§ SIR JOHN LENGI beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether it was by his authority that at the High Court of Justiciary, held in Glasgow on Friday, an ex-councillor and magistrate of that city was indicted for corruptly soliciting and receiving from a spirit merchant applying for a public-house licence the 438 sum of £600, as a bribe, in consideration of which he undertook to procure the licence, and subsequently, in breach of his duty as a magistrate, and in malversation of his office, corruptly voted for and endeavoured to procure the licence; and, further, in a second case, solicited and attempted to obtain another £500 from another applicant for a similar licence; whether he is aware that the judge of the high court who presided, holding that the offences charged against the ex-magistrate, and which the Advocate Deputy was prepared to call witnesses to substantiate, are not criminal offences either under the common or statute law of Scotland, dismissed the indictment and discharged the prisoner; and whether he is aware that in England recently severe penalties have been inflicted for offering bribes in cases of much less importance than those in Glasgow; and whether, if the decision in the Glasgow cases was in accordance with the law of Scotland, steps will be taken to bring it into conformity with the law of England.
§ *THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. A. GRAHAM MURRAY, Buteshire)In answer to the first paragraph, the indictment which is therein substantially although not quite accurately set forth was prepared, as are all indictments, in my name, and in this case I was personally cognisant of the terms thereof. It set forth facts which according to the views of the law officers constituted an indictable offence. In answer to the second paragraph, it is the fact that the learned judge of the high court dismissed the indictment, on the ground that the facts therein stated did not set forth a crime according to the law of Scotland. As there is no appeal from the decision of the judge sitting in the High Court of Justiciary, I am bound to accept this as the law. In answer to the third and fourth paragraphs, I imagine that the hon. Member refers to the case of Walker, which was a prosecution under the Public Bodies Prevention of Corruption Act. I cannot adequately explain within the limits of question and answer, but the hon. Member may rest assured that the cases are not similar, and that their result does not warrant the statement that the law in England and Scotland is different, 439 a point on which I express no opinion. If, however, a Bill which has been introduced in another place conies before this House I shall endeavour to secure the insertion of such clauses as will render the facts as alleged in the Glasgow case a criminal offence according to the law of Scotland, which in my opinion they ought to be.