CLASS III.—LAW AND JUSTICE. (Hansard, 10 March 1876)

§ MR. GREGORY
said, he did not object to the Vote, but he considered the officers who came within the meaning of the administration of justice, and who accompanied the Judges on circuit, were more ornamental than useful. They had recently the appointment of three gentlemen as referees under the new Judicature Act.

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
said, he had given an explanation on this question at an earlier part of the night; and with respect to those whom the hon. Member for Sussex alluded to, he might state that the question was under the consideration of the Lord Chancellor.

MR. GOLDSMID
concurred in the opinion expressed by the hon. Member for Sussex in reference to those officers whose duties on circuit were generally performed by their deputies. The office was, in fact, a sinecure.

§ MR. WADDY
said, he would move the reduction of the Vote by the sum of £1,700, which represented the salaries of one of the official referees of the Supreme Court of Judicature and of his clerk. It was of extreme importance that the gentlemen chosen to be referees should be men of talent, ability, and tried experience, inasmuch as they were to be the judges of law and fact com-pulsorily, often in cases of great difficulty and complexity. The gentleman whom he objected to was not, until his appointment, heard of in the profession, and he had not that experience in the regular practice of it which the public were entitled to demand.
1848 Whereupon Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £171,325, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1877, for such of the Salaries and Expenses of the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice, of the Court of Appeal, and of the Supreme Court of Judicature, as are not charged on the Consolidated Fund."—(Mr. Waddy.)

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
said, that although he was not personally acquainted with the gentleman in question, he had received from those who were fully qualified to judge the highest testimony to his ability, attainments, and general fitness for his office. He could not admit that a man could not be qualified to become an official referee simply because he had not obtained a large and lucrative practice. [Mr. WADDY: Any practice.] If it were the correct principle not to appoint men to high judicial offices until they had attained large practice at the Bar, he could only say that many of the most eminent Judges who had ever sat upon the Bench would not have been appointed. Further, it must be remembered that the appointment had been made by the Lord Chancellor, and no Member of the Committee would deny that the noble and learned Lord had been really and earnestly anxious to fill all the posts by the appointment of the best men. It was possible that the Lord Chancellor was not personally acquainted with all the gentlemen whom he had appointed; but in cases where he had no personal knowledge of the gentlemen in question he had relied upon the judgment, knowledge, and experience of those on whom he was entitled to rely for information and advice.

§ SIR HENRY JAMES
regretted the line of argument which had been adopted by the hon. and learned Attorney General, and he appealed from his hon. and learned Friend to the Government generally to prevent what would otherwise be regarded as a grave scandal. He protested against the question being made one of how the Lord Chancellor had or had not chosen a gentleman for a particular post. The Lord Chancellor had very little to do with the matter, and he therefore trusted that the Vote would be postponed, in order that further inquiry might be made before the appointment was ratified 1849 by Parliament. The duties of the gentleman appointed to the office in question would be both varied and responsible, and he would be subject to no public criticism. The gentleman in question had to decide cases without a jury, and before his appointment was ratified, the Committee should have reason to believe that he was a man of experience in the practice of his profession and one who possessed a judicial mind. He challenged any one to say this gentleman had ever substantially practised in his profession—as far as could be learned it appeared that he had never even attempted it. He had made only one appearance on the Home Circuit—and then the Judge dispossessed a revising barrister of his appointment, and gave it to this gentleman. The Attorney General knew, as well as he did, that it was the same Judge who made him a revising barrister that nominated him to the Lord Chancellor, and advised the Lord Chancellor to give him this appointment. Was it right that the House should ratify such an appointment without further information? He was speaking the universal opinion of his fellows in his profession when he said that there were plenty of men willing to serve who had not been failures, who had given proofs of their capacity as arbitrators for years, who were known to be good lawyers, and who had all been put aside merely to make way for the social acquaintance of a gentleman on the Bench. Whilst he felt that the objection and discussion might occasion hardship to a gentleman who was not to blame for having the appointment conferred on him, he trusted that under all the circumstances, the Vote would be postponed.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
confessed that what had been said in the debate on this subject was quite new to him. The most convenient course, he thought, under the circumstances, would be to withdraw the Vote in order that inquiries might be made in reference to the appointment in question.

§ MR. WATKIN WILLIAMS
said, that after the powerful language prompted by the public virtue of the hon. and learned Member for Taunton, he must make a few remarks in favour of Mr. Verey, the gentleman so fiercely attacked—it was mere affectation to conceal his 1850 name. He had known that gentleman some years, and protested against his being specially singled out for attack. He did not hesitate to say that the whole four were unsuitable for the post. He believed, however, that Mr. Verey was by far the most fit. He hoped, however, the Government would re-consider all the appointments, as well as the one which had elicited such an unusual display of public virtue from the hon. and learned Member (Sir Henry James).