The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1874-04-25 00:00:00

PUBLIC PROSECUTORS.

In the liorsz OF COMMONS, April 22, in answer to Sir E.
Wilmot, Mr. Cross said it was not the intention of the
Government to bring in a bill this session for the appoint-
ment of Public Prosecutors. The ma ter was under the con-
sideration of the Judicature Commission, and it would be
some weeks betore they presented their report, but when
they did it would receive the most careful consideration of
the Government.

-- • -------
TRIBUNALS OF COMMERCE.
Upon the order of the day for the second reading of this
bill being read,
Mr. Whitwell asked leave to postpone the further progress
of the bill until the 12th June, as the appendix to the report
of the Judicature Commission upon the subject had not yet
been presented.
Mr. Cross said he would do all he could to put the House
in possession of the facts brought out before the Judicature
Commission as soon as possible. The appendix was not
ready as yet, but he hoped to be able to present it to the
House on an early day.

The postponement of the second reading of the bill was
then agreed to

_
REVENUE OFFICERS' DISABILITIES.

Mr. Monk moved the second reading of the Revenue
Officers Disabilities Pill, the object of which is to enact that
no person employed In the changing, collecting, receiving, or
managing any of the revenues ot the country should be
liable to any penalty by reason of his having solicited the
vote of any elector, or having canvassed or addressed an
election meeting. The hon member reviewed past legislation
upon the subject, and stated that according to a ruling of
the Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas all civil ser-
vants were politically free, except officers of the Post Office,
who were prohibited from canvassing and attending political
meetings.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer admitted that the liabili-
ties might appear invidious and annoying, and that the sub-
ject of their removal was worthy of consideration. It was
doubtful, however, whether, if they extended to these officers
the right not only of voting, which the hon, member had
gained for them sonic tune ago, but of taking an active part
in elections, by canvassing and attending political
meetings, they would be really doing them a service.
They were a highly honourable body of men, performing
most responsible duties with great courage, fidelity, and
honesty, but he did not know that they would desire to
be turned into political partisans. The Government con-
sidered that the proper course would be to allow the second
reading of the bill to pass without opposition, and in the
Interval before the bill went into committee to consult the
officers of the two great revenue departments on the subject.
The reports from the Commissioners of Revenue would be
laid on the table.
After remarks from Mr. Norwood, Mr. Forsyth, Mr.
Childers, and Mr. Wheelhouse, the bill was read a second
time.

THE JURIES' BILL.

- --- -
Mr. Lopes, in moving the second reading of this bill, said
he was proposing to remedy a great evil which had long been
before Parliament, and which had been recognised as such
by the whole country. The credit of the measure was not
due to him, but to the late Government, it being substantially
the same as they had introduced in 1872. A London juryman
was a most ill.used person. lie had to decide most difficult
questions, which absorbed a great deal of time most valu-
able to our City merchants, and altogether the position was
not an enviable one. The Act of 1870 was most valuable,
but the Government had in the following year to bring
In a bill to amend some parts of it which had been found
unworkable. The lull of 1873 came into the House. and a
large number of clauses were passed, but it was withdrawn
at the latter end of the session, and no nothing was done.
The bill proposed to secure that which did nut at present
exist- a just and uniform incident of service among all per-
sons qualified to serve. It was proposed to increase the
area from which juries were taken, and they ilid that by
creating a new qualification. There was a qualification by
Which certain lodgers should be liable to nerve, and also
that managers of public companies should be called upon
special juries. Persons over GO years were now exempt,
but he proposed that they should have to serve
up to the age of 0.5, and up to the age of 70 unless they
claimed exemption. The hon. member then referred to the
evidence taken before the commisaion to inquire into the
Jury laws, and said they proposed to pay the overseers for
preparing the lists, so that there would be an end to the call-
ing of names of dead person*, and other evils. To prevent the
summoning officer and the purnan coming into contact, they
ixoposed to send all summomes through the post. They pro-
posed to reduce the number of jurymen in civil cases to seven.
but the parties could have twelve ilthey choose The criminal
juries they would retain the present number. In all eases
the jury must be U12011i111.11, As to the question of payment,
the pin" in a recent great ease would have by law been only
entitled to one guinea for the whole of the trial. It was pro-
posed now that special pirymen should be paid a guinea a
cause, and common jurymen se. a cause. instead of Bd.
Trials might be continued in case of illness or leath
Another provision enabled judges to release Jur nets during
the adjutuument ol gtagU tAe7 thought At. Dlo AM WWI

to seven.
criminal

In fact a digest of the whole law on the subject, and he
trusted that the House would accept it.

After expressions of opinion from several hon. members,
Mr Serjeant Simon said he had never been able to say why
special jurors should be paid when common jurors web°
not He objected to the clause permitting managers of
companies to sit on special juries. Generally the pro-
ViStone of the bill were in the right direction, he would
give it his support, and assist to paaa it through the
House. _
. _

Sir H. James trusted that the Government would take
charge of the bill, for waling as private members might be,
they would be unable to assist Its passage with anything like
the same facility as could the Government. The Govern-
ment would have an easy task In passing the hill, as most of
its provisions had been agreed to by the House last session.
He objected to the provisions which would place directors
of companies on the special jury list, as many gentlemen
holding that position were resident in the country during a
great part of the year. He considered that the present
systeni of unanimity should be retained, and that the present
number of twelve worked well.

The discussion was continued by several other hon. mem-
bers, and eventually Mr. Cross promised that the bill
should receive every considers dou at the hands of the
Government.
The bill was then read a second time.

CONJUGAL RIGHTS IN SCOTLAND.

Mr Anderson moved the second reading of the Conjugal
Rights (Scotland) Act Amendment Bill, and explained that
it proposed to extend the Act of 1861, by which the property
of married women could only be dealt with in the Court of
Session to the inf erior courts.

The Lord-Advocate agreed with the principle of the bill,
subject to a slight amendment.
The bill was then read a second time.

LAND FOR COTTAGERS.

Fir Charles Dilke obtained leave to bring in a bill to pro-
vide for the letting to cottagers of lands held for the benefit
of the poor, in extension of the Act second William tlic
Fourth, chapter forty-two, and the House adjourned.