CORRESPONDENTS' OPINIONS.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1080, 20 March 1911, Page 6

CORRESPONDENTS' OPINIONS.

. "SECRET COURTS OF JUSTICE." ; [To tlio Editor.] Sir,—The people of this city, and, 'indeed, , of ' New Zealand..generally .should feel deeply ''indebted to. you for the courageous position you have assumed in the above, matter. A most uneasy feeling has lately permeated. this community and,. in short, public confidence in the higher administration of-justice has received a severe' shock. j There are two aspects of the subject upon which.public opinion seems.to agree. First that equal treatment in respect of publicity should obtain. The name of-an alleged, defaulting bank clerk js published . in: full, .and as was-recently ?pbiriteH'X6uti even that of all' unfortunate judgment debtor who was imprisoned for non-pay-ment of some few shillings. Whether such publicity serves any useful purpose is open to argument, but certainly the most elementary sense of justice demands similar treatment no matter what may be the social or political -standing of the person concerned. l i'jfflre'iSeeond aspect''is this:' That it most , unfair to. allow public rumour the opportunity for selecting tlio offender and the extent of his offence. Every man about town has, during the past few days, heard more than one name mentioned and the amounts alleged to have been sued for have varied according to the fancy of the irresponsible person who knows everything. Your statement that "the newspapers have a solemn duty to publish such matters, whether'they concern, the/richi or the poot" is, in my opinion, an axiomatic truth, and will no doubt receive the strongest support from all who desire to mo the administration of justice free from stain.—l am, etc., LEX LOCI, STRANGE PROCEEDINGS. [To tho Editor.] Sir, —Will you kindly explain the grounds on which his Honour tho .Chief Justice issues'orders to the press not to mention the names of parties in the action which is being treated with such secrecy? I' know of no rule under which such an order can be issued.. Will you also publish the nature, of the action so that the public may receive further enlightenment on the strange course pursued? Your article in Saturday's issue ' was worthy of the high tnne and fearlessness which have always characterised your admirable journal—l am, etc., A.C. March 18. BY WHAT RIGHT? ■ [To the Editor.] Sir, —What are the discretionary powers, and for what wore .they given, which enable Judges of tho Supreme Court to administer the law in secret? The greatest and most ancient primary of jurisprudence was publicity in the trying of cases between the subjects of a State, and it has always been held that (hp graver interests of State alone justify privacy. In a recent case at Home we have seen our King a party to an open judicial trial, and his Majesty would not have shrunk from an appearance in the wit-ness-box, buc that his sworn advisers told hiin that grave constitutional reasons precluded him. What, then, are the reasons for the secrecy of the proceedings now being tried by his Honour the Chief Justice? Are . they reasons of State, or in the interest of morality?—l am, etc., JACOBUS.