Select Committee Coroners Bill, 1925 díospóireacht -
Thursday, 29 Apr 1926

SECTION 3.

" This Act may be cited as the Coroners Act, 1925."

Mr. BROWN

I beg to move as an amendment to delete the section and to substitute therefor a new section as follows:—

3.—(1) Subject to the provisions of this section a coroner within whose district the dead body of a person is lying may, in lieu of summoning a jury in the manner required by Section 23 of the Coroners (Ireland) Act, 1846, for the purpose of inquiring into the death of that person, hold an inquest on the body without a jury.

(2) If it appears to the coroner either before he proceeds to hold an inquest or in the course of an inquest begun without a jury, that there is reason to suspect—

(a) that the deceased came by his death by murder, manslaughter or infanticide; or

(b) that the death occurred in prison or in such place or in such circumstances as to require an inquest under any Act other than the Coroners (Ireland) Act, 1846; or

(c) that the death was caused by an accident, poisoning or disease notice of which is required to be given to a government department or to any inspector or other officer of a government department, under or in pursuance of any Act; or

(d) that the death was caused by an accident arising out of the use of a vehicle in a street or public highway; or

(e) that the death occurred in circumstances the continuance or possible recurrence of which is prejudicial to the health or safety of the public or any section of the public;

he shall proceed to summon a jury in the manner required by the Coroners (Ireland) Act, 1846, and in any other case if it appears to him, either before he proceeds to hold an inquest or in the course of an inquest begun without a jury, that there is any reason for summoning a jury, he may proceed to summon a jury in the manner aforesaid.

(3) The provisions of any enactment relating to the procedure in connection with an inquest shall, as respects an inquest or any part of an inquest which is held without a jury, have effect subject to such modifications in the procedure as are rendered necessary by the absence of a jury, and where the whole of an inquest is held without a jury the inquisition shall be under the hand of the coroner alone.

(4) Where an inquest or any part of an inquest is held without a jury, anything done at the inquest, or at that part of the inquest, by or before the coroner alone shall be as validly done as if it had been done by or before the coroner and a jury.

CHAIRMAN

It occurred to me, though Senator Brown is rather against it, that the coroner's jury should consist of a minimum of six. I cannot, for the life of me, see the necessity for summoning twelve. I think we should insert a sub-section to the effect " provided always that any jury summoned under the provisions of this sub-section may be composed of not less than six and not more than twelve."

Mr. BROWN

It is curious that there is no fixed number for the coroner's jury. In practice it is twelve. If you adopt this you will have to modify the new Section 5 as to a verdict by a majority.

CHAIRMAN

Why? I would leave the majority at four in the case of a jury of six. That would be two-thirds.

Sir EDWARD BIGGER

If it is a doubtful case, or a special case, the coroner ought to have more than six, and in practice, of course, he would have.

CHAIRMAN

In these formal cases, where a man dies of heart disease or something of that kind, if the coroner wants a jury he should have power, if he thinks fit, to have a jury of six.

Sir EDWARD BIGGER

In the special cases mentioned I would not like that the minimum should be so small.

Mr. BROWN

If the coroner is a sensible man he would have a jury of twelve in the case of murder, or a case of that kind. My real objection is that it would be interfering with the oldest court in the kingdom.

CHAIRMAN

We are conferring a privilege upon the coroner. At present there is no fixed number for a jury.

Mr. JACKSON

If the coroner has power to hold an inquest himself, without a jury, is it necessary at all to give him power to have a smaller number than twelve ?

CHAIRMAN

At present the system is very unsatisfactory. They are supposed to summon householders, but they do not. They go into the street and pick up every Tom, Dick and Harry.

Mr. JACKSON

Is it not the probability that they would continue to get these undesirables if you reduce the number?

CHAIRMAN

But it would be easier to get six householders than twelve.

Mr. BROWN

It is limited to people on the ordinary jury panel. It used to be householders, but it now includes people with the ordinary jury qualification.

Mr. JACKSON

It is a pity not to try and do away with the irregularity of picking up people at street corners.

CHAIRMAN

That is the reason why I suggest the number six. When the coroner had to call householders he very often had to adjourn the inquest until he was able to get twelve. I think it would be well worth while to put in six as the minimum.

Mr. BROWN

You could put in a provision that the jury shall consist of not less than six and not more than twelve.

CHAIRMAN

We could add a new sub-section: " Provided always that any jury summoned under this section shall be composed of not less than six and not more than twelve "; but would it not be well to make this a general provision and not one merely applying to the provisions of this section?

Mr. BROWN

Oh, yes, it ought to apply to all. I think this ought to be a new section before Section 4 on the Order Paper.

CHAIRMAN

Yes. Are women eligible on coroners' juries?

Mr. BROWN

Yes, now.

Sir EDWARD BIGGER

In cases of manslaughter and so on, I think it would be well that the number on the jury should be at least twelve.

Mr. BROWN

Do you not think it might be well left to the coroner, and perhaps also to the Minister for Justice, who has power to make rules under Section 17 as to procedure?

Sir EDWARD BIGGER

I do not think it would do any harm to have it inserted here.

CHAIRMAN

There again difficulty would arise. In some cases you would have half a dozen illiterate men.

Sir EDWARD BIGGER

Yes, but you would have twelve.

CHAIRMAN

But what is the magic in twelve?

Mr. JACKSON

Apart from whatever verdict a coroner's jury would bring in, the Government would act of themselves. If there was anything suspicious the Government would take the matter up.

CHAIRMAN

If there was any suspicion in the case, the Government would, of course, take the matter up. My own view is that you are more likely to get a more sensible verdict from six than from twelve. If the coroner thinks, in a particular case, that it would be more satisfactory to have twelve he will summon twelve. I think you might leave the matter to him.

Question—" That the new Section 3 stand part of the Bill "—put and agreed to.

Mr. BROWN

I move the adoption of a new Section 4 in the words agreed to:—

" 4. In the case of an inquest held by a coroner with a jury, such jury shall consist of not less than six and not more than twelve persons."

The remaining sections on the Order Paper will be renumbered accordingly.

Question put and agreed to.