§ MR. W. H. SMITHasked Mr. Attorney General, If the sanction of the Law Officers of the Crown has been given to a private Bill, intituled "The Court of Hustings (London) Abolition Bill," under which it is proposed to give to the Lord Mayor's Court concurrent jurisdiction with the Superior Courts of Common Law in matters arising within the Metropolitan district; and if the assent of the Crown has not been given, 1501 what course the Government propose to take with regard to the measure which now stands for Committee as an unopposed Bill?
THE ATTORNEY GENERALSir, in reply to the Question of the hon. Gentleman, I have to state that the sanction of the Law Officers of the Crown most certainly has never been given to this Bill. In fact, I never heard of it till my attention was called to the matter by this Question. On referring to the Bill, I certainly experienced a good deal of surprise at some of its provisions. I find that though it is a Private Bill sent to a Committee upstairs, it proposes to constitute a new Superior Court of Law with unlimited jurisdiction. [Laughter.] I say unlimited, because by one of the clauses it is provided that the jurisdiction of the new Court shall not be confined to the City of London, but shall extend considerably beyond it; the clause authorizing the committal of persons beyond the jurisdiction of the Court. I find that an appeal is given to the Court of Exchequer, thereby adding to the jurisdiction of one of the highest Courts in the kingdom. I have to state that, in my opinion, these provisions are altogether beyond the scope of a private Bill, and ought not to have been introduced. As to the course the Government propose to take, I may say that unless these clauses are struck out I shall certainly oppose the Bill on the third reading.
§ MR. W. H. SMITHI beg to give Notice that, on going into Committee of Supply, I shall call attention to the subject.