A Spectator's Notebook
IT IS ALWAYS a matter of astonish- ment to me that we should allow our Lord Chief Justice to be ap- pointed through the political spoils system, when there would be hell to pay if the most junior civil servant got a job in that way. So great is the risk that Lord Goddard may be succeeded by the present Attorney-General that The Times has felt it necessary to come out with a leading article condemning the idea. The Times is care- ful to say it has nothing against Sir Reginald Manningham-Buller : if he is the best man for the Lord Chief Justiceship he should have it. But Sir Reginald is palpably not the best man. He is, to begin with, a party politician, and not a very able one, to judge by his Attorney-Generalship; his handling of the privilege issue is, so far as I recall, the only redeeming feature of an other- wise undistinguished ministerial career. And there is nothing to show that he would make a good judge, let alone a good Lord Chief Justice. If there were no distinguished alternative on the Bench, it would be a different matter: but Lord Justice Parker, Mr. Justice Devlin or Mr. Justice Diplock would all make worthy successors to Lord Goddard. Nobody would deny that Lord Goddard himself, whatever his limitations, has in many ways proved an outstanding LCJ; but his chief claim to respect has been his resistance to the encroachment of the executive on judicial territory, and for the Government to revert to a political appointee, even if its choice were to be a great deal better qualified for the office than the Attorney-General, would be indeed a retrograde step.
* * *
Previous page
