DR. CAMERONasked the Lord Advocate, If the Crown authorities have 776 yet decided whether they will institute proceedings against any of the office bearers of the Scottish Legal Friendly Society for their dishonest practices, which official reports show to have been resorted to in connection with the management of that Society?
THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. B. BALFOUR)Sir, some time ago a criminal charge of falsehood, fraud, and wilful imposition was preferred against certain of the office-bearers of the Scottish Legal Life Assurance Society in Glasgow. I caused a very careful investigation to be made. It appears that at a general meeting held in June, 1881, the salaries of the Secretary and of the Treasurer were raised from £250 to £500 each, that of the President was raised from £100 to £250, and that of each member of committee from £25 to £125. The charge against the accused office-bearers was that this very large and sudden augmentation of their salaries had been corruptly obtained by means of fictitious votes. Admission to the general meetings is obtained by presentation of the contribution books of the members; and it was alleged, and I believe there is ample evidence to prove, that fabricated contribution books were used for gaining admission by persons who were not members of the Society at all. Unfortunately, it is not possible to ascertain how many fictitious votes were so admitted, nor how far the resolutions to increase the salaries were carried by their votes. This circumstance, as lawyers know, raises a great difficulty in the way of preferring a relevant criminal charge. In the second place, whatever ground of suspicion there may be, it does not appear, from the evidence at our command, that the fabrication or the use of the fictitious books can be brought home to the office-bearers accused. It is only too apparent that there has been gross and culpable mismanagement in this Society, to the great injury of its members, who belong to the working classes; and I do not hesitate to say that I should be glad if I saw my way to the discovery and punishment of the guilty parties by the Criminal Law. But, after consultation with my hon. and learned Friend the Solicitor General for Scotland, I have come to the conclusion that there is not sufficient evidence, at least for the present, to sustain a criminal prosecution.