MR. R. A. ALLISON (Cumberland, Eskdale)I beg to ask the Attorney General whether his attention has been directed to the case of Ecroyd v. Coulthard, recently in the court of Mr. Justice North, which, though it occupied only seven whole and part of two other days in the hearing, yet, owing to the rule laid down of taking witness cases only three days a week, was protracted over four weeks from 23rd February to 23rd March, involving the attendance of those engaged in it, including some 30 witnesses who had either to be brought backward and forward from Cumberland, or kept here for a prolonged period at great additional expense to the litigants; and whether some change could be made so as to prevent such inconvenience?
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir RICHARD WEBSTER, Isle of Wight)I have made inquiries into the case mentioned in the Question of the hon. Member. I find that the breaking off of the hearing of the case was exceptional, and due to the fact that Mr. Justice Romer and Mr. Justice North happened to be both engaged in trying witness actions. I am informed that no witnesses need have been in town before the 9th or after the 17th. Although such interruptions cannot at all times be avoided, I am satisfied that the learned Judges do their utmost to avoid unnecessary delay or expense, and I do not think that any steps can be taken to lessen the possibility of such inconveniences at times being occasioned.