The Calcutta Weekly Notes Monday February 25 1929

The Lord Chancellor in moving that the Bill be read for the second time before the House of Lords explained the scope of the Bill in the following terms :- In 1Q26 a Bill was introduced and passed through' This House fo provide for two extra members of the Judicial Committee who should be specially appointed for the pur pose of dealing with Indian appeals and who should be paid out of the funds o [...] The number of Law Lords was not.sufficient for the two final Courts of Appeal sitting simultneously and for the requisitioning of their services both for the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords and the Benches of Judcial Committee of the Privy Council for hearing Indiah and the Colonial appeals. [...] We have always oppoSed the supplanting of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council by any Supreme Court out Appeal in India but should the appeals from India continue to be heard by a bench of three members the majority of whom might be the nominees of the Government of India and the Secretary of State for India we are afraid that serious opposition might arise in the Indian Legislature regar [...] We publish in another column the views of the Government of India and the Secretary of State regarding the recommendations of the Indian Bar Committee that the proviso in sec. [...] The reslution purported to recommend to the Governor General in Council to take the necessary steps to get Section 101 of the Government of India Act amended :- (a) so as to make it c'ear that the Chief Justice of a High Court must be such barrister advocate or pleader of a High Court as is referred to in the Section and (b) also to provide that no less than three-fourths of the Judges of a Hi