^"°"^^^- 
 and the bringin„ inZ^^'J^\ J l'""- ^' ''^ ^ Reformer, 
 dead letter 15 year^ hv IVv. p 'f''"" "^'^' '' ^ad been a 
 ,. — ^oye^-by anotbei Reformer as Sec. 83 and 84, 
 
 '4 
 
 I 
 
 "^•mi^mii^^: 
 
1^4. 
 
 ices 
 ime 
 
 as 
 .re) 
 ,nd 
 
 of 
 lus 
 
 St, 
 
 ch 
 
 ■it 
 ts 
 
 is a sad commentary on Eeformers, who say they do unto 
 others as they would wish to be done by. An examination 
 of the facts I. have laid before the public prove the hollow- 
 ness of such declarations. Whatever Sir John Macdonald 
 did, he never legislated away the fees or emoluments of 
 officials appointed by himself, Can that be truthfully said 
 of Mr. Mowat and some of his colleagues ? I now submit 
 my proposed Act to regulate the serving of Writs. 
 
 An Act to regulate the serving of Writs of Summons, Subpoenas and all 
 other papers or proceedings issued out of the High Court of Justice or County 
 Court, requiring a personal or substitutional service. 
 
 Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative 
 Assembly of Ontario, enacts as follows : 
 
 1st. In all cases (in which the Sheriffis not a party) the Sheriff of each 
 County shall be the only recognized officer for the service of all Writs o( 
 Summons, Subpoenas and all other papers or proceedings issued out of the 
 Superior and County Courts, requiring a personal or substitutional service 
 within the County of such Sheriff. 
 
 2nd All Writs of Summons and Subpoenas or other Process issued out 
 of the said Courts, requiring a Defendant to appear m Court, and also 
 requiring a personal or substitutional service upon such defendant, shall be 
 directed to the Sheriff of the County in which (he Writ of Summons, Subpoena 
 or other Process is to be served. 
 
 3rd. It shall be the duty of every Sheriff to appoint a Bailiff in every 
 town or village in his County, distant 15 miles or more from the county- town, 
 and in which are two or more Attorneys practicing, whose duty it shall be to 
 receive and serve (at all points nearer to such iown or village than to the 
 county-town) all Writs of Summons, Subpoenas or other papers or proceedings 
 issued out of the Superior or County Courts, and delivered to him by the 
 Attorney practicing in. such town or village for service. 
 
 4th. The Bailiff in such town or village who has served the Process 
 under the provisions of Sec. 3, shall forthwith transmit the Original Process 
 with Affidavit of Service and mileage to the Sheriff of the County, and the 
 Sheriff shall make the necessary endorsation thereon, and stamp it with his 
 seal of office, and shall be entitled to charge his usual and legal fees, 
 including Affidavit and Mileage as shown by the Affidavit leturned with the 
 Original Process. 
 
 Sth in case the Writ or Subpoena is not fully and completely served 
 within ten days after its receipt at the Sheriff's office, the plaintiff, his attorney 
 or agent, shall be entitled to receive back the same ; and the Sheriff, Deputy- 
 sheriff or Clerk, shall endorse thereon the time of the delivery; and the costs 
 of the mileage and service of the W^rit or Subpoena, by any literate person after- 
 wards, shall, in case the person to be served was at any time during such ten 
 days within the County, be allowed in the taxation of costs, as if the service 
 had been by the Sheriff or his officer. 
 
 6th. No service shall be valid, no appearance or answer can be enforced 
 and no payment or proceeding taken upon any Writ of Summons issued out 
 of the Superior or County Courts, requiring a personal or subsUtutional, 
 service, unless and until the original proceediug has the Sheriffs', returii 
 thereon, nor unless the same has been stamped with the Sheriffs official seal 
 and recorded in the Process Book of the Sheriff of the County in which the 
 service should be effected. . 
 
 ! •» 
 
 -^ 
 
 
 H 
 
 15 
 
f*-l 
 
 * 
 
 7th. No Taxing-master shall fax any Bill of Costs for serving any Writ 
 of Summons or Subpana issued out of the Superior or County Courts, 
 requiring a personal or substitutional service without the Sherirs return 
 thereon, and the official seal of the Sheriff of the County in which the service 
 should be effected being afhxed to the original proceeding." 
 
 8lh, All Acts or parts of Acts or rule or order contrary to the provisions 
 of this Act are hereby repealed. 
 
 Be it further enacted that each Sheriff shall in each 
 year retain from the net receipts of his office, for his own 
 use, the amount set down opposite his County in the 
 following list, and that all fees collected in excess of that 
 given in this list, shall on or before the 15th January in 
 each year be paid to the Provincial Treasurer of Ontario, to 
 be used by the Government; to supplement the incomes of 
 Sheriffs whose incomes are under $2,000. 
 
 NAME OF COUNTY. Amt. to be retained by Sl.eriflF. 
 
 Toronto $6000 00 
 
 York 4000 00 
 
 Carlton 3400 00 
 
 Wentworth 3400 00 
 
 (This is $754.62 less than it was in 1876 before my los& 
 of $535.43 caused Ijy Mr. Mowat's Sec. 83 ) 
 
 In all other Counties the Sheriffs 
 
 shall retain the fees up to. 3000 00 
 
 In conclusion I appeal to the Government itself, the 
 meinbers of the Legislature and the Electors, to see that 
 justice is done us. First, I claim that services should be 
 done by Sheriffs because we require the fees as part of our 
 means of living ; we have our Bailiffs to do the work. We 
 did the serving 70 years without complaint being made 
 against us. Lastly, I maintain, that for the protection of 
 litigants the services should be made by Sheriffs, who are 
 supported in that view by the decisions of the Courts. 
 I disclaim the charge that I am fighting and traducing 
 Lawyers ; I am fighting tha Government, and exposing the 
 misdeeds of some Lawyers. No man has greater respect 
 and admiration for a talented, educated and honest member 
 of the legal profession than I have ; no country could be 
 governed without such men, and Canada has its full 
 proportion of them, 
 
 ARCHD. McKELLAR. 
 
 Hamilton, October 26th, i8gi. 
 
 ,:S 
 
 •>-' 
 
 ! I 
 
 ^: 
 
 i 
 
 16 
 
 
 '*»^- ^-'"'^^''^'^^^^mmmmmmmmmmmg' 
 
(■ 
 
 h 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 1-*J-: 
 
 / 
 
 •-"-•Sj' 
 
 •tl 
 
 
 w- 
 
 "flft' 
 
 is? 
 
 
 ^«rv* 
 
 * . ^-v 
 
 4^ 
 
 / JP-.^-.^l'^. 7. J v^^jg-g -*/'^ • «r»Cw-.A 
 
 ."/' 
 
 
s'-jT.-'-K S^ 
 
 V ' 
 
 ' ' 1,