GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1444, 2 October 1878, Page 3

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

[CBB PBEBS AGENOY.J LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Tuesday, Octobeb 1. miscellaneous. A report was read re the employment of boys who were said to be well treated. The Electoral Bill was read a first time. ohabitable aid. In reply to Mr Hall, Colonel Whitmobb said that the Government did not propose to introduce any Bill to deal with the subject of charitable aid institutions this session. The Government would be prepared to provide for one-half the cost of charitable aid and hospitals in each district, but the locality would have to provide the other half cost in some form or other. The Government desired to leave the management of hospitals entirely in the hands of local bodies. The subject was difficult to deal with, but as the existing system had been more or less successful in the past, it did not demand reform at present. THE VOLUNTEEB FOBCE. In reply to Colonel Brett, Colonel Whitmore said that a return would be prepared, showing the strength of the Volunteer and Cadet Corps, and other particulars on matters of defence He did not favor the introduction of Gatling guns, or repeating rifles, proposed by Colonel Brett. explanation. Mr ROBINSON explained that his absence at the call of the Council had been caused by urgent private business affecting other people's interests more than his own. BILLS ADVANCED. The Ormond Military Settlers and Bluff Harbor Endowment Bills, were read a second time, and referred to the Waste Lands Committee. The Patea Harbor Bill was read a first time and referred to the Harbor Committee. The Oamaru Waterworks Bill, and the Public Eeserves Bill, passed through committee. EVENING SITTING. WYNDHAM CEMETEBY. The Wyndham Cemetery Bill was read a second time, and passed through committee. Mr Watebhouse gave notice that he would move for its recommittal, to amend it in accordance with the report of the Local Bills Committee. MOUNT IDA "WATBB BACE. The Mount Ida Water Race Trust Bill came on for second reading. Colonel Whitmobe opposed it, until he had time to inquire into the special circumstances of the case. Sir Dillon Bell explained that the Bill had been supported by tho Minister for Public Works in another place. The report on the Bill from the Local Bills Committee waß read, recommending the experiment of the trust being placed in the hands of the local body in this instance. The second reading was postponed. HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES. Tuesday, Octobeb 1. The House met at 2.30. THE BOYS IN BELLAMY'S. Mr Bunny brought up the report from the House Committee, showing that the boys in Bellamy's are not employed more than Beven and a half hours per day. THE AMBEBLEY EXTENSION. Mr Rolleston asked if the rails for the extension of the Northern line from Amberley have arrived in the colony, and whether they would be appropriated for that work. Mr Macandbew said the rails had arrived, and would be so appropriated. THE BALCLUTHA PLOOD. In reply to Mr Murray, Mr Eisheb said the reason the flood was not telegraphed lower down the Clutha river when it was known at Clyde was that both No 1 and No 2 wires were carried away, and prevented the news reaching. LAND TAX BILS. The House went into committee on the Land Tax Bill on the postponed clauses, which were passed with only verbal alteration. Several new clauses were introduced, and considerable discussion ensued on a new clause dealing with pastoral tenants. Mr Wakefield very strongly opposed the clause, saying it would be equivalent to a tax of twopence a head on sheep, and practically mean ruin to the poorer squatters in Canterbury, or men of limited capital. The runholders who were large capitalists had all bought their runs, and therefore would not be in the same position as the poor and needy pastoral tenants, who were asked to pay as much as if their land was freehold. Mr Wakefield further maintained that the Attorney-General, when they were last in committee, promised to reconsider the whole question. The Attobney-Genebal and Tehasubee both denied that there had been any such promise. Messrs Bowen and Rolleston also argued against the clause. After further discussion, and an attempt by Mr Murray to introduce a new clause with the object of getting all moneys raised under the Act devoted to repay to the consolidated fund any deficiency between the interest and the coat of railways constructed in the provincial district, the Bill was reported as amended. Mr Wakefield gave notice to move for the re-committal of the Bill when it comes on for third reading. judicial COMMISSION bill. Mr Eox pointed out that there was no necessity to inquire into the powers of the judges as that was long established, and well-known. As to the punishment inflicted on Mr Barton, that was another thing, and he felt all would agree it was greatly to be regretted. Still any one who had read the long accounts of altercations between Mr Barton and the judges must, he thought, admit that the judges had to put up with extreme provocation. The hon. gentleman pointed out on , the other hand the aggravating effect it must have had upon Mr Barton when the Chief Justice refused the request of Mr Barton that he woidd refer to his notes made during tho hearing of a case. Still, while holding the balance between them, he felt bound to say that Mr Barton had used expressions which no Court could tolerate, and he instanced Mr Barton's use of the word "rascally," and which could only apply to the judge, because Mr Barton denied any intention of imputing such a thing to either Mr Travers or Mr Ollivier. As to the independence and individual rights of lawyers as against tyrannical judges, the hon. member pointed out that every lawyer was an officer of the Court, and on that account the Court had a power over each lawyer that it did not possess over any other person. He thought that both Mr Barton and the Court were in the wrong, but tho Court least so. When, however, it came to the question of punishment, he must say it was a fearful ono to a person of Mr Barton's position, and for such an offence, and ono not without provocation. The proper and safe course for the Court to have pursued would have been to have prohibited Mr Barton from pleading before

them until such time as he apologised and withdrew his objectionable remarks, made when on a previous occasion the judges fined Mr Barton, and ho set the Court at defiance, and told the judges he would not pay a penny. Ho deprecated the House interfering in this matter and taking away from the power of the judges as one of the most dangerous steps, dangerous to the welfare of the State, and especially to tho working-man. Mr Macandrkw considered tho question should ho disassociated from the cas? of Mr Barton altogether. It was one of a far higher character, and concerned every man in the country. He thought the whole history of our country would not show anything so monstrous since tho days of the Slar Chamber. It was not a matter for legal minds and technicalities, but for common sense. He did not believe in the infallibility of either kings or judges. They should bo hedged round witli laws limiting their power. The liberty of the subject was one of the greatest rights they had to preserve. He would support the Bill.

Dr Hodgkinson thought if it was competent for Congress to define and limit the powers of judges in America, it was equally competent for the House to do so in New Zealand. He would, therefore, vote for the second reading of tho Bill, which might tend to prevent the recurrence of a similar case. More definite legislation on the subject would be to the advantage of the judges, as it would remove the responsibility from their shoulders. Mr Macfablane said it appeared to him lucky that this tyrannical sentence had been passed upon Mr Barton. He (Mr Macfarlane) had been fined £SO for contempt of Court simply for writing a very temperate letter, and had then been threatened with committal. He would propose that a judge should have power to commit an offender to gaol for contempt for a few hours, until bail could be found, and then the offender could be tried by a jury. As to the Press, it was no doubt true that the power of judges was so great as to gag its voice. He wished that the Press might stand in exactly the same relation to the Courts of Law as the rest of the world did ; that the Press might have full liberty to write upon any matters before the Court. Sir G. Gbey moved the adjournment of the debate. EVENING~SITTING. The House resumed at 7.30. JUDICIAL COMMISSION BILL. The Premier said the powers claimed by the Judgeß of the Supreme Court to sentence persons for contempt, for a month or for life, was so monstrous as to shock the imagination, and if that was law, as was said to be so by various lawyers of the House, he must question that law. Why in the early ages judges claimed the right of torture and of pressing a prisoner to death, and it was only when these claims were submitted to public opinion that it was shown that such claims were not based on any law, and were then swept away for ever. He was absolutely shocked at the arguments of the Attorney-General. Then again judges at one time claimed the power to sentence for witchcraft. Who could imagine now-a-days judges claiming such powers ? Yet eighteen persons had on t one occasion suffered for witchcraft, and on another a poor Irish woman was hanged because she could not say the Lord's Prayer in English, though unable to speak the language. He denied that the liberties of the people depended on the judges. They depended more upon the advocates and the juries, and often upon the accused themselves. If ever these powers existed he contended they must have lapsed by desuetude, and he ventured to say if there had been power to appeal to the Privy Council it would have been shown that the judges acted in violation of all law, and that they acted wrongly in asserting a right which had never been more than a custom that had had lapsed and ought never to have been revived. Then tho judges exercised a power over the Press (the only means of ascertaining public opinion) which was odious, and not to be allowed. The power of public opinion on such questions had been referred to, but what better means was there of turning public attention to the matter than passing a Bill and having an investigation. Public opinion must be formed, and the first thing that would follow would be to take away the power claimed, if the judges had it, and if not to lay down limits beyond which they should not go. The thanks of the colony were due to his young friend, the introducer of the Bill, who, although now only a student of law, would yet become one of the brightest ornaments of the profession. It had not been been contended by those who supported the Biil that any case had been made out against the judges, though the Attorney-General, the member for Kaiapoi, and the member for Wanganui, all agreed that a case had been made out, because all agreed that the punishment was too great. The member for Wanganui said the judges erred, but that Mr Barton erred in a greater degree. If, then, Mr Barton for his error received a month's imprisonment, would they say how much punishment the judges should have meted out to him, as the colony of New Zealand was the first piace in which such a stretch of power was exercised by judges. Let them put it upon record that New Zealand was the first place to discontinue so tyrannical and monstrous a power. Mr Delautoub said he was not disappointed in the speech of the Attorney General, which plainly showed that because of his position he was bound to subordinate all his feelings to the position which held him in thrall. Who was to defend the judges in the House ; if the Attorney-General did not. He did not damage the case, because he (Mr Delatour) never contended that the judges had not the powers claimed for them. Nor had he denied by anticipation any of the positions taken up by the AttorneyGeneral. He merely urged that such powers were repugnant to all principles of justice and right, and had given in support of the ground he took up the opinions of some of the highest authorities on constitutional law, who all agreed as to the unprecedentedly tyrannical nature of such powers. The hon. gentleman referred severally to various points of tho speeches against the Bill. He asked the House if they refused to grant this commission, what did they propose to do in regard to Mr Barton's case or those others which might arise P The Bill sought more than to redress the single wrong complaiKed of. It was intended with the view of securing the purity of the Bench and keeping it pure. Too much attention was paid to Mr Barton's case, and too little thought of his clients, of the men who were debarred from obtaining justice by the form of Court, who, after gaining in the Courts, were yet driven into bankruptcy Courts. He hoped that what had been asked for moderately and justly would be granted by the House, and if it were not now, he felt certain the time would soon come when such a request could not be denied. The House then divided, and the second reading was negatived by 39 against 27. The division list was as follows :

ayes—27. Messrs Baigent Messrs Mosb Ballance M'Minn Barff Murray Brown, J. C. Nahe Currington O'Eorke Delautour Bees Dignan Beeves Fisher Seaton George Sheckan Sir George Grey Swanson Messrs Hauilhi Taiaroa Hislop Tole Hodgkinson Wallis Macaudrew noes—39 Major Atkinson Messrs MurrayAynsley Messrs Bowen Orrnond Brandon Kicha-dson Bryce Eichmond Sir E. Douglas Eolleston Messrs Driver Eowe Fitzroy Saunders Fox Seymour Gibbs Stevens Gisbome Stout Hobbs button Hunter Tawiti Hm-sthouse Tosehmakcr Johnston Thomson Kenny Tmnbull McFarlano Wnson Menders "VVhilaker McLean "Wood Montgomery Woolcock Moorhouse

CUSTOMS TABIFF BILIi. Mr Ballance then moved tho second reading of the Customs Tariff Bill, in a very brief speech.in which he explained a few alterations made since the Bill was first introduced. The Bill was read a second time on the voices, and tho House immediately went into committee on tho Bill.