MISDEMEANORS BILL. (Hansard, 9 December 1819)

The Earl of Shaftesbury
reported the bill, intitled "An act to prevent delay in the administration of justice in cases of misdemeanor."

The Lord Chancellor
proposed several verbal amendments, which were made on the report being brought up. One related to the granting of copies of indictments to defendants. In certain cases defendants were already allowed copies before appearance; he therefore proposed to insert the word, "after," in order that they might be granted after appearance.

Lord Holland
did not rise to oppose any of the alterations suggested. He was glad to find that the noble and learned lord was so readily disposed to amend the bill. He now rose to move an amendment to the effect, that in cases of information ex-officio, filed by the attorney-general, if the defendants were not brought to trial within eighteen months, such information: should cease to be of any effect, unless there should be an order issued by the court for further delay. He moved this as a clause in the present bill, because he thought it of importance that in a bill, the object of which was to hasten trials for misdemeanor, by taking away the privilege enjoyed by defendants of traversing a disposition should also be shown to prevent delays through the conduct of the prosecutor, particularly in the case of ex-officio informations, which might be kept interminably hanging over the heads of individuals to the destruction of their peace of mind, and perhaps of their property, without any means, at present existing, of compelling the attorney general to proceed with them.

The Lord Chancellor
admitted the importance of the considerations urged by the noble lord. It was, he believed, true, that there were no means of forcing the attorney-general on to trial. In other cases, the defendants might carry down, the record by proviso, but where the attorney-general was prosecutor, the defendant could not carry down the record without a warrant from that officer; He admitted it was of importance to consider whether any means could be adopted of shielding a defendant, under such circumstances, from the effects of unnecessary delay; but he thought that to do it effectually, and with a due regard to all the 958 considerations involved, required more machinery (if he might use the expression) than the clause of the noble lord afforded. In crown cases, where there was what was called a private prosecutor, the defendant, though entitled to carry down the record if the prosecutor did not proceed, yet he must tender himself for trial and abide by the consequences. The noble lord's clause contained nothing on this point, but merely went to enact that the information should cease to be of any effect. In one case in the court of King's Bench, where a motion was made to force the attorney general on to trial, it was suggested by one of the judges, that the object might be attained by moving for a trial at bar, which, if the court granted, they would fix the day for the trial. He did not, however, mean to say that the subjects of this country ought to be in that state in which, in cases of prosecution by the attorney-general, they, could only force that officer on to trial by moving for a trial at bar. If the noble lord would with draw his motion, he would endeavour by the third reading to frame some clause that might meet the object in view, or else he would state, what he conscientiously felt upon the subject. It was frequently not the fault of attorneys-general that the panties they prosecuted were not brought to trial.

Lord Holland
was glad to hear what had, fallen from the noble and learned lord. The subject, however, was not new to the House. Five or six years ago he had called the attention of their lordships to it; and two years ago, it had again been brought under the consideration of parliament. His mind was made up on the subject; but if the noble and learned lord would himself introduce a bill to remedy the evil, in case it should not be convenient for him to consider the matter fully before the third reading, he would not press the clause. As the noble and learned lord was of opinion, that to make some alteration in the present practice was a subject worthy the attention of the legislature, he hoped that either by a clause on the third reading, or by the introduction of a new bill, the necessary amendment would be made. Perhaps, by the time the bill was read a third time, the' noble and learned lord would be able to come prepared for the consideration of the subject.

The Lord Chancellor
observed, that the measures which the noble lord had alluded 959 to as having been already before the House, differed from the present proposition. He understood that it was intended to move the third reading of the bill to-morrow. Whether a matter of such importance as that suggested by the noble lord could or could not be by that time arranged in his mind, in a state fit to be introduced as a clause, he could not tell; but if no provision should be made on the subject in the present bill, he should certainly think it his duty to give all the assistance in his power to any measure which might be brought forward on this subject if he thought it proper, or conscientiously to oppose it if he thought it wrong; for until he fully considered the proposition which might be made, he would not pledge himself.

The Marquis of Lansdowne
expressed a hope that the noble lords opposite would agree to postpone the third reading of the bill till Monday. Their lordships would not, he trusted, allow the inconvenience arising from a short delay to stand in the way of justice. It was of great importance, when, upon grounds some of which he would admit were strong, it was proposed to deprive the subject of valuable privileges, that their lordships should endeavour to redress any grievance which might be discovered in the administration of the law. The noble and learned lord had on this, as on other occasions, evinced his readiness to consider any proposition of that description. It had, with respect to this bill, erroneously gone forth, that the noble and learned lord had laid down the law in the case of the Seven Bishops as the foundation of the measure; whereas he had done no such thing, but in adverting to that case, had observed, that the defendants had a right to imparle, and were hardly dealt with when that right was refused. If it appeared that the subject suffered injury by the delay of prosecutions at the suit of the Crown, that injury could only be removed by obliging the attorney-general to bring on the trial within a limited period. It was but justice to furnish the subject with some facilities in return for the privileges which were taken away; and a provision, which would prevent prosecutions from hanging interminably over the head of defendants, was one to which their lordships' attention should be seriously applied. If, by delaying the third reading of this bill far two or three days, the noble and learned lord should have time to make up his mind on 960 the subject, a considerable advantage would be gained; for the provision would form a very appropriate clause in the present bill, and would be better so introduced than if made the subject of a separate measure.

The Earl of Liverpool
said, that if his noble and learned friend could be prepared to propose a clause by Monday or Tuesday, he would have no difficulty in postponing the third reading.

The Lord Chancellor
expressed his willingness to give the subject every consideration in his power, but still thought it would be better to make it the subject of a separate bill.