§ Mr. Goldieasked the Attorney-General whether his attention has been drawn to the recent refusal of a court of quarter sessions to hear an appeal against an order of a court of summary jurisdiction directing the destruction of a dog found to be dangerous, under Section 2 of the Dogs Act, 1871, on the ground that no appeal lay, inasmuch as the proceedings had been instituted by way of complaint instead of information; and whether he will introduce legislation to remove this anomaly, in order that the owners of dogs proceeded against under the said Section may have a right of appeal to quarter sessions in common with other persons convicted by courts of summary jurisdiction?
§ Sir S. HoareI have seen Press reports of the case to which my hon. and learned Friend refers. As he is aware, there is188W a distinction between proceedings which may result in a conviction of an offence and those which may result in an order. There is no general right of appeal against orders made by courts of summary jurisdiction on complaint, and on the information at present before me I know of no sufficient reason to justify me in introducing legislation to provide a right of appeal in the type of case to which he refers.