HC Deb 15 May 1865 vol 179 cc293-5
MR. FERRAND

said, he rose to ask Mr. Attorney General, Whether it is true that Mr. Henry Sedgwick Wilde, when Registrar of the Court of Bankruptcy at Leeds, was called upon by one of the Bankruptcy officials, by authority, to re sign his office, and that he refused to do so; whether Mr. Wilde was then informed that, if he would resign at once and obtain a medical certificate, he should have a pension of £600 a year, although he was then in a good state of health; whether he did obtain such medical certificate and resign, and was the pension so promised granted or sanctioned by the Lord Chancellor; was Mr. Wilde, on his resignation, succeeded by Mr. Welch, who was then in a precarious state of health; was it arranged that Mr. Welch should hold the office until the reversal of the outlawry of the Hon. Richard Bethell; and was Mr. Richard Bethell's appointment made out after his outlawry was reversed, and did he attend the Bankruptcy Court at Leeds on or about the 24th of February last, and state to officials that he was appointed Registrar?

MR. MURRAY

said, he wished to ask in addition, Whether any petition was presented by Mr. Wilde to the Lord Chancellor explaining the causes which rendered his retirement necessary; and, if so, whether the truth of such explanation was verified by his affidavit.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Sir, I will answer the series of questions put to me by the hon. Member for Devonport, including that just added by my hon. Friend opposite, which relate to the resig- nation by Mr. Wilde of the office of Registrar of the Leeds Court of Bankruptcy. The answer which I have to give is this:—Mr. Wilde was not called upon by any Bankruptcy official to resign, but he was called upon to answer certain complaints against him (of irregularities in his office, not, I believe, extending to personal defalcation) contained in a Report to the Lord Chancellor by Mr. Commissioner Ayrton. Mr. Wilde sent answers to these complaints, which answers were not deemed satisfactory. The Chief Registrar was informed that Mr. Wilde's state of health was such that he would be en titled to resign under the 33rd section of the Bankruptcy Act of 1861; and when he informed Mr. Wilde that his explanations were not deemed satisfactory, he suggested to him, from friendly motives, that if his state of health was in fact such as he (the Chief Registrar) heard it was, he would probably be permitted to retire in the usual manner. Upon this, Mr. Wilde sent to the Lord Chancellor a petition, which stated— That your petitioner has for some time past been afflicted with a failure in his sight, and that the same has now become so serious that lie is no longer able satisfactorily to perform the duties of his office, as appears by the certificate of Samuel Key, a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons, practising at Leeds, hereunto annexed, and is consequently desirous of retiring. This petition was verified by the affidavit of Mr. Wilde, and Mr. Wilde was under these circumstances permitted to resign, and receive a pension of £600 per annum, under the section of the Bankruptcy Act. So much as to the resignation of Mr. Wilde. Then comes the question as to the appointment of Mr. Welch. The question was whether, when Mr. Welch succeeded Mr. Wilde, the first-named gentleman was in a precarious state of health, and was it arranged that Mr. Welch should hold the office until the reversal of the outlawry of the hon. Richard Bethell? The answer to these two questions is this: Mr. Wilde was succeeded by Mr. Welch. Mr. Welch had been some time before strongly recommended to the Lord Chancellor for an appointment of this kind by the late Attorney General, Sir William Atherton, Mr. Edward James, Q.C., Attorney General for the County Palatine of Lancaster, and other members of the Northern Circuit, to which he belonged, but his Lordship never saw him in his life, and never until now heard of his being in a precarious or bad state of health. As to the alleged arrangement for benefiting the hon, Richard Bethell, the answer is that no such arrangement was ever made or proposed, or thought of; nor was there at the time of the appointment any outlawry. Mr. Welch's appointment is dated the 30th of July, 1864, and the outlawry was not until the 15th of December of the same year. Then comes the last question—whether, after the reversal of his outlawry, Mr. Richard Bethell at tended the Leeds Court of Bankruptcy on or about the 4th of February, and stated to the officials there that he was appointed Registrar. The facts are these. Mr. Richard Bethell was never appointed a Registrar of the Court of Bankruptcy at Leeds. A vacancy had some time before Mr. Welch's appointment arisen in London by the resignation of Mr. Bethell himself, for reasons which made the Lord Chancellor consider that resignation necessary. The Lord Chancellor was afterwards pressed to transfer Mr. Welch to London, and to appoint Mr. Bethell to Leeds, but he positively refused to do so. If Mr. Bethell attended at the Bankruptcy Court at Leeds, as is alleged, or stated to the officials there that he was appointed a Registrar of the Leeds Court, it was altogether without the knowledge or sanction of the Lord Chancellor.