IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXIX, Issue 98, 15 June 1911, Page 5

IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.

FINAL COURT OF APPEAL. AX INTERESTING DISCUSSION. London, .June 11. TJ’.o Imperial Conloronco further discussed the question of the proposed Imperial Court-of Appeal. ivtr Batchelor declared that unless there wore serious practical obstacles in the way two courts of final appeal ought not to ho continued. noth bodies wore composed largely of the same judges. The Privy Council was the only court in the empire which did not give individual judgments. Mr Asquith declared that some thought that it was an advantage if one did not know whether a judgment was unanimous or the extent of dissent.

Mr Batchelor replied that the argument sometimes was against it. The constitution of a final court would ho another step towards Imperial unity. Lord Lorebnrn explained the nature of the jurisdiction already existing in the Lords of Appeal and the Privy Council. The personnel of both was practically identical. His own view was that if every court had only one judgment it would be more coherent. The empire ought to decide the kind 'of tribunal it desired, if so desired, England could arrange that all eases of a particular Dominion could ho heard consecutively, in order that the judge of that Dominion might he present. The Government was not prepared to recommend a change in the personnel of the Lords of Appeal. It was already possible to add any distinguished judge of the Dominions to that body. Lord Lproburn added his own idea was that they should add to the highest Court of Appeal two English judges of the finest quality, fixing the quorum at five, that court to sit successively i.n the House of Lords for the United Kingdom, and the Privy Council for the • Dominions. Thus they would have the same court in full strength for both classes of appeals. Sir Joseph Ward said it was hardly practicable for a Nejv Zealand judge to visit England to deal only with New Zealand eases. In eases having reference to native lands, it was greatly important to have a judge present who was conversant with native customs. Mr Haldane instanced a Maori case lasting ten days, when it would have been useful to have had a judge present.

Mr Asquith said that if the court sat in full strength occasionally they would meet . the complaint that the Privy Council was a scratch court and too few in numbers. Lord Lorolnirn, replying to a question as to.whether there would be any objection to merging the Lords into the Privy Council, said tllo_ system he suggested might develop into one court. ' Be did not think the people at Homo had any quarrel against, the existing court. i Mr Malan (Natal), and Mr Bordour (Canada) expressed themselves as satisfied with the existing system . appeals. Sir Joseph Ward said ho had not the slightest idea of reflecting on the Privy Council. New Zealand was in a peculiar position with regard to native land legislation. In view of Lord Loroburn’s statement he would not urge the merging of the two courts, but suggested the addition of a permanent. judge from each important Dominion. The difficulty in the way was that a judge coming especially might, deal with a ease which 'bad lieen already dealt with in New Zealand. If permanent judges were appointed for five or seven years they would overcome the difficulty and assist in securing uniformity and coordination for the empire laws. Now Zealand would hail with satisfaction judges of other Dominions dealing with New Zealand cases. Dr. Findlay declared that .the presence of a resident colonial judge would obviate the expense of sending counsel to instruct the Privy Council in the peculiar features of New Zealand law. Mr Asquith asked whether _ the other Dominions approved of Sir. J. G. Ward’s Suggestion. Mr Fisher declared he was not prepared at present to accept it. ,The other delegates said they were satisfied with the present system. Mr Asquitii said ho preferred the suggestion to hoar cases from tho Dominions at a stated time, enabling a judge to attend. _ Mr Fisher withdrew his motion, and substituted one recommending the embodying, of the Government s proposals, communication to be sent to the Dominions at the earliest date. . This was carried. NATURALISATION PROBLEMS. London, June 13. Mr Harcourt presided at the meeting of the Imperial Conference. Sir J. A. Simon, Attorney-General, and Mr Churchill wore present. The naturalisation resolution proposed by New Zealand, the Commonwealth and South Africa, was discussed. The general opinion favoured an Imperial certificate of naturalisation with the retention of tho Dominions local conditions. . Mr Churchill crystallised his suggestions hit;) a series of resolutions, which were adopted. The nationality will bo world-wide, provided the time of rcidcif.ee by five years in any part of tho Empire. Tlio overseas resolutions wore withdrawn^ Mr Batchelor, in moving a re,solution that every Dominion must determine whom to admit to cicixensiiip, said it was no part of the conference’s work to lay down rules. Nothing could ho done in regard to Imperial naturalisation except by the Dominions themselves. The conditions in the various Dominions varied considerably. He asked whether it was not worth while to give an Imperial certificate with the standard embodying the most drastic conditions imposed in. any Dominion. hi that way Imperial nationality would bo secured without interfering with the Dominion’s right to compel an applicant to comply with local requirements. . , , Sir Wilfrid Banner urged that British subjects anywhere should ho recognised anywhere. ‘Sir J. (!. Ward, refertvig to the Imperial Draft Bill, said tho equalisation laws of British citizenship i iv-st bo kept entirely separate f.-om the question of naturalisation of aliens. If that wore done, and the Dominions retained powers to -xelude aliens, there could lie no teason.ibJe objection to definite Hricish c P/.enship throughout the (avp.ro. Mr Malan saw practical difficulties existing in tho nvo sets of certificates which tho draft I ill i-iop.ased. Ho agreed with Sir W. I .a.'tier’s now THE OFFICIAL REPORT. London, Juno 13. Tho Colonial Office is unable to issue the precis of Ilia proceedings at the Conference vet.