ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE BILL. [H.L.] (Hansard, 19 July 1928)

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR (LORD HAILSHAM)

My Lords, in moving that these Amendments be taken into consideration by your Lordships' House, it will probably be for the convenience of the House if I state now the nature and purpose of the Amendments so as to avoid having to make three or four speeches later on. There are six Amendments. The first three are purely formal, arising from the fact that it was originally anticipated that the Bill would become law at an earlier date than now appears likely. We are providing that it is not to come into operation before October 1.

The fourth Amendment, leaving out Clause 13, is one which I shall ask your Lordships to agree to with very great regret. It is an Amendment which omits that part of the Bill which provided for the appointment of two additional members of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council for the purpose of Indian Appeals. The reasons which have induced the Government to accept this Amendment are that at this stage of the Session it is, unfortunately, possible for a comparatively small and insignificant number of people to prevent a Bill of this character becoming law altogether if they are sufficiently persistent in their opposition to any material part of it. This Bill is obviously one which could have been made to take a very long time in Committee in another place. Unfortunately, there was a section of the members of another place, I think very few in number, and I am sure, very short-sighted in their Imperial view, who took objection to this clause.

The Government, therefore, were faced with the alternative of dropping the clause or losing the Bill. Had it been that the effect of dropping the clause 1215 would be permanently to give up the hope of appointing these two additional members I confess I should have pressed very hard to fight the Bill even at the risk of prolonging the Session. I have had an opportunity of discussing the situation with my right hon. friend the Prime Minister and as a result of that discussion I have every confidence and belief that when the next Session begins one of the first measures to be brought before Parliament will be a measure embodying the provisions which are now being dropped. Therefore, the effect of the obstruction in another place will be, not to destroy this very useful provision, but merely to delay its operation.

I do not disguise that it puts me in some little difficulty during the first few months of the autumn. There are at present, if the Judicial Committee sits at full strength in two places and if this House be sitting judicially, some fifteen places which ought to be filled. I have six paid members of the Appellate Tribunal besides myself, seven in all, to fill those fifteen places. I am driven, therefore, to rely on volunteer help; but, however loyal and generous their help is, your Lordships will see what a very heavy strain is placed upon those who are willing to give their services in this difficult situation. I think that the delay will only be a temporary one, and for the reasons I have given I shall ask your Lordships to agree to the Amendment, assuring your Lordships that it will not be my fault if measures are not taken at a very early opportunity to repair the mistake which those in another place insisted on making.

Clause 16 was a clause which made the revenue judgments of the Dominions and of this country reciprocally enforceable. Objection was raised to that and it was dropped for the same reason. I should tell your Lordships that as a consequence it will be necessary to make two formal Amendments to the Bill which I shall move in due course. The sixth and last Amendment is of a purely formal and drafting character and has the object of making the Bill consistent. I beg to move.