§ MR. SAMUEL EVANS (Glamorgan, Mid)I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the decision of the Court of Appeal that poor appellants to the Court of Appeal from decisions of county court judges, acting as arbitrators under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1897, may be required to give security for costs before being allowed to prosecute their appeals; whether he is aware that persons appealing by way of new trial in cases tried by high court judges with juries cannot be required to give any security for the costs of the appeal; and, whether, in view of the importance of enabling workmen or their representatives to obtain high judicial authority on complicated questions of the construction of the Workmen's Compensation Act, he will undertake to make representations to the rule authority as to the advisability of making a rule dispensing with the necessity of giving security for costs when they desire to appeal.
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Sir M. WHITE RIDLEY,) Lancs, BlackpoolMy attention has been called to the decision referred to, and I am aware that in applications for a new trial—which, I may observe, are not, strictly speaking, appeals—it is not the practice to require security for costs. As regards the third paragraph of the question I have to say that, after consulting with the Lord Chancellor, in accordance with the promise given by my right honourable friend the Under Secretary of State for the Home Department, in my behalf on the 7th March, I do not see my way to make to the Rules Committee the proposal suggested by the honourable Member.