§ Order for Second Reading read.
§ The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. William Watson)I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."
This small Bill, which has already passed the House of Lords, is essential to the more effective administration of justice in Scotland, and I hope it will present no difficulty and cause no great discussion in the House to-night. The Bill has its origin in an awkwardness that arose through the necessity of preserving the old Royal Burgh of Inverary as a circuit town. In fact, no sitting of circuit courts has been held in Inverary since 1908. No Sheriff Court business is now done there at all; there has been no Sheriff Court business done there since 1919. It has been necessary, however, because of the existing regulations or statutory provisions of the criminal law, to preserve the court house there, although no business has been done. It is with a view to dealing with that situation, at Inverary and at any other places where it may arise, that we provide in the first Clause that circuits shall be arranged by the Lords Commissioners of Justiciary, as they are called, who are the Scottish judges dealing with criminal procedure matters. I do not think it necessary to go through this Clause in detail, but it does provide for circuits to be arranged, and, of course, published by what we call an Act of Adjournal, which is the ordinary form 302 of regulation familiar to Scottish lawyers.
In the second Clause we deal with a matter which is, in many cases, of advantage to the accused. According to our procedure in Scotland, in the case of a-person who is indicted, there are two statutory diets. The first is the pleading diet, at which the accused is called on to plead guilty or not guilty. If he pleads, guilty, he is either dealt with straight away or remitted to the High Court for sentence. If he pleads not guilty, then he is removed to the High Court for trial and the second diet is appointed for dealing with the trial. Occasions have arisen where an accused person who has pleaded not guilty at the first diet, before the date appointed for the second diet has made up his mind to plead guilty. In order that that event may more conveniently be dealt with, we propose to apply to that case exactly the same procedure as applies to a man who pleads guilty at the first diet. Of course, it is to the advantage of the accused that he should be more speedily dealt with.
The third Clause deals with another small matter, and it enables a jury to be made aware of the charge, which they are to try at a criminal trial, by the clerk reading a summary instead of the whole indictment. As those familiar with such matters are aware, there are certain classes of indictments which are very long and complex, and necessarily so, and, consequently, the jury cannot readily follow the charge if you read the whole thing, from beginning to end, straight away.
§ The LORD ADVOCATEYes, they are printed, and supplied to the jury in moat cases.
§ The LORD ADVOCATEPrevious convictions are dealt with separately. In the case of a very long and complex indictment it undoubtedly would be a great advantage if the judge were to settle a summary of it in order to bring more clearly before the jury what was the exact charge, and under Clause 3 we propose to provide for that. Clause 4 is merely a repealing Clause, to give effect to the alterations made by Clause 1 in the existing law. It provides that the exist- 303 ing law shall continue until such time as the High Court may make alterations under the powers conferred upon them by Clause 1, and that completes the whole matter. I hope what I have said will give the House a general idea of the matters contained in this Bill which I think will effect a great improvement in our law procedure in Scotland.
Mr. W. ADAMSONI do not propose to discuss the matters which have been referred to on the Second Reading, and all I wish to say is that we shall reserve our right to deal with the points which have been explained by the Lord Advocate during the Committee Stage of the Bill.
§ Mr. BUCHANANI agree with the last speaker that the various points we wish to discuss should be dealt with in Committee. There is, however, one point which I would like to mention. The Lord Advocate is aware that a Committee was set up in Scotland to deal with the question of Appeal Courts in criminal cases. I have been requested to ask why the Scottish Office and the Law Officers have not incorporated in this Bill proposals dealing with a criminal Appeal Court in Scotland. There is no reason why the question of a criminal appeal should not have been included in this Measure. This is a non-controversial matter. The establishment of Appeal Courts in England has worked satisfactorily. I am aware that the people I represent have not a thorough grip of these legal questions. but why has an Appeal Court not been established in Scotland by this Bill, and why has it not been incorporated?
England has tried an Appeal Court for a number of years, and it has proved entirely successful. There is a demand for it in Scotland, and it should be introduced as early as possible. My reason for raising this matter now is in. order to make a protest against the dilatoriness of the Scottish Office in this matter, because this question might have been incorporated in this Bill, or at any rate we should have been given some idea when a Bill dealing with the establishment of an Appeal Court in Scotland is going to be introduced. Of course, I do not oppose this Measure. It is perfectly true that when a man pleads guilty before the pleading diet he is automatic- 304 ally remitted to the High Court for sentence. I would like to ask would it not be possible where a man pleads guilty to prevent a good deal of the delay taking place between his pleading guilty and him being sentenced. I think the trials in such cases might 'foe hurried forward. I hope the Lord Advocate will be able to give us some assurance in regard to the establishment of an Appeal Court.
§ The LORD ADVOCATEWith regard to the establishment of an Appeal Court for Scotland, when the Committee which dealt with this subject reported the present Bill was well on its way through the House of Lords. I am just as anxious as the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) to see effect given to that matter, and I assure him that it is under consideration and there has been no dilatoriness about it. I hope we shall be able to introduce the Bill without any serious delay. The matter will be dealt with, but, of course, it will mean the setting up of a new Court. It is a matter which will have to be dealt with in a separate Bill and could not be properly dealt with in a Measure like the one we are considering, which only deals with minor amendments. On this question I sympathise with the views which have been expressed by the hon. Member.