CRITICISMS ON A JUDGE.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1148, 8 June 1911, Page 5

CRITICISMS ON A JUDGE.

« NOT CONTEMPT OF COURT. CHARGE AGAINST AN EDITOR DISMISSED. ALLEGATIONS OF BIAS. By TsloErapli—Pcess Association—Copyrieb! (Hec. June 8, 0.30 a.m.) Melbourne, Juno 7. Tho High Court to-day dismissed tho charge of contempt of Court brought against Mr. Henry liichard Nicholls, editor of tho Ilobart "Mercury," for publishing an article reflecting on Mr. Justice lliggins, President of the Commonwealth Arbitration Court. In the article, which was published on April 7, tho "Mercury" stated:— "Mr. Justice lliggins is, we believe, what is called a political Judge, that is, he was appointed becauso he had well served a political party. lie, moreover, seems to know his position, and does not mean to allow any reflections on thoso to whom he may bo said to bo indebted for his Judgeship. In the course of the hearing of a case in the Arbitration Court, one of the counsel described the Broken Hill labour organisation as 'the most tyrannical' that' he had known, and ho added, 'moreover, they aro encouraged by their union and tho Government of this country.' Whereupon Mr. Justice Higgins was shocked, and is reported to havo said severely, 'You are not entitled to speak severely of those above us.' Whether ho meant that the union or tho Government 'is above us' is said to bo somewhat uncertain, because as the unions are supposed to rule tho Government, it is hold that they must bo regarded as t'lie supremo power, and must not be lightly spoken of, no matter what' kind of language they may use themselves. . . . Mr. Justice lliggins . . . has no resemblance to the Judge who did not' hesitate to deal with tho I'rince of Wales in ,an exemplary manner, and who lias had universal applause ever since. The time may not be far distant, we suppose, when we shall not bo allowed to speak ill of the Caucus, for that' is above all. From another point of view, wo may be disposed to exclaim, with Maria, in Twelfth Night': 'La, you, an' you speak ill of the devil, how he takes it to heart.'" The Chief Justice, Sir Samuel Griffith, in giving t'he High Court's decision today, said a Judge was not so much'open to libel as anybody else. Contempt' of Court, he added, was to obstruct' or interfere with tho Courts; . .. ....