§ MR. MONKI beg to ask Mr. Attorney General, Whether it is true—
That no single action has been taken by the Law Officers of the Crown in order to put the Act of 1879 (the Public Prosecutor's Act) properly in force, and that the operation of the Act has been left entirely without the guidance of the Attorney General;and, if it is so, whether he would explain why such is the case?
§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir HENRY JAMES)I am not sorry that the hon. Gentleman has given me an opportunity of answering the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South-West Lancashire (Sir R. Assheton Cross) on Friday last——
§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILLI beg pardon for interrupting. I must rise to Order. The Question put down on the Paper is a verbatim quotation from a speech delivered in a debate on Friday last; and I want to know whether it is not directly contrary to the Rules of the House?
§ MR. ONSLOWOn that point I beg to point out that the Clerk at the Table has on more than one occasion prohibited me from putting a Question because I had put in it a quotation from a speech made in debate in exactly the same way. I would ask you, Sir, whether there should not be some symmetry in the conduct of the Clerk?
§ MR. SPEAKERIf a verbatim report has been quoted in the Question in the manner referred to by the noble Lord, it is out of Order.
§ MR. MONKThen I would beg to withdraw the Question, and to ask my hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General, whether it is true that no action has been taken by the Law Officers of the Crown? ["Order!"] The Speaker will stop me if I am not in Order. I wish to ask the hon. and learned Attorney General whether it is true that the operations of the Public Prosecutor's Act have been left entirely without his guidance?
§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILLThat is exactly the same thing.
§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir HENRY JAMES)I will answer the Question very shortly. The facts are these. When I came into Office I found certain Rules drawn up for my guidance by my Predecessor, which had been approved of and bore the signature of the then Secretary of State for the Home Department, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South-West Lancashire (Sir R. Assheton Cross). I have considered those Rules very carefully, and they seem to me the best that could be drawn up as applied to the limited staff at the disposal of the Public Prosecutor. I have considered them from time to time, and when I have given special directions to the Director of Public Prosecutions, I have consulted him whether the rules required alteration, but found such was not the case.
§ MR. WARTONHas the hon. and learned Gentleman ever considered the subject with regard to the extension of the staff of employés in the Public Prosecutor's Office?
§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir HENRY JAMES)The whole matter is under consideration. I have considered it in conjunction with my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary; and we have thought it better that a Departmental Committee should be appointed to inquire into the subject mentioned by the hon. and learned Member for Bridport (Mr. Warton).
§ MR. R. H. PAGETWill the hon. and learned Gentleman be good enough to lay on the Table the instructions which have been issued in regard to the employment of the Public Prosecutor in cases of indictment for perjury?
§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir HENRY JAMES)No instructions have been given by me; but I see no objection to making public any instructions that may be given.