§ Lords Amendment: In page 11, line 3, leave out "a High," and insert "the Federal."
§ 4.26 p.m.
§ The ATTORNEY - GENERAL (Sir Thomas Inskip)I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."
The Clause as it left this House contained the requirement that a person who could be appointed Advocate-General for the Federation should be a person qualified to be appointed a judge of the High Court, and excluded members of the Bar at a High Court in a Federated State. It is now proposed to substitute the words "the Federal" for the words "a High" so that the person qualified to be appointed Advocate-General for the Federation shall be a person qualified to be appointed a judge of the Federal Court.
§ 4.27 p.m.
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI am not fully informed by the explanation of the learned Attorney-General. I do not understand how it is that these considerations were not present in his mind and in the mind of the Government when the Bill was under discussion in the House of Commons. During that long period one would have thought that the differences between the Federal Court and a High Court would have presented themselves very directly to those Ministers who were in charge of the Bill. As far as I understood the Attorney-General he suggests that a certain class of persons whom it is desirable to make eligible for this position would be included if the Amendment were made. Can he or one of the Ministers give some indication as to the 2508 numbers of these people and the kind of posts that they have held? One does not wish to broaden the qualifications for so important a function if it is a matter of perhaps two or three people who would be left out, but if it comes to throwing open this post to a class of people of qualifications different from those originally thought indispensable by the Government, and consequentially and potentially diminishing the character and quality and status of the appointment, I think more careful consideration should be given to the Amendment. Perhaps the Under-Secretary will explain. I see he is charged with a great body of information upon the subject.
§ Viscount WOLMERI do not think my right hon. Friend need worry particularly about this Amendment. It is really only intended to meet a point that concerns the legal profession in the States. The only thing I should like the Under-Secretary to say is whether this point was raised by the States and whether they attach any importance to it. I do not think that the serious consequences which my right hon. Friend seems to fear need be anticipated.
§ The ATTORNEY-GENERALI can speak again only by leave of the House. There is practically no difference between the qualifications for a judge of the Federal Courts and a judge of the High Courts, but it happens that in the case of pleaders a person in order to be eligible for a High Court judgeship must have been a pleader at the Bar of a High Court. With that one exception the Amendment will make practically no difference.