HC Deb 17 February 1896 vol 37 cc463-4
MR. ATHERLEY-JONES (Durham, N.W.)

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General, (1) whether his attention has been called to the great length of time occupied in the trial of certain recent election petitions, and the consequent heavy expense entailed upon the parties, with special hardship to the respondents by reason of the inadequate amount of the statutory deposit to meet costs, and the insufficient security for obtaining costs against the petitioner; (2) whether he has considered or will consider the desirability of limiting the particulars to a prescribed number of cases of treating, undue influence, or other statutory offences; and, (3) whether he will take into his consideration the desirability of fixing by statute the date at which, for the purposes of the Corrupt Practices Act, candidature may be taken to have commenced, or otherwise dealing with this question upon which the Judges have expressed much difficulty in finding a satisfactory solution?

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Sir RICHARD WEBSTER, Isle of Wight)

I am aware generally of the matters mentioned in the first paragraph, but not as to the extent to which there is a difficulty in obtaining costs from petitioners. I do not think it would be possible to limit particulars to a prescribed number of instances. No general rule can be laid down. The suggestion in the last paragraph is one worthy of consideration, though I doubt whether it would be possible to fix a definite date by statute.