HC Deb 05 May 1853 vol 126 cc1220-1
The LORD ADVOCATE

said, he would now propose to nominate the Select Committee on this Bill.

MR. COWAN

said, he must suggest that it was too late to proceed with the nomination to-night; and he would also suggest that one of the Members for Edinburgh, which was the seat of the Law Courts in Scotland, should be added to the Committee.

MR. CRAUPURD

said, he objected to the constitution of the Committee, and expressed his hope that the nomination would be postponed.

The LORD ADVOCATE

said, that he had applied, unsuccessfully, to several Scotch Members to serve.

The Committee was then nominated.

MR. CRAUPURD

then moved that the Committee should have power to send for persons, papers, and records. It might be said that further evidence was not requisite; but he believed that the great preponderating feeling in Scotland was decidedly opposed to the system of double sheriffs, and was in favour of the change in the constitution of appeal which he had suggested. He would press his Motion at present, and he would divide the House upon it.

The LORD ADVOCATE

said, he had announced, on a former occasion, that it was not his intention to take evidence before a Committee. Further evidence was unnecessary. There had been the strongest feeling expressed in favour of the Bill from all classes in Scotland, and he would not consent to hang up the Bill until August upon a merely abstract question. He would, therefore, oppose the Motion.

MR. EWART

said, he should support the Motion. He would take the sense of the House, on a future occasion, as to single or double sheriffs.

MR. DUNLOP

said, he should also support the Motion; he felt convinced, that, if the measure were carried without deliberate inquiry, it would only unsettle and disturb, and prove in no manner satisfactory.

MR. COWAN

thought it was not desirable this discussion should take place in the present state of the House. He should move the adjournment of the debate.

MR. ALEXANDER HASTIE

hoped that the right hon. and learned Lord Advocate would accede to the Motion of his hon. and learned Friend (Mr. Craufurd).

MR. CHARTERIS

said, that the feeling in Scotland was unanimous in favour of some change in the present system. The only effect of enabling the Committee to take evidence would be to prolong the inquiry to the end of the Session. He would recommend his hon. and learned Friend (Mr. Craufurd), who had a Bill on the same subject as this Bill, which stood for a second reading on Wednesday next, to withdraw his present Motion, and allow the question as to whether there should be one or two sheriffs to be discussed on that day.

Debate adjourned till Wednesday next.

The House adjourned at a quarter after Two o'clock.