§ MR. MELLORsaid, he rose to call the attention of the House to the recent appointment of Justices of the Peace for the Borough of Great Yarmouth; and to inquire of Her Majesty's Ministers whether it is their intention to introduce any measure for regulating the appointment of Justices of the Peace for Boroughs in England and Wales. He became a candidate for the borough of Great Yarmouth in 1857, and in the course of his canvass he found that several persons declined to promise to vote for him on the ground that if they did so they would not be able to obtain any licences for the public-houses they were erecting. He made inquiry into the circumstances, and he found that there were eighteen acting magistrates for the borough, fourteen of whom were Tories, or Conservatives, only three Liberals, and one neuter. It was represented to him that in consequence of this state of things there was great dissatisfaction, and a great sense of insecurity and uncertainty with respect to the integrity of the decisions which might he come to on licensing days, and on matters connected with the licensing system. It turned out that on licensing days magistrates who never attended on other occasions came down, and by a large majority refused to give licences to houses which did not belong to persons of their party, and that with respect to overseers, the practice was to appoint three Tories to one Liberal. The consequence was that great suspicion was entertained as to the way in which the Parliamentary registry for the borough might be got up. He presented a memorial from the inhabitants to the Government on the subject, and Lord Chancellor Cranworth thought that the mere preponderance of one political party was not a ground to induce him to interfere, but on receiving a further statement, and on the three Liberal magistrates declining to attend the bench unless fortified by some addition to their number, as they felt that under the circumstances it was useless to attend, and after notice was given to the Town Council and Mayor, and every inquiry had been made, Lord Cranworth added six additional magistrates to the bench, making nine Liberals to fourteen Tories, or Conservatives. The announcement of this addition caused great excitement in the town, and the Town Council and Mayor made a re- 265 presentation to the Lord Chancellor to induce him to withhold the appointments. This led to further inquiry, which induced Lord Cranworth to feel that it was his bounden duty to make the appointments. Thereupon a petition was presented to the House of Lords complaining of Lord Cranworth 's conduct. A memorial was also presented, in which it stated that these magistrates were all of one party, and had been appointed because the majority of the bench did not vote for the Liberal candidate at the last election. It was also alleged by the Conservative body in the borough that the bench of magistrates was already too numerous, and that no necessity existed for any addition to the number. The answer of Lord Cranworth was, that it had been represented to him that Sir Edmund Lacon, now a Member for the borough and one of the magistrates, was not only a banker but a brewer, and the proprietor of a large number of public-houses, and that he had great influence with his brother magistrates. Lord Cranworth also said that in consequence of the complaints made to him that justice was not properly administered in connection with the granting of licences, he had thought it right to appoint the six new magistrates. On a licensing day, subsequently to the presentation of the memorial, a division of sixteen to eight took place on the bench. Under these circumstances, and after the remonstrances of the then Mayor and Town Council in 1857, on the ground that there were too many magistrates in the commission, and that there was no complaint of inattention to their duties on the part of these magistrates, what was the astonishment of the inhabitants of Great Yarmouth on the 13th of Juno, three days after the defeat of the late Government on the Amendment to the Address, to find that three new magistrates were added to the commission of the peace for that borough. A complaint had been previously made that the influence of Sir Edmund Lacon was too great in Yarmouth, but one of the gentlemen added to the commission was a partner in Sir Edmund Lacon's bank, and might therefore be supposed to be to some extent under his influence, and another was a gentleman who came up to town to remonstrate against the appointment of six magistrates by Lord Cranworth, and the third was a gentleman of whom he (Mr. Mellor) knew nothing except that he held the same political views. What reason, then, could there be for appointing three 266 additional magistrates on the 13th of June? It was clear there was no deficiency in the number of magistrates, and the object could not be to correct a preponderance of Liberals over Conservatives, for there had previously been on the bench fourteen Conservatives to nine Liberals. Some clue might perhaps be found to the reason for these appointments in a speech made by the right hon. Gentleman opposite on a recent occasion, when a number of noble Lords and hon. Gentlemen assembled to condole with and to encourage one another on the position and prospects of the great Conservative party. At that meeting that distinguished speaker is reported to have said, "There is a party in the country—which is the best security for public liberty and good government —a party whoso policy has been to maintain the institutions of the country—to uphold the prerogative of the Crown—to support the privileges of Parliament, whether hereditary or elective—to maintain the national Church in alliance with the State, and not dependent upon it—to sustain that great principle of local government which has guaranteed liberty throughout the land, and which has been mainly supported by independent corporations and by independent bodies of magistrates." He (Mr. Mellor) could only suppose that the appointments to which he had referred had been made with the view of increasing independent bodies of magistrates. It appeared from returns which had lately been laid before the House that from 1854 to March, 1858, the number of magistrates appointed in the County Palatine of Lancaster was seventy-six, while in the subsequent sixteen months no less than 122 magistrates had been appointed for that county. In the borough of Ipswich there were, up to 1851, only four magistrates; on the 25th of September, 1852, when his hon. and learned Friend (Sir Fitzroy Kelly) was a law officer of the Crown, there was an addition of six gentlemen to the commission of the peace; and on the 14th of April, 1859, nine other names were added to the commission, thus malting in all fifteen new appointments. It appeared from these returns that in many places the number of magistrates had been very suddenly doubled, or more than doubled. Lord Cranworth had only put six new justices upon the list at Yarmouth, under the supposition that amongst the Conservatives there would always be a certain number who would give conscientious votes, and that 267 therefore six would be enough; but the result of the division, when sixteen voted on one side and eight on the other, showed that the noble and learned Lord's experiment had proved a failure. He (Mr. Mellor) wished that the present system, by which the duty of applying to the Lord Chancellor was thrown upon Members of Parliament, might be abolished. He could assure the House that when he canvassed Great Yarmouth, he had been quite disgusted at the suggestions that he would be expected to make or to support recommendations to the Lord Chancellor with regard to the appointment of borough magistrates, and he at once came to the conclusion that the system of such appointments required investigation and amendment. Lord Cranworth had also communicated to the Town Council his intention to increase the number of the bench of magistrates, but in the case of the recent appointments he believed that no such communication had been made, and that no opportunity had been afforded of remonstrating or of making any representations as to the character or fitness of the new magistrates until the appointments had been made. He begged to ask whether it was the intention of the Government to introduce any measure for regulating the appointment of justices of the peace for boroughs in England and Wales?
§ SIR HENRY STRACEYsaid that, as one of the representatives of Great Yarmouth, he felt it due to his constituents to endeavour to make some reply to the observations of the hon. and learned Gentleman. Of all men in the world, he would submit with the greatest deference the hon. and learned Gentleman was the very last who ought to have come forward to make such allegations. He had in his possession a statement published by the hon. and learned Gentleman in the Norfolk newspapers which seemed to him to justify that opinion. The hon. and learned Gentleman had said that he had lately presented a petition from Great Yarmouth. It had been made to appear as if the inhabitants of Yarmouth were opposed to the appointment of these three gentlemen. He had, however, taken the trouble to look at the petition, and he found that it contained the signatures of just five persons, and those of no great social standing, out of a population of between 35,000 and 40,000 of whom 1,300 were electors. He doubted whether any other Member, except the hon. and learned Gentleman, representing 268 a borough of equal magnitude, would have had the hardihood to present such a petition. The hon. learned Gentleman complained that there were thirty-one magistrates for Great Yarmouth; but how had that number been created? Why, at the instance of the hon. and learned Member for Nottingham, who had waited upon Lord Cranworth and obtained from him the appointment of six new magistrates, all of one political feeling. But that was not all. The hon. and learned Gentleman had recommended nine to Lord Cranworth, from whom the six were chosen, and yet, though he had sought to get three more than that noble and learned Lord consented to appoint, he now complained that thirty-one were too many for the requirements of the town! In 1858 the Yarmouth bench consisted of twenty-five magistrates, the six added made thirty-one; and if the hon. and learned Gentleman had had his way there would have been thirty-four. But what would the House think when it was told that, while the hon. and learned Gentleman modestly acknowledged to having got six new magistrates made, he had kept altogether in the back ground the fact that he had actually brought up a list of fourteen names? If the hon. and learned Gentleman disputed that, it could be substantiated from a statement that he had made apparently in his own justification, in consequence of the jealousies which existed between him and other portions of the Liberal party in Yarmouth. In that town, as in that House, the Liberals were divided into various sections, which were named after their respective leaders, and called Macullaghites, Youngites, Watkinites, and Mellorites. In securing six new Liberal magistrates the hon. and learned Gentleman had only acted in conformity with the promises made by the gentleman he had succeeded, that gentleman being the hon. and learned Member's own relation, who was unseated on petition. Two of the Liberal candidates had undertaken, if they themselves were returned to Parliament, to have a certain number of Liberal magistrates elected. Being, however, unseated on petition, they had not an opportunity of making their application to Lord Cranworth, but the matter had, instead, been taken up by the hon. and learned Member, who, if he could not get his whole fourteen names appointed, at least got six of them. Whether that was not carrying out what had been promised to the voters if they would only return 269 two Liberal Members the House might be left to determine. The hon. and learned Member had spoken of the partiality shown by Conservative Lord Chancellors in giving the Conservatives a preponderance on the Yarmouth bench. Now, if certain of the Yarmouth magistrates finding out the error of their ways had thought fit to change their politics, that was entirely their own affair. Certainly two Members of the bench, who were Liberals when appointed, and had for years consistently supported Liberalism, had subsequently left that party. On the passing of the Municipal Reform Act in 1836 a batch of ten magistrates was given to Great Yarmouth, every one of whom without exception was chosen from the ranks of the Liberals. In 1840 an addition of five members was made to the bench, only one of whom—having property in the town, but living sixteen miles from it, and seldom or ever attending the justices' room—'was a Conservative. In the following year four more were appointed, every one of them being Liberals, thus making eighteen Liberals to one Conservative. The Conservatives, naturally dissatisfied at having but one, and he an absentee, representative on the bench, made a remonstrance, and seven Conservative magistrates were accordingly created. In 1846, Lord Lyndhurst being Lord Chancellor, application was made to him for the appointment of six new magistrates. Having satisfied himself that the increase was necessary on account of vacancies having occurred, Lord Lyndhurst refused to create a mere party batch, and he therefore nominated four Conservatives and two Liberals. In 1852 another application was made to Lord St. Leonards, who, following the same equitable rule, also appointed four Conservatives and two Liberals. Up to that time it was clear, then, that the Conservative Lord Chancellors had displayed a more impartial feeling than the Lord Chancellors of the hon. and learned Gentleman's own party. The hon. and learned Member had said that he made the application in 1858 to Lord Cranworth which ended in the creation of six Liberal magistrates, in consequence of the representations made to him by his party, He maintained, therefore, that the existing number of magistrates in Yarmouth was caused by the hon. and learned Gentleman himself. Lord Chelmsford, it was true, upon application being made to him, appointed three magistrates, but that was done solely for the purpose of filling 270 up two actual vacancies and one prospective vacancy. He could assure the House upon his own personal responsibility, that the gentlemen appointed by Lord Chelmsford were all eligible for seats on the bench, and, although he could not pretend to possess the legal knowledge of the hon. and learned Gentleman, he had no doubt the House would accept the word of a country gentleman as readily as it would that of any lawyer.
§ SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, that in the absence of the Home Secretary, he had to state that it was not the intention of his right hon. Friend or of the Government to propose any measure to Parliament to regulate the appointment of magistrates. It would be difficult, indeed, to lay down, by Act of Parliament, any precise rules upon such a matter, but at the same time he could not help saying that nothing could be more prejudicial to the fair and impartial administration of justice or the confidence which the people at present felt in such an administration than the practice of appointing magistrates with a view exclusively to their political opinions. That an attempt should be made upon each change of Government to introduce new magistrates without reference to the existing number was deeply to be regretted. The hon. and learned Member for Nottingham had referred to Lancashire, but that county occupied an exceptional position. Complaints did not often arise with respect to the magistracy in counties, because county magistrates were appointed upon the recommendation of the lords-lieutenant, who generally exercised a sound discretion. In the case of Lancashire, however, some check seemed to be wanted. In that county magistrates were appointed by the Chancellor of the Duchy without any reference to the Lord Lieutenant, and during the last sixteen months more than 120 magistrates had been placed upon the bench in that county, and he understood that at the present moment there were more magistrates in Lancashire than policemen. It would be his duty to ascertain whether any rule could be laid down, not in an Act of Parliament, but in his own office, for the purpose of putting a check on the existing practice in Lancashire, or, at all events, of insuring that before gentlemen were placed upon the bench there should be some inquiry as to the necessity for any addition to the number of magistrates.
§ Subject dropped.