PARLIAMENT

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 305, 20 September 1919, Page 7

PARLIAMENT

: HOARD OF TRADE BILL | 'MORE ABOUT PROFITEERING i .. .:. The Legislative Council .met. at 2.30 i p.m. yesterday. ! . LAND AND INCOME TAX. The Land and Income Tax Bill was re- , ' ceived from the Lower. House, and was read-a first time. ! '..', PAYMENT OF JURORS. ; The Hon. SIR FRANCIS BELL moved the second reading of tho Payment of .Jurors Bill, which provides that tho ■-. remuneration of.jurors may bo fixed from time to time-by Order-in-Oouncil, instead of bv statute, as at present.: The Bill was read a second time. '. JURIES ACT AMENDMENT. The Juries Act Amendment Bill (Hon. J. MncGrcgor) ' was committed. The Bill orovides (clause 2} for the acceptance in all criminal cases, except capital, •' of'a 'majority.'verdict of ten members of the jury. . ■'■'.. The Hon. W. J, Geddis moved in amendment that in- clause 2 the word. "eleven" bo substituted for the word "ten." Ho though it was desirable to ' reduce as far a3 possible any question of an element of doubt. ■' Tho amendment was lost on the voices. The Bill, which wis reported with only ; , formal amendments, was read a third time and passed. CRIMES ACT AMENDMENT BILL THROWN OUT, i The Hon.J.MACGREGOR moved the ■ second reading of the Crimes Act Aniend- > ■ ment Bill. •..,,.,... , Mr. MacGregor. explained that the Bill was not aocurately to bo described as one < for the abolition of.the Grand Jury. ■Tho Bill was designed to give the law ', officers of the Crown power to make presentments to the Supreme Court—presentments that would have the same effect as bills of indictment found by a -Grand Jurv. If tho Bill were put into effect the provisions for the summoning of the '. Grand. Jurv would .still .remain on the Statute Book.. He proposed, if the Bill reached, tho committee stage, to provide In it'that application for the summoning of. a Grand Jury might be made to the ■ .Suurome Court. He claimed (hat Australian experience suggested tho advis- ; Ability of passing such a Bill as he proposed. Three of the Judges of the Su- , creme. Court of New Zealand,' viz., the Chief..Justice (Sir Robert Stout), the •-lafe.Mr. Justice Denuiston, and Mr. .lus- ; , •ticn'Sim.'had stated .that they were, in favour. of the 'proposed change in the law. The other judges, were opposed to The Hon. G. J. GARLAND.supported the Bill. He.looked on' the present Grand Jury system as "a blundering norr of. business." With the addition which -Mr. MacGregor had proposed to -make, to ..the Bill, fbe Bill would give . ,-New... Zealand, the system which had . answered very satisfactorily in the Aus- . traiian States. : • The Hon. SIR.FRANCIS BELL thought : that the Bill,tended to take the administrative iustice from a-position that was i eafe to a oosition that, might, not be safe. He could see- no reason for departing ' from the old system. There were cases in which, while an official - prosecutor .. would be bound to put a man on his trial, a Grand Jury' would rightly sayth'nf. the case was rubbish, and would decline to do so, The Jill was defeated by H vote to 9. The.division list.was as follows':— Aves—Geddis, Hall-Jones. Garland, .. Fisher. Thomson, Moore, MacGregor, .Simpson, MncGibbon. ' ■•■•.., '" Noes—Bell. Aitken, Michel, Jones, .Stewart. Earnshaw, T.ouisson, Harris, .Sinclair. Samuel, Patnki. Gnw. Hawke, . Grimmond., - The Council adjourned at 1.30 pan.