HC Deb 05 May 1913 vol 52 cc1657-8

asked what law costs have been paid out of public funds in connection with the "Hawke" and "Olympic" case; how much to each of the Law Officers; what interests the several recipients of this public money represented; and by what disinterested authority this expenditure was held to be necessary?


The total law costs to date are £9,648 15s. 4d., of which the Attorney-General received £1,645 18s. Od. The Solicitor-General was not briefed. As the hon. Member is no doubt aware, the "Hawke" was a cruiser belonging to His Majesty's Navy and the Attorney-General represented the Admiralty and the commanding officer of His Majesty's ship.


asked the right hon. Gentleman if he will specify the peerage cases in which the Law Officers have been paid out of public funds fees in addition to salary during the last two completed financial years, the amount paid to each of the Law Officers in each of the cases, how the public were supposed to be concerned in the cases to the extent of paying; and whether the Controller and Auditor-General has called special attention to any of these payments?


I will circulate a statement with regard to the first part of the question. The Crown is always represented by the Attorney-General in peerage cases, because it is concerned in the correctness of the decision arrived at with regard to the claims made. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.—[See Written Answers this date.]


Are the claimants required to pay any of the costs?


So far as I remember, the claimants make their own representations. So far as the Attorney-General is concerned, he is acting for the Crown in the matter.

Sir J. D. REES

Is the right hon. Gentleman quite clear that no part of the costs is recovered in the case of a Parliamentary petition?


In the case to which the hon. Gentleman refers, that of an election petition, the Crown claim the expenses to which they are put.