GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1443, 1 October 1878, Page 3

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

[PBE PEEBB AGENCY.] HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Monday, Sebtembeb 80. The House met at 7.30. PETITION. Sir Geoege Obey presented a petition from the Bay of Islands, stating that certain Europeans were preventing duly qualified Natives from enjoying the electoral franchise, but chiefly Edward Marsh Williams. THE *LOGD IN THE CLUTIIA. Mr Mueeay gave notice to abk the Commissioner of Telegraphs why he'did not, according to promise, notify all the lower stations on the Clutha that the river was rising. CHARITABLE EESEEVES. Mr Bowen gave notice to move that reserves should be made throughout the colony for charitable purposes. UNDERGBOUND TELEGBAPHS. Mr Pyke asked whether, in view of the frequent interruptions to telegraph communication, the Government would cause the wires to bo laid in pipes under the surface in exposed places. Mr Fishes said it was too expensive a plan to adopt. THE HINBMOA'S EXPENSES. Mr Fitzeoy again asked when returns regarding the Hinemoa would be laid on the table. The Peejj:iee 3aid he had only the same answer he had already given, but if the hon. member give notice qf motion that such a return ohould bv furnished, that would afford him (the Premier) an opportunity of making such a statement as the House had a right to expect. BENEVOLENT societies. In reply to Mr Barff, Mr BaIIANCE promised a return of the benevolent societies in the colony having public funds at their disposal. PIEST READINGS. Several Bills were introduced, and read a first time, including the Railway Reserves Sales, Bills to establish a High School at Wangarei, and a'Girls' High School at Auckland, and a Bill to further encourage the education of ttie youth of Zealand. The impounding Bill, from the Legislative Council, was introduced and read a first time, JUDICIAL COMMISSION HILL On tho motion for the sneond reading of this Bill, Mr Stout said if anything would make one vote for the Bill it was the able and argumentative speech of the hon. member for Mount Ida. Butjhe would ask the House to consider what the Bill proposed. It first of all asked for what tho Government had power to do, namely, appoint a commission. If there was no doubt as to the power of the judges to imprison, then there was no need of a commission. The duty of a commission always was to report on matters of fact not to givo mere opinions. After going over the principal propositions of tho Bill, the hon,. gentleman asked waa it .wise

for the House to place in the hands of commissioners the power of saying that the procedure of the Courts of England, America, and the colonics for many years had been in an entirely wrong direction. He proceeded to quote from a nnmber of eminent legal authorities in support of the power enjoyed by Judges of the Supreme Court to commit for contempt, and snid that the Court of New Zealand possessed all the powers of English Courts. There was therefore no need for a commission to enquire, because it was clear that the Courts had power to commit. It would be an unheard of thing to instruct a commission to determine what the law of England was. The hon. gentleman set out at some length the law of New Zealand regarding Judges. With regard to the third subsection of the Bill, which referred to Mr Barton's imprisonment, he profaced his remarks by saying that he did not agree with the punishment which had been meted out. But while it was necessary that the fair freedom of speech of the bar should bo conserved, it was of great deal more importance to conserve the powers of the Supreme Courts. They should do nothing to lower the status of the Supreme Court. Anything which lowered that would react upon themselves. In arguing that it was necessary that the Judge should have the power to punish for contempt, Mr Stout pointed out that the Commission asked must have the power to punish for contempt. On the other hand, if the Judges made an improper use of the power they possessed, and public opinion revolted at it, there was a barometer which at once indicated pretty precisely the limits beyond which it was not right to go. In reply to the argument that this law had been a growth of centurieß and was not conferred by Statute, he pointed out that a law which had been observed for six hundred years in England, and since the foundation of the United States, without the Parliament of England or Congress of America taking steps to alter the law, was the very best proof that the law was necessary. In conclusion, he would ask the House to be very careful how it interfered with the powers of the Supreme Court. Speaking for himself, he would oppose the second reading. Mr Rees saw no renson why the fact of a custom or law being old should be any reason why the subject should not be considered. The rGal question was—was the thing right ? Such a lame argument as that wpulcj prevent all reform. Had that rule always been observed, the English people would never have obtained their liberties. King Charles would not have lost his head. He urged that the Bill asked for nothing which would injure the position or weaken the proper power of the Judges. It was a poor argument to say that public opinion would influence the Judges as well as Parliament. The positions were entirely different. Public opinion might remove the hon. member from his seat in Parliament, but it could not stir a Judge upon the Bench. To show how necessary it was that there should be some power of interference with the Judges to restrain their powers, he said that it was seen by English papers that grave scandals had arisen there solely on account of the inviolability of the position of Judge. In one instance a Judge had become imbecile through age, yet he could not be removed. He was surprised at the slavishness to precedent of one who was always liberal. Such an arbitrary irresponsible power that placed in one man's hands the power over the purse and liberty of another was entirely opposed to the spirit of the English Constitution. There was no position so high that it should not be open to criticism. The power possessed by the Judges amounted to this ! That a person might bo imprisoned without power to appeal, or power or the Crown to pardon. They were told they should be careful not to cast a slur upon the Judges; but if the Judges acted above and beyond reproach, a slur could not be cast upon them. Nothing was so calculated to lead a man astray as the possession of absolute power —a power above Parliament, above the Crown, and above the Law itself. He saw nothing to object to in the BilJ,