THE IMPERIAL COURT OF APPEAL.

Timaru Herald, Volume LXXVI, Issue 11665, 25 January 1902, Page 4

THE IMPERIAL COURT OF APPEAL.

THE CONFERENCE THAT FAILED,

Dunedin "Star" Special Correspondent. LONDON, December 6. The parliamentary White Paper, published last Saturday, summarising the discussions at the Conference on the Imperial Court of Appeal iast June, and the comments cf the Press thereon, show that the forecast sent you at the close of the Conference as to the decisions of the delegates and the reasons assigned for the "as you were" result were substantially correct. The majority of the delegates were of opinion that" appeals should continue to lie from the colonies and India to His Ma-jesty-in-Council; that appointments to the Judicial Committee should be made in such numbers as might be considered necessary from the colonies and India ; that the selection should not be restricted to judges and ex-judges; that the appointees, if judges, should vacate any judicial office Held at the time of appointment. Further, that the colonial members to be appointed shouLd be appointed for life, or a term of at least filteen years ; insufficient salaries should be paid to attract suitablyqualified men, and provision should be made for pensions; that arrangements should be made for securing a larger attendance of Lords of Appeal to sit on the Judicial Committee; and that, with a view to avoidance of delay, the colonies should suggest any alteiations which they considered desirable in the various Orders-in-Council regulating appeals to the Privy Council.

Mr Justice Emerson, of Newfoundland, concurred in these recommendations, subject only to the proposal made for the establishment of an Imperial Court of Appeal for the Empire. Sir James Prendergast (New Zealand) thought that, wh'le for the present appeal ciiould continue to lie from the colonies and India to His Majesty-in-Council, the time might soon arrive when a new final Court of Appeal for the whole British dominions would be practically possible. He disagreed with the resolution as to appointments ftom the colonies to th.e Judicial Committee, ?•» Jie considered that that resolution did n"t indicate a satisfactory scheme of colonic;! He further stated that in fru.ere the legal systems were sub?tantfa'?Fy (the Same as that of England he failed to : md i sxiSicient reason for any colonial representation. Mr Justice Hodges, of Victoria, fhe Commonwealth delegate, was as outspc/foto as ever. In his opinion, theie should fe' only one Court of Final Appeal, whic& should halve vested in it the appellate jurisdiction of the House of Lords and of His M::jesty-in-<iJ6flncil. This Court should contain representatives from India, Canada, South Africa, and Australia, and should ordinarily sit in two divisions, though in cases of exceptional difficulty both divisions might sit together. " Such a court woulcl bring tile best legal thought in the United Kingdom in touch with the best legal thought in tije Empire outside the United Kingdom. It" would be a won-

derfully strong court, and command the admirati-n and respect not only of the whole British race, but also of every race in the British-dominions. It would be a ■powerful factor in the development of a closer union between all parts of the Empire. In the British dominions it would obliterate in the administration of justice all distinctions between place and persons. Just as there is one flag to protect the subject from external assault, so there would be one court as the final arbiter of internal disputes." These recommendations were forwarded last August by Mr Chamberlain to the Governors of the various colonies in a despatch, in which he said that " the result cf the Conference has been to show that no far-reaching alteration in the present tribunal is desired, or would be considered satisfactory, by the colonies generally; and so long as the colonies are of that opinion His Majesty's Government do not propose to make any material changes for the establishment of an Imperial Court of Appeal." In concluding his despatch Mr Chamberlain asked the colonial Governments to consider " whether any, and if so,what amendments are desirable in the present procedure that will tend to simplicity, the avoidance of unnecessary delay, and the reduction of the cost of appeal." After the announcement in the King's Speech of February last that " certain changes in the constitution of the Court of Final Appeal are rendered necessary in consequence of the increased resort to it, which has resulted from, the expansion of the Empire during the last two generations," Mr Chamberlain might have been expected to lay before the Conference some carefully formulated scheme for a court on the lines originally suggested by Mr Haldane, and subsequently repeated by Mr Justice Hodges. As ' The Times ' says, some had hoped that " an august tribunal might be created, which would prepare the way for a true Imperial Council. We are, inelined to think that, if the Committee had had before it a scheme carefuly prepared by the law officers, something more promising might have been sanctioned." Other journals also consider that the delegates would have arrived at a- different conclusion had the Imperial Government itself been unanimous and in a position to formulate a suggested policy. The explanation of the fiasco given by the " Daily Chronicle" tallies with that which I sent you at the close of the Conference, viz., that Mr Chamberlain, as a practical, business-like man, fuly realised the absurdity of the present system of the same lot of judges sitting in one place as the final Court of Appeal for England and in another as the final Court of Appeal for the rest of the Empire. Personally, he favoured and wished to carry into practical effect Mr Haldane's suggestion of one Imperial Court of Appeal for the Empire, which should take the place of the House of Lords and tis" Judicial Committee. His Tory colleagues however, and the more Conservative liuryers, represented by the Lord* ChancelloT,. saw in the scheme the thin end of the wedge for the reform of the House o'f Lords and all sorts of imaginary constitutional .difficulties and dangers, "and made it necessarv for him to back down.

A conference of colonial delegates left to their own devices, and going their own 'ways, furnished the Government with an excellent excuse for continuing to mark time.

Mr R. D. Haldane says in a letter to' The Times" :—"lt seems doubtful whether the Imperial Government had any clear ideas of what they wanted to do when they convened the recent conference. The outcome of that conference has been to make it plain that merely to upholster' the Judicial Committee will do no good. . . . I do not think that any scheme short of the fusion of the House of Lords and the Privy Council into one great Imperial tribunal will inspire enthusiasm in the colonies. .... But the timidity of Conservative Ministers in approaching any scheme which tends to modify the existing functions of the House of Lords makes these views unlikely of realisation, for the present."