HC Deb 26 October 1911 vol 30 cc414-8
Mr. ELLIS DAVIES

I desire to call the attention of the House to the administration of justice in Wales, particularly in that portion which is Welsh-speaking. Time after time the attention of the House has been drawn to certain remarks that have been made, not always of a very complimentary nature, with regard to Welsh witnesses and jurymen. Not many years ago the late Lord Chief Justice Russell took occasion to draw attention to a remark that had been made on this subject by two of his predecessors in the administration of justice in North Wales. Speaking of Welsh juries, the late Lord Chief Justice Russell made this remark:— I am justified in saying, I could not desire a more intelligent jury than those who have come before me. But that testimony has not saved Welsh witnesses and Welsh jurymen from criticisms which I am sorry to say are sometimes very offensive. We are quite accustomed to remarks made by magistrates, and are not at all surprised by them, but when a justice of assize takes occasion in the administration of justice to make remarks which, to say the least, are not of a complimentary character, either with regard to witnesses or juries, as to the language in which they choose to give their evidence or conduct their work, I think we are entitled in the House to take some notice of it. My remarks are directed to some observations by one of the most respected members of the English judicial bench—Mr. Justice Channell—at Carnarvon Assizes some ten days ago. The occasion of these remarks was that a large number of jurymen who had been called up took exception to serving on the ground that they were not competent to discharge their duties because of their lack of knowledge of English. [A laugh.] I should have imagined that when a man is sworn to return a true verdict it is essential he should understand the evidence upon which that verdict is to be based. Mr. Justice Channell made some remarks which I would attribute to his lack of appreciation of the facts of the case. Let me remind the House that the Welsh language is the language of the home, of the religion of the people, and of their business. I have never in the course of my political life, now extending over some years, addressed a political meeting in my Constituency in the English language, and that has been for no mere sentimental reason, but it has been because it is the language the people understand. If I may be permitted to make a personal reference I would say I am a member of a legal firm practising in the county town of Carnarvon, and nine out of every ten of the interviews carried on with our clients are in the Welsh language. But an English judge, ignorant of these conditions, because Welsh jurymen took exception to serving on a jury in an important trial—

Lord HUGH CECIL

Is it in order to comment on the action of one of His Majesty's Judges otherwise than on a motion directly raising the conduct of the Judge?

Mr. SPEAKER

It rather depends on the meaning of the word "comment." If the hon. Gentleman is going to develop his speech on the Motion for Adjournment into an attack on the Judge for some words he used, that would be deafly out of order. But if some recent statement by the Judge in the discharge of his duty is merely used to illustrate some particular wrong which the hon. Member believes to exist in the administration of justice in Wales, then I think it may be permitted. But of course it is not open to the hon. Member to criticise adversely a Judge who has nobody here to defend him, and cannot deny the charge made by the hon. Member. It would be quite contrary to the practice of the House to allow a criticism of that character.

Mr. ELLIS DAVIES

I should be sorry indeed to say anything offensive of Mr. Justice Channell, who is one of the most respected members of the English Bench. But let me refer to one sentence which his Lordship used. After experiencing some difficulty in empanelling a jury able to understand English, he said "failing these I may have to try other cases by ignorant people, if I cannot get sensible ones." The implication is that a Welshman cannot be deemed a sensible man unless he has a knowledge of a foreign tongue. [Laughter.] I do not know whether the hon. Member who laughs has any conception of the fact that Welsh was spoken in this country before the first Saxon left his native land. May I reply, not to Mr. Justice Channell in particular, but to the whole bench of justices, that if knowledge of a second language is to be the only condition on which a man can be deemed to be sensible, how many are there who would pass muster?

May I put another point, rather overlooked by English judges when they come to Wales, that a merely slight acquaintance with a language does not necessarily imply that a man is master of a language and enables him to give his evidence in that language, still less stand cross-examination in it. How many Members of this House who have gone through the public schools would like to be cross-examined in French in a court of law? How many of them would follow the jargon of the criminal courts of the country in that language? The difficulty is one which has been going on for years. We cannot get those responsible for the administration of justice either to ascertain the facts, or, when they have ascertained them, to face them. A Welshman is at least entitled to be tried by a jury of his peers. If you exclude from the jury-box in North Wales those men who have no knowledge of the English language you are going to deny Welshmen the fundamental right of a Briton to be tried by his peers. There is a very pathetic side to the question. I have watched on many occasions a prisoner standing in the Court all day while evidence of the most important character was being given against him, and no attempt was made to convey to him one word of the evidence on which he might be convicted or even tried for his life. That is a position which would be intolerable to an Englishman—I do not see why it should be tolerable to a Welshman. It seems to me that there is a simple remedy, and that is the appointment of an official interpreter. It is done, I am told, in the Transvaal and also in Canada. In one case Dutch is used in the Courts alongside English, and in the other French is used alongside English. We do resent these discourteous remarks, which are continually being made by magistrates and even by members of the High Court Bench, which sometimes are not only discourteous but exceedingly offensive to those who happen to be in Court for the purposes of business.

Mr. HUGH EDWARDS

I should like to associate myself with the protest which has been made by my hon. Friend in regard to the remarks made at the Carnarvonshire Assizes. It is a very good tradition of this House that no attack should be made upon any of His Majesty's judges, but it is well for the House to remember that other people, not so fortunately placed as are His Majesty's judges, have also their rights in the way of protection. I think that Welsh jurors who come to serve their country and are prepared to give their services, as all of them do, ought to be saved from the humiliation of having themselves addressed from the bench as "ignorant people." So far from being blamed because they are so proficient in Welsh, they ought to be commended. In Canada no one would think of sneering at a French-Canadian who spoke French, and in South Africa the Dutch language is recognised. The Noble Lord (Lord H. Cecil) has of late shown great zeal on behalf of the Welsh Church. He has gone up and down the country declaring what a great institution it is. He might supplement his remarks in future by declaring that the glory of the Welsh Church is that its services are held in the Welsh language. The least that can be done is that jurors should be saved from the humiliation of these sneering remarks. There is a very strong feeling in Wales on the matter. My hon. Friend has explained that whenever he delivers political speeches he does so in Welsh. So does the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He is eloquent in the English language, as hon. Members opposite have cause to know; but he is much more eloquent in Welsh, as the Noble Lord (Lord Hugh Cecil) knows. He has heard him speak, though I do not suppose he has been able to follow him; but I am quite sure that if he were able to understand a speech in Welsh of the Chancellor of the Exchequer he would give up his crusade on behalf of the Welsh Church. There is a very strong feeling in Wales with regard to the remarks made from the bench, and I think that in future His Majesty's judges will be much more careful if they know that a protest of this kind will be made. Unfortunately, we are not in a position, I understand, to move a Resolution, but I hope we shall carry the House with us in the sense and sentiment that these remarks should for the future cease altogether.

The HOME SECRETARY (Mr. McKenna)

I find myself in a certain amount of difficulty because I cannot quite take the full force of the charge which has been made. Both my hon. Friend's were particularly careful not to make any charge against His Majesty's judges, and it would be unbecoming in me to defend one of the judges from a charge which has not been made. As I understand, something has been said which appeared on the face of the report to be derogatory to the Welsh language, and in a secondary sense to Welsh jurors. As my hon. Friends know, I have the honour to represent a Welsh county. [An HON. MEMBER: "Can you speak Welsh?"] I regret to say I cannot. I can assure my hon. Friend that he is not likely to find me backward in defending the claim of the Welsh people to speak the Welsh language nor the claim of a Welsh jury to full consideration by the public. In the present case my hon. Friends seemed to suggest, though they did not actually state it, that it would be a desirable thing in North Wales if the proceedings in Courts of Justice were conducted in the Welsh language.

Mr. ELLIS DAVIES

What I suggested was the appointment of an official interpreter.

Mr. McKENNA

I am not sure that the proceedings of the Courts of Justice would be greatly helped if they had to be conducted through the medium of an interpreter. I only know the facts from the statistical point of view. My hon. Friend knows them from his knowledge of the everyday life and business of his county. But even in his county the monoglot Welsh, although there are more in Carnarvonshire than in any other county in Wales, and particularly in his part of the county, where they are in a majority, are by no means so large a proportion as to preclude the possibility of getting excellent juries who speak English as well as Welsh. I have heard proceedings conducted in the East End of London—in the Whitechapel county court—and I am bound to say that I have never thought that the interposition of an interpreter is an assistance to the cause of justice. I hope my hon. Friend will not think me unfair to him if I say that to such a proposal as that made at such a time as this and without notice he can hardly expect me to give more than a dilatory reply. I will say that after inquiry into the case and full investigation of the circumstances, not of this case only, but of the general circumstances, both in North and South Wales, I should be very happy to consider whether it would be a convenient method to appoint an official interpreter; but I hope my hon. Friend will not press for an answer on such a matter as that at such short notice as this.