§ MR. CONYBEARE (Cornwall, Camborne)asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether Mr. Newton was one of the magistrates who took part in the conference of Metropolitan magistrates; and whether, prior to that meeting, any case had come before Mr. Newton's Court by which the illegality of the interpretation of the law as agreed upon at such conference had been brought under Mr. Newton's notice; whether the Metropolitan magistrates have similarly met and agreed to act upon any special interpretation of the law in reference to the right of public meeting in the open spaces of the Metropolis, and the action of the police in protecting the promoters of such meetings from disturbers of the peace; and, whether he will call the attention of the Lord Chancellor to the matter?
§ THE FIRST LORD (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, Westminster)Mr. Newton, the police magistrate at Marlborough Street Court, stated that he could not say positively whether he took part in a conference of Metropolitan magistrates on the 25th of November last; but his impression was that he was not present. In 1884 his attention was called to an alleged illegality in acting on the uncorroborated evidence of a police-constable; but the conclusion come to by the magistrates in 1883 —and again adhered to in November last—was that there was no illegality in acting on the evidence of a police-constable, uncorroborated by any other 522 witness. The Metropolitan magistrates had never, at any conference or otherwise, agreed to act upon any special interpretation of the law in reference to the right of public meeting in the open spaces of the Metropolis, or the action of the police in protecting the promoters of such meetings from disturbers of the peace.