PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
TILLIC.O.885
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NÓT TO
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
64
Mr. Justice HODGES: I am pretty sure; I am very positive about it.
Mr. CILAMBERLAIN: Ithink I understand Mr. Justice Hodges' point, which is that the Privy Council must be treated separately, as being an International or an Imperial Tribunal, and that the Rules with regard to the Privy Council should be, therefore, independent of any Rules which prevail in any other Courts.
Mr. Justice HODGES: Quite so.
Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I understand that contention; but I would suggest to him that, no grievance of any kind having been suggested, it would be hardly worth while to raise a great discussion on the subject. If, however, he is of a different opinion, and desires to press it, then I do not think it can be pressed before this Conference. We are not in a position to deal with it.
The LORD CHANCELLOR: We are not the Inns of Court.
Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: We are not the Inns of Court. We are not in a position to deal with it. In the case, if it were really desired, in spite of what I suggest, that it is not on the whole advisable, if, in spite of that, it is still desired by the Australian Government to press the matter, they would, of course, communicate with me through the Governor-General, and I should communicate their views to the Inns of Court, and be able, no doubt, to supply a reply, whatever it may be. But I think it very likely that that would raise the wider question, the larger question. If the Inns of Court were approached upon this question, they might like to discuss the other question whether there should be any comity between the Bars of all the Colonies.
The Hon. DAVID MILLS: I remember some years ago the question arising as to whether a Canadian barrister, who was senior to an English barrister, would be
given precedence in the same case before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. He was treating it as a Canadian Court for that purpose.
The LORD CHANCELLOR: They were sitting as a Canadian Court then. The Hon. DAVID MILLS: Quite so.
Mr. ROSE INNES: There is one point I must ask leave to make clear, and that is with regard to the second recommendation. I do not know what the views of other Delegates are, but certainly we agree with that second recommendation. I mean to convey that the payment of Colonial members of the Judicial Committee, and the status of their appointment should apply to those already appointed, not only to those appointed in the future. There are already three. I wish to make it quite clear that, at any rate, my intention was that that recommendation should apply to the men already appointed. I do not think it would be desirable to leave them at their present status and appoint others, because that would be swamping the Judicial Committee with Colonial representatives, and none of us want that. In fact, that was one of the reasons why we recommended that arrangements might be made for colonial appeals- to have three here sitting continually. That is a very large colonial element, and we desire that the Imperial clement- the English clement- should be further strengthened.
The LORD CHANCELLOR: So I understand.
The Hon. DAVID MILLS: Is it understood that we should take action upon this?
The LORD CHANCELLOR: To tell you the honest truth, I have not had the pleasure of reading Mr. Justice Hodges' dissent.
Sir JOHN EDGE: I think, Mr. Justice Hodges, with the exception of your specific recommendations for an Imperial Court, nearly all the other matter that is in your Memorandum was considered and discussed?
The LORD CHANCELLOR: Oh, yes; certainly. *`
65
55 Sir JOHN EDGE: At our meetings nearly all the other matter was
considered?
Mr. Justice HODGES: Most of it was, I think.
The LORD CHANCELLOR: It was.
Sir JOHN EDGE: Everything that is material in it, except the specific recommendation as to the formation of the Imperial Court ?
The LORD CHANCELLOR: Yes, certainly, with that exception.
Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I should think that it may be convenient to publish some papers with regard to this Conference, my Lord Chancellor.
The LORD CHANCELLOR: Well, some, I should think; I am not quite certain whether it would be advisable to publish all. The members of the Conference will take care that their own Governments are informed on the subject; but I am not quite certain that it would be desirable to publish it all. However, so far as this country is concerned, I do not think that we could have any objection.
Mr. Justice HODGES: Of course, I shall communicate all to my Government; beyond that I do not care.
The LORD CHANCELLOR: That of course.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: Perhaps we might allow that to stand over till the views of the Colonial Governments are communicated, if they desire to express them.
The Hon. DAVID MILLS: It is an act that is highly at variance with the recommendations which the Conference has made.
Mr. Justice HODGES: My suggestion?
The Hon. DAVID MILLS: There would be no object in reconsidering it. Our recommendations; it is simply dissenting from our view.
The LORD CHANCELLOR: Yes.
Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Well, probably it would be sufficient that we should send a copy of the proceedings to each of the Delegates, and consider the question of any general publication later.
The LORD CHANCELLOR: Yes, I think that would be the better way.
Sir JAMES PRENDERGAST: A copy of the shorthand writer's notes ?
Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Yes.
Sir JOHN EDGE: May we consider that our duties are at an end?
The LORD CHANCELLOR: You must ask my right honourable friend on that subject.
Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Yes.
Sir JOHN EDGE: I know, Mr. Chamberlain, that some members are anxious to get back to their Colonies, and some are anxious to get out of England.
Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Yes; I consider, unless any member of the Conference desires a further meeting, or to raise any other question, that; so far as the particular object for which the Conference was called, it is now concluded, and, on behalf of His
[882]
K
}