SECOND READING. (Hansard, 15 May 1888)

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY),

in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that the first part dealt with the powers of the Coroner to hold certain inquests, and the second part with the mode of his election. There appeared to be a general 288 consensus of opinion on the 1st section of the Bill, which gave the Coroner power to hold inquests in respect of fires. He was not sure that such power did not already exist. Such inquests used to be held, but owing to a legal decision that had been given by the Courts, they had been discontinued. However, it was felt that a power to hold such inquests ought to exist, and it was consequently conferred by this Bill. The subject of the mode of election of the Coroner was a more debatable matter, and though he had read a great number of communications, which all concurred in condemning the present practice as an intolerable nuisance, there was no such unanimity as to the system to be substituted for it. At present every freeholder in the district was entitled to vote at an election of a Coroner, no matter how limited his freehold or how recently he might have become possessed of it. There was, therefore, no register and great confusion, with consequent enormous expense, and many a candidate had been ruined by his success or failure. It had been suggested that the Parliamentary constituency should be substituted. There was a particular objection to that part of the Bill which vested the appointment of Coroners in the Lord Chancellor. His mind was quite open upon this matter, and he certainly should not jealously claim the patronage which the Bill gave him. It might be suggested that the new County Councils should have the power of appointing Coroners; but the objection would at once arise that this could not be provided in the Bill, because no such Bodies existed at the present time. Even if they did, it would require consideration whether the election of Coroners by those who were themselves an elected body was altogether a desirable mode of meeting the difficulty. All he would say at present, therefore, was that the present system ought to be altered, and that when the Bill reached Committee he should gladly welcome any suggestion which would get rid of the difficulty. The responsibility of appointing Coroners was not one which he had desired to attach to the Office of Lord Chancellor. He asked their Lordships to read the Bill a second time.

§ LORD HERSCHELL

said, he wished to express his strong objection to the 1st clause of the Bill with reference to the mode of appointing Coroners. He entirely shared the view expressed by his noble and learned Friend as to the extreme inexpediency of the present mode of appointment; and he looked upon the proposal to vest the patronage entirely in the Lord Chancellor as a very serious one. There could be no doubt that the abolition of the system by which the freeholders had a voice in the appointment of the Coroner would be regarded by many with some jealousy. The mode of popular election was an unsatisfactory one; but there was a widespread feeling that the Coroner ought to be regarded to some extent as a representative of the people, and should not be appointed by the Executive. If they did away with popular election altogether in this matter as it now existed, they were not likely to carry public opinion with them in attaining the end which they had in view by substituting for the present system a system of appointment by the Lord Chancellor or any other officer of the Government of the day. The only step by which they would be able to accomplish what they had in view with general assent would be to vest the appointment in some elected body. Many of the municipalities had for years lead the power of appointing Coroners, and any proposal to take that power away from them would be regarded with the utmost jealousy and hostility. It was proposed to constitute County Councils, and it seemed to him that the natural course would be to extend to the County Councils the power of appointing Coroners. It was true that the County Councils were not yet brought into existence; but they had that night passed a Bill which was based upon the assumption that these Councils were going to exist. He would suggest, therefore, that the question of appointment should not be dealt with until they were able to deal with it in the way he had pointed out. At all events, do not let them transfer the power of appointment to the Lord Chancellor. He should feel it his duty to bring this question forward when the Bill reached the Committee stage.