§ MR. BOTTOMLEYI beg to ask the Prime Minister whether is aware that at the last sessions of the Central Criminal
†The Question was as follows:—
§ MR. REESTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the attempt of individuals to lay informations against Colonial governors in the London police courts, in repect of acts preformed by them in their official capacity and approved by their Governments, action will be taken to amend the Law in this behalf, in order to the maintenance of the proper independence and dignity of such governors and Governments.
§ Court, out of the sixty-nine prisoners tried, no fewer than eighteen were found not guilty, while in three other cases the bills were ignored by the grand jury; and whether these and similar statistics will be referred to the proposed Royal Commission on Police Administration, with a view to the consideration by that body of the proportion of cases in which police evidence, acted upon by magistrates, is eventually found to be untrustworthy.
§ MR. GLADSTONEThe Question seems to mo to show a misapprehension as to the respective duties of the committing magistrate and the court of trial. It is the duty of the magistrate to commit for trial if a prima facie case is established, but the jury is bound to acquit unless the absolute guilt of the prisoner is proved beyond all reasonable doubt. There must therefore always be a large proportion of acquittals among the cases committed for trial; and it would be an evil thing if it were otherwise. Further, in a large proportion of the cases, the question of guilt or innocence does not turn on police evidence In those circumstances I do not think it would in any way assist the Commission in its inquiry if I were to refer to them these or any similar figures.