THE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE
[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.]
have not Mr. Coppersmith's letter before me as I write, but I have that of Mr. Twamley, and there are one or two matters contained therein which are obviously open to criticism. Before I deal with these I hasten to say that I am neither a professional magistrate nor a lay one, but I have had and hope to have in the future the privilege of appearing in a professional capacity before both.
The first point of substance which Mr. Twamley makes is that, " If magistrates had been a failure and guilty of dishonest practices, would they have flourished and waxed more powerful for 600 years ' ? " and " would the Justices have been and still be, in an increasing degree, entrusted with larger jurisdiction by the higher legal authori- ties ? " It may be true to say that Justices have existed for 600 years, and during that time have " flourished and waxed more powerful" and have had their jurisdiction extended ; but it does not follow that they now administer the law more efficiently than any of their predecessors.
In my experience in those Petty and Quarter Sessional courts which have a professional lawyer as chairman, justice is usually administered much more satisfactorily than in those in which a lay Justice, however experienced, presides. Mr. Twamley further adds that the Justices continue to " retain the confidence of their fellow-citizens." What does he mean by the term " fellow-citizens " ? Does he mean the general public who know so little of the proper way of administering justice, or does he mean that portion of it which from time to time has the misfortune to he brought before the Courts in question f With regard to the right of appeal, as to the exercise of which Mr. Twamley says that he can recollect very few instances, not only in his area but elsewhere—the right of appeal, to adapt the famous remark of a celebrated ex-High Court Judge, is, like the Ritz Hotel, open to all ; but the
mere fact that this right is not exercised more frequently does not necessarily show that those upon whom judgement is passed are satisfied with that judgement or think that justice has been done. The majority of those who might exercise a right of appeal from Petty Sessions have neither the means nor the knowledge wherewith to exercise that right.
The criticisms which I venture to make are not so much directed to lay Justices themselves, though there are undoubt- edly some who merit much adverse criticism, as to the institu- tion of lay Justices, who have not the qualification of a legal training, which is, in my opinion, essential for a person who is to administer justice, especially in criminal matters. To be able to approach a case unfettered by local prejudices ; to be able properly to weigh up the evidence, and to reject that which is inadmissible or irrelevant (sometimes a difficult matter even for experienced lawyers) ; and to be able correctly to apply legal principles, are matters in which of necessity laymen must be rarely capable of succeeding, however conscientiously they may try.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Previous page
