§ MR. COBBhad upon the Paper the following Question:—To ask the Attorney General whether the custom of barristers practising in County Courts where their fathers are Judges, and having professional chambers in or adjoining the district of such Courts, is in accordance with the traditions and etiquette of the Bar; whether he is aware that Mr. T. E. Ellison, of the North Eastern Circuit, has his professional chambers at Sheffield, and practises in his father's Court, and that the Registrar and Deputy Registrar of the Court at Sheffield are uncle and cousin to Mr. Ellison; whether he is aware that Mr. D. M. Metcalfe, of the Western Circuit, has his professional chambers at Bristol, and practises in his father's Court; whether he is aware that Mr. Rupert E. C. Kettle, of the Oxford Circuit, has his professional chambers at Birming ham, and practises in his father's Court, and that the Registrar of the Court at Dndley is Mr. Kettle's brother, and the High Bailiff his brother-in-law; whether he is aware that Mr. Edgar Meynell, of the North Eastern Circuit, has his professional chambers at Newcastle-on-Tyne, and practises in his father's Court: whether he is aware that Mr. E. Honoratus Lloyd and Mr. T. Fitzroy Lloyd, of the North Wales and Chester Circuit, whose professional chambers are in London, practise in their father's Court at Chester; whether he is aware that in these districts there is a feeling among the public and the members of the legal profession that the custom of these barristers practising in their father's Court does not inspire confidence that justice is impartially administered; and whether he will call the attention of these gentlemen to the traditions and etiquette of the Bar, or call the attention of the Lord Chancellor to the facts? The hon. Member said: Before I put this question I wish to withdraw paragraph three, which relates to Mr. Metcalfe, as, since I put the question down, I have been informed that he has not practised in his fathers Court for more than 10 years.
SIR R. WEBSTERIn answer to the hon. Member, I beg to say that I have already expressed my opinion upon this matter in reply to a question put to me 927 in this House during the present Session, to which I would refer him. I must decline to enter into the merits of any-particular case, as I have no opportunity of knowing the circumstances, and no representation has been made to me in the matter. With reference to the withdrawal by the hon. Member of the third paragraph, I must express my regret that he should have made such statements without satisfying himself as to their accuracy. In a letter received to-day from Mr. Metcalfe, he says—
So far as I am personally concerned, Mr. Cobb must have framed his question either without any inquiry at all, or he must have been guided by some very unreliable and incorrect information, for, as a matter of fact, I have not practised in any of my father's courts for 11 years. It seems to me that I have a right to complain that Mr. Cobb has thus used my name in the House of Commons without having had the courtesy to ask me if his information (if any) was correct, and without having taken the trouble to make inquiries, either of my father or of any well-known firms of solicitors in Bristol.
§ *MR. COBBI regret very much having put down Mr. Metcalfe's name, but I may say that I received the information with regard to that gentleman from one of the leading Queen's Counsel on the Western Circuit. [Cries of "Name!"]
MR. A. STAVELEY HILL (Staffordshire, Kingswinford)May I ask the Attorney General whether he has not received from a member of the Oxford Circuit, who was also named in the question, a denial of the accuracy of the statement?
SIR R. WEBSTERWith regard to Mr. Kettle, I think it right to state that some time ago that learned gentleman did consult me upon the subject of practising in his father's Court, and, on my suggestion, that gentleman has also given up such practice. That information, also, the hon. Member might have obtained had he thought fit to make inquiry.
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Longford, N.)What is the hon. and learned Gentleman's information with regard to the other learned gentlemen named in the question?
SIR R. WEBSTERI have no knowledge of the circumstances of those cases, and no representation of any kind has been made to me with regard to any of those gentlemen.