§ VISCOUNT DILHORNEMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, as reported, it was with the approval of the Government that a Motion was tabled in another place which has been described as an attack on Her Majesty's Judges and which suggests that, in the discharge of their judicial functions, they have usurped the legislative function of Parliament.]
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR (LORD GARDINER)My Lords, the Motion tabled in another place criticising the decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of Ward v. James neither required nor received the approval of Her Majesty's Government.
§ VISCOUNT DILHORNEMy Lords, in view of the noble Lord's Answer, does he not regard it as most astonishing that The Times, with its high reputation, should assert positively on its main page, at the very beginning of an article, that this Motion was tabled with the approval of the Government? Am I to take it from the noble and learned Lord's Answer that there was not the slightest justification for this statement? Further, would he not regard it as very shocking if the Government had given their approval to the tabling of any such Motion?
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORMy Lords, as to the first part of the supplementary question, I am never surprised at mis-statements which I read in Conservative newspapers about the Government. As to the second part, I think it is perhaps 7 undesirable that your Lordships' House should comment on what is or is not tabled in another place.
§ VISCOUNT DILHORNEMy Lords, may I further ask the noble Lord to take note of the fact that it will be very wounding to those responsible for The Times that he should describe it as a Conservative newspaper?