MR. SERJEANT PIGOTTsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to bring in any Bill during the present Session to amend the laws or the constitution and procedure of the Courts of the Island of Jersey? He put the Question in consequence of the information which reached him during the last few years, from time to time, that deep and bitter complaints were made with reference to the injustice arising, not only out of the state of the law of that island, but of the administration of it by the Courts. The whole administration of the law of that island was concentrated in one great court, called the Royal Court. That Court was composed of a bailiff, who was appointed by the Crown, and twelve jurats, who were popularly elected. The only person possessing a legal education was the bailiff. The only necessary qualification of a jurat to hold office was, that he should be possessed of land of the value of £30 a year; and the only disqualification was keeping a public house, or trading as a butcher or baker. The bailiff could exercise no authority whatever in a Court so constituted, and the whole administration of the law and justice was left to the jurats, who had no legal education. Under such circumstances it could hardly be a matter of wonder that there was a maladministration of the laws of that island. The Commission which issued in 1846 to inquire into the administration of the criminal and civil laws of the island, reported that the Court did not possess the confidence of the inhabitants, nor did it deserve it. In 1859, another Commission was issued, of which Sir John Audry was the head, and the Report of that Commission would show to the House that the Court of Jersey combined every bad property and qualification which could belong to a court. Nevertheless, it was the only court in which justice was administered in the island, with the exception of a court for small debts and the manorial courts. They stated that it was sometimes impossible to maintain order in court, and scenes of violence took place which the Court was unable to suppress. Moreover, great uncertainty also prevailed as to what the law 840 was, and the Commissioners wound up by declaring that any reform would be absolutely useless which would leave the duties of the superior court in the hands of a numerous body without professional education, whose attendance was precarious, and for whose nomination no one was responsible to public opinion. With that view, they did not recommend any reform of the laws until reform of the Court had first taken place. He would give a few illustrations of what the law was in the island. Unlike the practice in this country, the law of arrest could be put in motion by any suitor who chose to make a statement, not verified by oath, to an officer of the Court, who immediately issued a warrant. The law of arrest, too, according to the Commissioners, was put in motion for the worst purposes—extortion and oppression. There was the case of a gentleman, who had carried on business in London for many years, and who was appointed one of two trustees under a marriage settlement. That gentleman having gone over to Jersey was seized and thrown into prison, where he was kept for two or three years, on the ground that he was a debtor for the corpus of the trust, although he urged that he could not make over the corpus without committing a breach of trust, exposing him to attachment by the Court of Chancery in England. Another person resident in Birmingham, who was arrested in Jersey for a debt contracted while temporarily residing in Jersey, was still kept in prison because he could not produce a settlement of property to his wife's separate use, which the trustee in England refused to part with. The absence of any law of uses or trusts, was a most important question for persons who might wish to form themselves into a joint-stock company for gas, water, or other purposes, which could not now be done without the greates risk. Other parts of the law were in an anomalous state; for instance, the law of evidence. A man could not call as witness the husband of his aunt; and there was an instance of a case in which the suitor's wife's former husband's father was not admitted. Neither did the inhabitants enjoy trial by jury in any form. Again, the law of guarantee was so unsatisfactory that the Commissioners reported that it was impossible to acquire an estate free from incumbrances, without limit of time or extent, no matter what the wealth of the purchaser. The Commissioners finally reported that in their judgment legislation was imperatively required 841 to settle those important questions. Not only had these Reports been made by Royal Commissions, but a memorial, signed by nearly 600 inhabitants, had been presented to the right hon. Baronet, stating that they were anxious that the suggestions and recommendations of the Commissioners should be carried into effect, as the best means of promoting the prosperity and tranquillity of the island, He hoped the right hon. Baronet would not be influenced by any representations directed against the Report of the Commissioners proceeding from interested parties, but that he would exercise his own sound judgment upon the subject.
§ MR. HADFIELDsaid, that as the first Commission which sat upon the question was appointed as long ago as 1846, it was high time that the matter should be settled. He would recommend the right hon. Baronet the Home Secretary to deal with it according to the dictates of his own sound judgment. He was assured that the value of land in Jersey would increase 50 per cent provided the defects in the laws were removed. The inhabitants, whether of English or French origin, were loyal subjects of the Queen, and they were most anxious for the reforms recommended by the Commissioners.
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, that notwithstanding the doubts which he had heard expressed on the other side of the House as to the existence of the Channel Islands, he could personally testify— having been an ocular witness not only of Jersey, but also of Sark—that there were such places in rerum natura, and that they were unquestionably to be included with the dominions of Her Majesty. With regard to the question just put to him he hardly thought that at that hour, and that extremity of miscellaneous and desultory discussion, the House would expect him to follow the hon. and learned Member in his extensive review of the legislation of Jersey; but he was not at all prepared to deny that there were great defects both in the law of that island and in its administration. Unfortunately, however, it was not the habit of that House to legislate on the internal concerns of Jersey. No doubt, the supreme power of legislation resided in Parliament, but it was not the practice of Parliament to legislate with respect to the internal affairs of the possessions of the Crown, whether as near or more remote than the Channel Islands. As to any suggestion that, instead of referring the question to the consideration of 842 the States of the Island of Jersey, there; should be legislation upon it under the; simple authority of the Crown by means of Orders in Council, that would certainly be a strong measure to resort to at that early period, and before the States of the island had had an opportunity of examining the Commissioners' recommendations. He, therefore, did not think the Government I would be justified in adopting that course. With regard to the defects which the hon. and learned Member for Reading — no doubt an enlightened law reformer—might discover in the institutions of Jersey, perhaps that hon. Gentleman would find, on further inquiry, that many of those defects were pleasing to the inhabitants of the island. The people of Jersey were attached to many of those ancient laws and customs with which time had familiarized ' them; and it was by no means clear that any act of the Queen in Council making an extensive alteration in their institutions would he hailed with general approbation in the island. It, therefore, behoved Her Majesty's Government to proceed cautiously in this matter. But if he had not gone at as rapid a pace as the hon. Member for Sheffield desired, it ought not to be supposed that he shared that blind-ness to some of the defects of the institutions of Jersey to which he had ventured to advert.
§ MR. SOTHERON ESTCOURTsaid, he was very glad to hear that the right hon. Baronet was determined to prosecute; the matter; and that, although there might be further delay in dealing with so nice and critical a constitution as that of the island of Jersey, and with laws to which the islanders were perhaps more attached than the merits of those laws deserved, yet that the Government did not intend to allow the subject to drop. The remarkable peculiarities, not to say abuses, of the institutions of Jersey had been fully and ably set forth in the Report of the Commissioners, who, he must say, had discharged their duties in a very admirable manner.
§ Motion agreed to.