HL Deb 24 July 1890 vol 347 cc683-90

Amendments reported (according to order).

LORD HERSCHELL

My Lords, upon this Motion I desire to say a word or two with regard to what took place when this Bill was in Committee. I am not going at all to revert to the subject which was then discussed, namely, the question of adding another person whose concurrence shall be necessary before the regulations which shall be made by the County Councils with regard to the reception and accommodation of the Judges are sanctioned. It is merely with reference to the operation of that clause that I desire to say a few words. It seems to me that its effect has not really received sufficient consideration. I do not propose to move the Amendment now, but what I would venture to throw out for your Lordships' consideration is that it would be really much better that the rules referring to these matters should be made by the Secretary of State for the Home Department than that they should be made by the County Councils, with the concurrence of the Lord Chancellor. I will point out in a moment my reasons for saying so. The proposal in the Bill might obviously in particular cases lead to a deadlock of a very disagreeable character, and one which, I think, would not tend to the dignity of the Judges in the administration of justice, or to the advantage of the country. The Bill proposes that these rules for the reception of the Judges and their accommodation should be made by the County Councils; but the rules would be absolutely ineffectual unless the Lord Chancellor concurred in them. No doubt that was put in as a safeguard in order to secure that arrangements which would be suitable in the administration of justice on circuit should be made, or, at all events, that no others should be made. But let me ask your Lordships to consider for a moment what would happen. Supposing County Councils made rules which the Lord Chancellor did not think fit to concur in; he would refuse to sanction them, and the consequence would be that in that particular county there would be no rules at all. Matters then would, I presume, go on as at present, and the Judge would be left to determine upon the mode of conducting the arrangements as between himself and the Sheriff. He would still have the power which he has now of enforcing his views, and the Sheriff would have to submit to them. Therefore, the result of the Lord Chancellor not concurring in the regulations proposed by the County Councils, would be that things would be brought to a deadlock and the Sheriff would be left under his present liabilities. I cannot help thinking that, in a case where the Lord Chancellor did not concur, disputes would be engendered between the Lord Chancellor and the County Councils, and that the kind of discussion which would take place as to what was sufficient accommodation for the Judges, or what sort of lodgings would do for them, or what other provisions should be made for their reception, would not be likely to be of a very edifying character, or be calculated to be of much advantage in the administration of justice. It seems to me it puts the Lord Chancellor in a very undesirable position, because there would be a possibility of his being thus brought into collision, or into something like conflict, with any of the various County Councils, because each one of them has to form its own regulations, and to carry out its own conception of what is proper accommodation and a proper mode of receiving the Judges. It seems to me, having regard to the fact that the administration of justice is a matter of general concern for the whole community, although the administration of justice may be carried out by the Judges going to each county, that the country at large is interested in the proper administration of justice and in ensuring that everywhere proper rules shall be carried out relating to the accommodation and reception of the Judges. But there is this further reason; if the whole of these expenses fall upon the county then I quite understand the feelings that the County Council ought absolutely to determine what the extent of those expenses should be. But many of these expenses do not fall entirely on the county. That part of them which relates to the accommodation of the Judges falls almost exclusively on the Treasury, and in many counties exclusively. I do not understand that my noble Friend who introduces this Bill intends that the County Councils should pay any expenses which they do not at present pay. The provision is that the regulations should be made by the County Councils, and that, of course, relates to the accommodation of the Judges. I have looked at the evidence which was given before the Committee, and it comes to this, that in many counties a very large portion of the money is found by the county for the accommodation of the Judges. The view is that they should find that money, and the only question is as to the amount to be found. Then, as regards the other expenses. When a third Assize is necessitated the Sheriff assisted in bearing the expense of that Assize. The Sheriff largely contributed to the expense of that third Assize. That, of course, would continue. Therefore, as regards the third Assize the money will be found largely by the Treasury, while the County Council is given expressly jurisdiction over the rules relating to the expenditure of that money. Of course, I am not suggesting that in every case, or in many cases, you would be likely to have these questions arising as to how the Judges should be received, or what accommodation is sufficient for them. But I can conceive County Councils existing in the future, though not, perhaps, at the present day, where there might be discussion of a very undesirable kind regarding the administration of justice, arising out of circumstances which might have taken place owing to the manner in which justice had been administered.

Now, that seems to me to be a result which it is very desirable to avoid. But, my Lords, I have this further reason, that in the view which may be adopted hereafter, when this matter is more thoroughly dealt with, I apprehend the counties will not have to bear any part of this expense. There are counties now which I believe bear practically none of these expenses. An arrangement is made with the Under - Sheriff, by which the fees that are raised are taken by him, and ho bears the necessary expense of the shrievalty, so that in those cases no burden would fall on the county; and I know that is the case in a very largo county which I have in my mind. At the same time you would relieve the counties of matters of Imperial interest where the burden should not fall upon them. Of course, that state of things is not brought about by this Bill, but I hope that will ultimately be the case everywhere. It is very undesirable to bring the County Councils into a matter of this description, and for them to make the rules now, when, if you have, say next year, a complete measure dealing with this matter, they will be parties really not interested in making the rules at all, because they will not have to bear the burden of the expense. I would submit under those circumstances, whether, if this be a temporary measure it would not be better to leave the determination of these matters to the Home Secretary, in which case you could not have any of these difficulties and differences of opinion, probably resulting in a deadlock, which you might have if these proposals were carried out. I do not think it is conceivable that any injustice would in that way be done to anybody, and I think that it would be better for the matter to be carried out uniformly over the whole country, than that each County Council should act according to its own ideas in reference to the rules under which the administration of justice shall be carried out.

* THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN

My Lords, the proposal of my noble Friend, as shadowed out by him, is rather a large one to make at this stage of the Bill, and until we see the Amendment drawn out in terms, I should prefer to reserve such remarks as I may have to make to it. But there are one or two things which I should like to say to your Lordships which strike me at this moment. In the first place, this question of substituting the Home Secretary for the County Councils and the Lord Chancellor had not escaped my attention, in the first instance, and I have taken steps to try to ascertain whether such an arrangement was likely to be approved of. I am bound to say I did not find that that arrangement was likely to meet with approval in certain influential quarters. But, leaving that point, there is another one which I think the noble and learned Lord has almost entirely passed over, and that is that the County Councils will have to find the money. The noble and learned Lord says the County Councils will not have to find the money, because ultimately the Under Sheriffs will become the officials of the County Councils, the fees which are received by the Under Sheriffs will go to the County Councils, and the County Councils will bo able to make such arrangements as to make the sum which is received in fees recoup them for all the expenses which have been incurred in respect of the duties of the High Sheriff. That may, or may not, be the case; we do not know how that will be until it is proved; but, at all events, even if it happens, as the noble and learned Lord supposes, that the County Councils will have the control of the Under Sheriffs, the Under Sheriffs will be the officers of the County Councils, and the money will therefore pass through the hands of the County Councils. So that, to that extent at all events, the County Councils will have to find the money. Now, with regard to the Judges' lodgings, I must remind your Lordships that the Judges' lodgings is only one of the matters concerned, and that the other point, the protection of the Judges, was left unnoticed altogether. But is it true, as a matter of fact, that the Treasury do find the money at present, and are they prepared to find it in the future? I know that in certain cases the Treasury do find a very substantial part of the money, if not the whole of it; but there are a great many other cases in which they do not, and I think the Treasury would be very reluctant to take upon themselves any additional burden. Of course, if the Trea- sury will come forward and say that they will take upon themselves the whole expense of lodging the Judges, and if they are also prepared to take upon themselves the whole expense of protecting them and managing the business of the Assizes, then I quite admit the argument is a very good one, and that we may hand over the making of these regulations to the Home Secretary, or to any other official whom the House may choose. But we have to deal with the state of things which at present exists, and here I must point out that the High Sheriffs' expenses are not limited to finding accommodation and lodgings for the Judges, but that the High Sheriff has also to find the javelin men, or else to arrange for the attendance of police who are to protect the Judge. Those police are to be paid for by the county; and when it is also proposed by this Bill to throw upon the county any other expenses of that kind which may be incurred, I think the county will be very reluctant to say that they are prepared to pay whatever expenses the Home Secretary may choose to throw upon them. The reason why the Bill at present proposes to enable the County Councils to make these regulations is because it expects the County Councils to pay, and I do not know why we should not trust the County Councils in the matter. I apprehend the whole principle of our local legislation is to trust the County Councils as far as we can in these matters. Of course, it is possible there may be certain cases where the regulations made by County Councils may not be approved. The Lord Chancellor may not approve of the regulations which are made by the County Councils. If such case occurred, what would happen? Why, you will have to fall back upon the present practice, and if the present practice would be discreditable then it is discreditable now, and it is the more discreditable because it is universal. That is the reason why this Bill is introduced My Lords, I shall not offer any further remarks until I see the Amendment, but I think, at the same time, it is a very large Amendment to make at this stage of the Bill.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

I cannot help thinking that the noble Earl has not quite sufficiently answered the ob- jection which has been pointed out by the noble and learned Lord (Lord Herschell.) He says you will revert to the old practice if the Lord Chancellor and the County Councils disagree. I do not find that in the Bill, and I very much doubt whether that is a true construction. It seems to me things would then come to a deadlock, and I do not find any provision as to what is to be done in that event. I can only say that I cannot find it in the Bill.

THE EARL OF CAMPBEDOWN

If I may be allowed to give an answer, I think what would happen would be this: If a deadlock arose the Judge would settle the matter with the High Sheriff by telling him if he did not do so-and-so, he, the Judge, would fine him, just the same as at present.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

I very much doubt whether that is the true construction of the Bill. It seems to me to deprive the Judge altogether of any such power as he now possesses. Of course, I do not acquiesce that he does possess any. As the Bill is framed, it seems to me to leave the particular cases pointed out by my noble and learned Friend unprovided for. I point that out to the noble Earl, because, if that is so, and that is my present impression, he will probably think it right to meet that in the event of the Bill going further. I can. only say for myself that so long as I keep my present office I shall be heartily grateful to anybody who will transfer this function to any other member of the Government. I do not feel at all anxious to exercise the jurisdiction which this Bill puts upon me, and I am not quite certain that arrangements might not be made by the Home Secretary with the County Councils which probably would satisfy everybody. I will take this opportunity of referring to the statement of the noble Earl who spoke the other night of a Judge threatening a High Sheriff for not wearing a particular coat, and I said I had no knowledge of such an occurrence; but I must mention that I have received a letter from a gentleman who says that he remembers the circumstance well, and he goes on to give the name of the persons concerned in the incident. This only shows how such things can be exaggerated. I do not name the persons to the transaction, because some of the actors in it are alive, and it might give pain to do so. It was a matter which occurred long ago, and so far from its having any relation to the dress worn by the High Sheriff, the fact is that the High Sheriff had been guilty of the greatest possible impropriety and defiance of the Queen's Representative, and it was for that that he was fined £500. It had no more relation to Court dress, or to the coat the High Sheriff was dressed in at the time, than it has to do with this Bill.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY

There is just one point to which I would refer with regard to the compulsion upon the County Councils to pay. I apprehend as the Bill stands, whether they make regulations or not the construction which has been put upon the Bill is correct, that they will have to pay. It would be a considerable punishment to them that they would still have to pay all the expenses; but I really do not think we need be so very distrustful of these County Councils. We have constituted them, and our whole wish is to make them useful and responsible bodies. In most of the counties they consist of persons of considerable position in the county, and they are the principal body now in the county itself. I cannot think, therefore, that it is at all necessary we should show the distrust of them which is apparently shown by my noble Friend behind me. I have no doubt they will feel, as we all feel, that the dignity of the Judges should be consulted, and that everything which is proper to be done for the purpose of showing respect for whatever is connected with the administration of justice will be done. If it should happen, unfortunately, that any County Councils should fail in their duty, it may probably be necessary to deal with them in another way; but I quite agree with my noble and learned Friend behind me, that if the regulations are to be imposed upon the County Councils by an authority from without, then it is only reasonable that the Treasury, that is to say the Secretary of State, should act in the matter, and I do not suppose my noble and learned Friend would make any great objection to that arrangement.

Bill to be read 3ª on Monday next.