The report of the Select Committee appointed a month ago
to consider whether Sir Stuart Samuel had vacated his seat, in consequence of his firm having transacted business with the India Office, was issued yesterday week. The report states that, after having heard evidence and considered the docu- ments laid before them, and having also beard counsel on behalf of Sir Stuart Samuel, the committee found that several important and difficult questions of law were involved, and that on the question referred to them a unanimous decision was impossible of attainment. Holding, therefore, that a divided opinion would not carry the weight that was desirable, they report in favour of referring the question to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, on the motion of a Minister of the Crown, sanctioned by the House, and desire to ask the House for its determination whether, while reserving its right of ultimate decision, the House should adopt this procedure. They also express the opinion that if the House should decide to adopt such procedure, the Attorney- General should take steps to secure that the case is presented and argued before the Judicial Committee, not only by counsel for Sir Stuart Samuel, but also from the opposite point of view. The result of the inquiry has gone far to justify the criticisms of those who argued that the matter should at once be referred to a court of law instead of being submitted to a party committee.
Previous page
