§ MR. BARTLEY(for Mr. KELLY) (Camberwell, N.)asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, when giving Notice of his intention to move an Address to Her Majesty for the appointment of an additional Judge of the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice, he has had in mind the provisions of Clause 6 of the Railway and Canal Traffic Bill, now in this House, and which has already passed through the House of Lords, the language of which clause is as follows:—
On an Address from both Houses of Parliament representing that, regard being had to the duties imposed by this Act on the ex officio Commissioner, the state of business in the High Court in England requires the appointment of an additional Judge of that Court," &c.;and, whether the proposed appointment of a further Judge of the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice would be in addition to or substitution for the appointment provided for under such Clause 6 of the Railway and Canal Traffic Bill?
§ THE FIRST LORD (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, Westminster)The appointment of an additional Chancery Judge is rendered necessary by the state of business in that Division of the High Court of Justice. The powers given by 601 Clause 6 of the Railway and Canal Traffic Bill will enable the Government to appoint a Judge; but no such proposal will be made to the House unless the then state of business in the High Court renders it absolutely necessary that such an addition shall be made.