EXTRA JUDGES,

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1887, 23 October 1913, Page 4

EXTRA JUDGES,

THE JUDICATURE BILL; SOME OPPOSITION. Mr. V. 11. REED (Bay of Islands) reported, for the Statutes Revision Coml- - that it had reviewed the Judicature Bill, and recommei'ided that it be allowed to proceed with amendments. Mr. T. M. WILFORD (Hutt) asked whether the Government intended to introduce any amendments to the Judicature Bill, in regard to the number of Judges. It seemed to him that there was a general agreement in the legal profession that more Judges wero ed, but that tho profession was not generally agreed upon the question as to dividing the Appeal Court. As to tho new Judges ho had no doubt thatMr. Hashing, of Dunedin, would be made a Judge, that the present Soli-citor-General would also become a Judge, and that Mr. Ostler (Crown Solicitor) would move up into the SolicitorGeneral's place. Sir Joseph. Waid said he assumed that the member for Hutt must be speaking with knowledge of something that transpired before the committee. , Mr. Wilford: No; I was not. Sir Joseph Ward: Was tho Committee unaiiiinou3 regarding the Judge's? Mr. Reed: No, A Persistent Questioner. Sir Joseph Ward: Well, why don't we know this, Mr. Speaker? He went on to submit that if the Chief Justice had been consulted in the matter his opinion shojld be made known to the people. There was nothing confidential about it. He wanted to know if the committee had had t any information from tlio Chiel Justise. Mr. Leo: Don't you know? Sir J. Ward: No, I don't ; does the honourable gentleman know? Mr. Lee: Yes, I know what went on in the committee; ~. Sir J. Ward: Then 'aren't we entitled to know? There was 1 nothing unfair and unreasonable in. asking the Attor-ney-General what i the.. Judges &£ Supreme Court said ah'bilt'thfe'proposal to add two to their number. If the Judges approved the pronosal; he was prepared to support, it. Ho also wanted to know if there was any report from the Judges upon the Bill. Mr. J. PAYNE (Grey Lynn) ar.id that ho thoroughly agreed with the member for Awariia that the countrywas entitled to tho information asked for. Mr. G. LAURJ3NSON (Lyttelton) also supported the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. G. W. RUSSELL (Avon) asked the Government to state on whose advice it was proceeding in this matter. Mr. G. WITTY (Pic-carton 1 ) asked that the Chairman (Mr. Reed) should state what amendments had been made in Committee. The.y would then know what thev wero talking about. Mr, R. M'CALLITM jWairau) said that lie cordially supported the Loader of the Opposition. Ho stated that one section of the membei's of thft Revisions Committee had followed the Chief Justice while another section had followed the other Judges. Not the Time for Talk. The Hon. A. L. HERDMAN said tliat it was quite unusual, at this 'stage upon ti Bill, to mako a second reading speech, and ho was not going into details in tho matter. Ho proposed when the second reading came along to explain, as carefully aajie could, and as exhaustively as he could, tlio reasons for tho proposed changes. Everything that happened before the committeo' the House was entitled to hear. Tho honI ourable members on tlio other side had assumed some desire on his part to keep something back. Ho had no such desire. There was another obligation rc-sting upon him, however. As tho legal representative of the Government, it became his duty, from time to time, to communicate with the Judges, and ho considered that these communications wero confidential, unless the Judges permitted him to make' public use of them. He intended to mako tho same statement to the House as ho had mado to the committee, but he did not propose to delay business by making the statement at that stage. Ridiculous Suggestions. It was ridiculous to suggest that there was anything to conceal. It was ridiculous of the member for Lyttelt.nl to suggost that it was tho objeit of the Government to create highly-paid officials when thero was no need for it. It was tho duty of the Government, to , provido for the proper administration of tho country, and if the Judges were . over-worked then it became the duty of the Government to meet tho positioji without- fear, even if it involved the payment of highly-paid officials to un- . dertake tlio work. He was convinced : from what had como under his notice . since becoming a member of the Cabinet that there was-noed, and urgent need, j for some additional assistance in tbe , Supreme Court. Tho Court of Appeal 1 sat threo times a year, and the Judges , wero away from their districts attending j the Court of Appeal during fifteen weeks in the year. During that period the work of the Supreme Court in the various districts was to a very j great ' extent at a standstill, j The Ministfr next referred to tho Bill . introduced by Sir John Findlay when J ho Was in office, and stated that he j considered an itinerant Court of Appeal { an institution that was quito impossible j in this country at tho present time, j When the Bill camo up for second reading ho would place before ihe House documents he had received from the , Judges. Until thou lie would hold J them as confidential. As to What hap- | poned before the Statutes Revision , Committee that was a different matter | altogether. Members couid ascertain ( what happened before the committee s from members who attended it. j The Opposition Attitude. j, Mr. G. W. FORBES (Hurunni) said that the Minister should have treated s the request of the member for AwarUfi i with more consideration. As an indi- t ration that tlip information aeked for sjioujd have been eivejj, he moved to e

- refer the report bank to the Statutes t llcvision Committee. Air. D. UUDDQ (Itainpoi) contended 5 that advice should be sought from tlio Judges themselves, and not from the > Law Socioty in regard ,to the necessity t ol' appointing additional Judges. ' Unanswered Questions. , SIR J. WARD (Awarmi) complained J that the Attorney-General had not anj swered any of his questions. AVhat , was the use of the Attorney-General j saying that he would givo tho information when tho Bill came up for second t reading? j I. Mr. llerdman: That is when it is always given. Repeating that ho considj ered communications from Judgeß confidential, Mr. Herdman said to tho I Leader of tho Opposition: "You may [ break faith if you think'proper to do 3 a 0" ■ Sir J. Ward: I never have broken „ faith. Ho had asked whether a report had been obtained from the Chief . Justice, 1m continued, and, if so, wlioI thcr tho Chief Justice favoured-the pro- . posal contained in this Hill. How ; could tho Attorney-General- sug- , gest . that it was confidential 5 when lie (Sir J. Ward) had 5 askod it publicly? Sir. Herdman sought to interpose ft remark at this point, but tho Leader of . tho Opposition carried on with such a Steady _ flow of talk that tho Minister I found it impossible to get it word in. Sir J. Ward went on to cont-end angrily | that tho line of action he was taking was fully justified. Ho pointed out that a eolleaguo of tho Attorney-Gene-ral, tho Leader of tho Upper House, was president of the Law Society, ana said that tho two Ministers must havo agreed in concert to recommend tho appointment of two additional Judgeß. Ho went on to say that it was childish to talk about confidential as the Attorney-General had done. ■ Mr. Herdman: Who is talking like a child now? Sir J. Ward said that the House and the country wanted to know. Mr. Herdman: Don't lose your temper; don't get cxcited; Sir J. Ward said that not all of tlio leading lawyers in tho country considered that the Judges wero overworked. Mr. Herdman did not make a second 1 speech. _ - A division was taken at 4.5 p.m. on thd amendment moved by Mr. Forbes, ' and it was negatived by 33 votes to 23. Tlio report was laid on tho table. QUESTIONS CROWDED OUT. At 4.2-5 p.m. Sir J.i Ward reminded the Primo Minister that this was question day, and suggested that tho Cheviot report which was about to come oil should be deferred and questions discussed for an hour. The PRIME MINISTER said that there wero very few questions on that day's Order Paper, and suggested that the discussion should bo deferred until next Wednesday. If time were not found on that day, ho would provide another opportunity. "As to the Cheviot report, in view of tho fact that tho committee was unanimous, it should not be necessary to discuss it at all. He was the person most concerned, and was so well satisfied with wlwt the committee had dono that be was prepared to let it go without a word.