THE WARD-CHAPMAN INQUIRY.

Evening Star, Issue 3579, 12 August 1874, Page 2

THE WARD-CHAPMAN INQUIRY.

['[By TjspajSApip}

Wellington, August U. The [committee reported to the House as follows

That in the month of April last au action for libel was pending in the Supreme Court at Dunodin, between James Macassey and George Belt. Tilt Mr G. K. Xurton, „f !lT?^iT a3 J BO^ citor for the defendant Bell; that Mr Ward, District Judge, was advising counsel on behalf of the defendant Bell but acting gratuitously; that Mr Tutfon’ also acted generally, as solicitor for Mr Ward, and rplatujg to Mi W’arit private bugmess. passed bct\yee*l them bv telegraphs that Mr J«.tice (SraLsS X Sff'S 109 l “ n maiJ ® « behalt ol the S »n ff ’ oaß6 ?y.‘ made an order ex parte ™ * he Plamtiflf to inspect not only telegrams between the parties to the action ift 11 ! 1 * to Reaction, but also telegrams m passed between Mr Turton and Mr Ward relating thereto; that Mr Ward considered such order was illegal, or that at all eyent 9 it should hot h*ve :lb e en tffie e? pd,rfe; that, acting updejr sucl* tSref. and under a feeling of irritation that the correspondence between himself and MrTur. ton, not only m relation to the said action but also m relation to his own. private affairs* might thereby be handed over to the inspection of plaintiff or his solicitors, Mr Ward became imbued with the suspicion that Mr fll J u fc Cha pmau , and he therefore made the charges against Mr Justin ChanmM e 8»“ to Mr ogei, that Mr Ward has exolained tu tb« SSnmar that char S° hgamst Mr Justice Ohapman was not meant as a general chare? but only as * 0 .the said S*l acSSf n' Bell J thafc the Practice of the supreme Court at Dunedin appears to have make order, for theT^UooM

telegrams ex parte, and several such orders had been made by Mr Justice Chapman in other cases, and bad not been disputed or called in question ; 'hat the practice of the Supreme Courts and in other parts of the Colony has been to make such orders only after hearing both sides That no action ■was taken on th* order by the plaintiff, and the sa ; d order was afterwards rescinded by Mr Justice Chapman. The conclusion to which the committee have come upon this Eartof the sul ject submitted to them for iqniry is as follows:—1, That the charges made by Mr Ward against Mr Justice Chap* man have not been substantiated, and were made without due consideration of their importance as affecting the character of a high judicial officer. 2. That, while the practice of issuing such orders ex parte may be open to .grave question, the committee are not of opinion that Judge Chapman acted partially in the matter, nor are there any grounds whatever for impeaching the conduct or questioning the integrity or impartiality of Justice Chapman in the genersl discharge of his judicial duties. 3. While it may not bo within the order of reference itself, the committee cannot refrain from suggesting to the Government the desirability of making arrangements for the periodical shifting of Supreme Court and District Court Judges to different ciroats.