HC Deb 23 May 1905 vol 146 cc1137-8
MR. BUCHANAN (Perthshire, E.)

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the impending legislation promised by the Government on the questions in dispute between the United Free Church and the legal Free Church, it is with his knowledge and sanction that the Solicitor-General for Scotland appeared in the Court of Session, on Tuesday, May 16th, as counsel for the legal Free Church.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

The Solicitor-General for Scotland was interested in this case before he was Solicitor-General, and it would be a hardship to his clients to abandon the case which he has undertaken. It is perfectly consistent with the Treasury Minute that the Scottish law officers should undertake practice when it does not interfere with public duties. It is conceivable that cases might arise where there would be conflict. But the Solicitor-General ought not to have, and will not have, any part in the drawing up of the Bill which the Government propose to introduce before Whitsuntide.

MR. BUCHANAN

Is it in the interests of the legislation which the right hon. Gentleman is about to introduce for the purpose of settling this serious ecclesiastical difficulty that a member of the Government should be closely associated with one of the parties?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I think this is a matter well understood in Scotland and Scottish practice. I confess that I think it is an unfortunate thing, but clearly the Solicitor-General is not to blame.

MR. DALZIEL (Kirkcaldy Burghs)

He ought to have given it up when he was appointed.

AN HON. MEMBER

They never give up anything.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

The only persons who would suffer if he were to withdraw would be his clients.

MR. DALZIEL

Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake that the Solicitor-General shall not appear in other cases?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I agree that he ought not to take on fresh cases dealing with impending legislation.