VAGARIES OF THE BENCH. An Age Limit for Judges.

Free Lance, Volume III, Issue 142, 21 March 1903, Page 8

VAGARIES OF THE BENCH. An Age Limit for Judges.

MR Justice C'onoll" of Auckland, is once moip slrong.lv in evidenc" This week the Appeal touit, b\ a unanimous decision, re\eis,od the e\tiaordimr\ judgment which the octogenaiian judge pronounced about three weeks ago m the cdso of Bowes \ Bowes and Jennings lh Bewes a medical man practising las piofession at Otahu''u, noai Auckland, applied to the Covrt for a divorce ftom Ins wife, on the giound of her a-dulteiv w lfrli a commission agent named Jennings The paities had been mained foi twenty years, but since 1901 hid been living a.pait, undei a deed cf sepji .it ion bv winch Dr. Bewes undeitook to contribute £120 a yeai tow-aids his, wife's support. *■ * * Certain mforiration leached the doctor in Januai v last, w Inch prompted him ' to play til pi spy Along with a friend named Henderson, he went "by night to the boarding-house where his wife resided. They w aited outside about an hour, then forced an entrance through a French window, and surprised the respondent and co-respondent together under circumstances w hich left no room for doubt. The case was further strengthened by evidence from the landlady as to admissions made to> her by Mrs. Bew-^s. And, to crown all, nei-

ther of the accused parties appeared in Court, or offered opposition to the suit. * * • Yet, m face of all this, Mr. Justice Canolly dismissed the petition for the astounding Reason that the husband, by Hatching his wife, thereby connived at her unfaithful conduct. He ignored aJ together the fact, that the parties had been living apart for twelve years, and that, while the husband had no control over his wife, he was paying for her maintenance. But this was not all. The judge passed some severe reflections upon the petitioner. Not only did he ooindemn him as having connived at Ins w lfe's infidelity, but he rubbed in the caustic by saying "It is highly discreditable that a man suspecting his. w lfe of adultery should wait a whole hour in the hopei of such an act being committed by her." There was, of course, not a tattle of evidence to justify the idea that the Doctor had any such hope at all. It was pure assumption, and of apiece with the monstrous dictum that to watch a suspected wife 01 husband is to connive at their misconduct. * * * If the petitioner had been an ordinary working man, without means to carry has suit further, he would have been condemned to a cruel injustice. Besides that, a license would have been granted to guilty wives and husbandstc puisue their amours with greater impunity than ever. The divorce law would have been reduced to a dead letter, and the question "Is Masmage a Failure?" would have been driven much nearer to a highly unsatisfactory conclusion. Fo-rt.una.tely, Dr. Bowes was able to carry hisi case to a higher tribunal, and get the singular judgment of the lower Court reversed. * • • It is not the first time by any means that Judge Conolly has surprised the public by his judicial comments and sentences And reference to this fact naturally raises the Question whether there ought not to be an ag&-limit for our judges and magistrates. Quite recentJv the ukase has gone forth from the Government that civil servants must retire at the age of 65. Why should not Parliament similarly enact a law prescribing say 70 years as the limit for service on the Bench ? In the vast majority of cases, both the physical and mental faculties begin to show signs of decay and infirmity after that age. Mr. Justice Conolly is over eighty years of age, and, in the nature of things, must be long past his prime. * * * For the high position of judges, we w ant men w hose powers are unimpaired bv the infirmities of age. If retirement from the Bench were made compulsory at seventy years, that tranquil leisure winch should follow a laborious life would be ensured to our veteran judges At the same time, fairer oppoitunities for advancement would be gi anted to the younger members of the. Bar. As matters: stand at present, if senility overtakes a judge the country must gnu and bear it. If extreme age sours his temper, warps his judgment, dims his memory, and weakens his mind, there is no redress. This should not be. The la,w really must step in, and impose an age limit.