§ Mr. Watsonwished to put a question to the right hon. Baronet opposite, in consequence of a report which had been circulated in the newspapers. It had been stated, that a division of the Northern Circuit was about to be made, by taking one half of the business from the circuit, and putting it on the Norfolk Circuit. He wished to know if it was true that any such absurd regulation had been recommended by the Commission of Inquiry, or was about to be adopted? He wished to know whether it was specified in the Commission itself, or in the instructions given to the Commissioners, that they were not to take into consideration the question of appointing two additional Judges in Westminster Hall, and if they had been prevented from doing so? He wished to know also, whether it had been well considered, with respect to the administration of the law, that the existing state of things should be altered; for he believed that no single client, or any human being representing clients, had ever made any complaint against the existing system?
§ Sir J. GrahamI really am at a loss how to answer the hon. and learned Gentleman's last question. The hon. Gentleman said that no complaints had ever been made as to the existing state of things, and wished to know whether there was any intention of changing it. The term "existing system" is so general and vague, that it leaves me in doubt as to what part of it he means to direct his inquiries. With respect to the other two questions, I have no such difficulty. The first refers to the Report of the Commission to which the question as to the division of the circuits was referred. That Report has been drawn up and agreed upon, but it has not yet been presented. With respect to its subject-matter, I, not having official cognizance of it, must decline discussing the terms of a Report which, as far as I am concerned, is unknown. The third question has reference to a restriction 941 in the inquiries of the Commission. It is quite true that a letter was addressed to me by that Commission, inquiring whether it would be competent for them, in making their Report, to contemplate an addition to the existing number of Judges. I immediately informed them, as was indeed apparent on the face of the Commission, that no such question as that of increasing the number of the Judges would be referred by Her Majesty to a Commission. A measure of that nature would be taken into consideration by the Executive Government, if they judged it necessary, on their own responsibility. The sole question referred to them was, presuming the number of Judges to remain unchanged, how in their opinion the existing circuits might be divided with the greatest advantage for the transaction of the public business,
§ Mr. Roebucksaid, it appeared that the question referred to the Commission being how the business of the circuits, with the existing number of Judges, might be best distributed, they were not to consider whether the existing circuits might not be better arranged by the addition of two new Judges. If that question was altogether cut off from their consideration, then came the inquiry whether another Commission should be issued, the real question being whether the Judges were not necessary.
§ Sir J. GrahamThat is a question which I cannot contemplate being subjected to the consideration of any Commission. I conceive it strictly within the province of the Executive Government.
§ Mr. Roebuckwished to be informed whether the right hon. Baronet intended to submit to the House, or to any other tribunal, a re-distribution of the circuits?
§ Sir J. GrahamI have had no opportunity of seeing the Report of the Commissioners, therefore I can only say that I am not prepared to recommend an addition to the number of the existing Judges.