To the Editor of the New Zealand Spectator.

New Zealand Spectator and Cook's Strait Guardian, Volume I, Issue 38, 28 June 1845, Page 3

To the Editor of the New Zealand Spectator.

Sir, — In a late report of the proceedings in the Supreme Court here, I observed a case in which the award in an arbitration was tried to be set aside on a technical point of law, and on inferential circumstances, — and the case appeared to have drawn forth considerable discussion from the learned counsel on both sides ; his Honor the Judge even appeared to enter into legal uncertainties on the subject. Now, it has always been my humble opinion that law has little to do with arbitration, as the latter has been wisely considered the real fountain of justice, where facts and circumstances are freely brought forward, without contortion or restraint, and not held back for having been perhaps omitted on the record, — and I am sure you will agree with me in viewing the general acceptation of a reference to arbitration as being, a desire to avoid law, seeing that what often " may be law is not always very good justice," — and the parties who agree to a reference, by the very act, virtually admit, tbat, either through feeling, or otherwise, they are not able, of themselves, to arrive at a proper settlement of their differences, and that they leave the whole of whatever matter it may be without incumbrance, to the parties they may respectively nominate — implying, that they desire nothing but justice and fairness, and where the operation of the " glorious uncertainty" is not supposed to hold any undue effect — in fact, justice to the parties is, doubly secured, asTa diifererof course only. nominates as his arbitrator, a person in whose judgment and integrity he has confidence, and in case of any doubt between the referees appointed, they call upon a disinterested third party to determine on any difference that may arise between them, so that there is two to one iv favour of justice — and why an award has to be " artificially" drawn up, or require a " conveyancer" or " special pleader ," to assist in its manufacture, is something new to me, — and I believe the universal interpretation of the admirable system of arbitration is, the honest desire of the parties entering into it, to receive a fair and just settlement of their differences, and when a party does agree to abide by the decision of such a tribunal, and afterwards endeavours to back out, on any legal quibble, or otherwise, it certainly appears as if his case was bad, or that he had a " penchant" for trusting to the " statutes," — I say he has, in such a case, no business whatever to go to law in the matter. Therefore, if I understand, that the true principles of aibitration are other than unfettered, by what ought to be, obsolete technicalities of law, — and are not the gentlest mode of arriving at equity, I am mistaken, that's all. — Your's very obediently, A Grand Juror. Wellington, 16th June 1845.