44. Mr. Owen Evansasked the Attorney-General whether he is aware that in a case tried at the last Cardiganshire Assizes, held at Lampeter, in which two defendants were convicted of conspiring to obtain money by false pretences, part of the evidence for the prosecution related to conversations carried on, and representations made, in Welsh, and that several of the witnesses, being Welsh-speaking, expressed their desire to give their evidence in Welsh; and whether he will inquire into the facts and consider what steps may be taken to see that Welsh-speaking witnesses are permitted to give their evidence in Welsh?
§ The Attorney-GeneralAccording to my information with regard to this case, it is inaccurate to suggest that Welsh-speaking witnesses were not permitted to give their evidence in Welsh. The last part of the question does not, therefore, arise.
Mr. EvansIs it not a fact, according to what appeared in the Press, that they were not permitted to give their evidence in Welsh, although they requested to be allowed to do so, and is that in accordance with the policy laid down by the hon. and learned Gentleman in this House that Welsh-speaking witnesses should be allowed to give their evidence in their natural tongue?
§ The Attorney-GeneralThere was some comment in the course of the trial, in the report which I saw, with regard to one witness, but it appeared that that witness had given his evidence in English in the police court, and the learned counsel when he called that witness expressed his respectful agreement with the line that the learned judge took with regard to that witness.
Mr. EvansDoes not the hon. and learned Gentleman realise that to give evidence-in-chief in the English language is a very different thing from being cross-examined in it, and is he not aware that the witness did ask to be allowed to give evidence in Welsh? I am asking the hon. and learned Gentleman whether what happened was in accordance with the practice which he explained to the House?
§ The Attorney-GeneralFrom such reports as I have seen, there is no ground for believing that an interpreter was refused. I have read such reports as have been available for my information, and I do not think anything that took place in that trial is a proper basis for suggesting that the learned judge was not fully alive to the considerations which the hon. Gentleman has put, or that he did not give witnesses every chance to give their evidence properly.