MR. BARTON AND THE SUPREME COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5250, 21 January 1878, Page 3

MR. BARTON AND THE SUPREME COURT.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW ZEALAND TIMES. gni, The following correspondence between the Deputy-Registrar of the Supreme Court and myself seems to me to be of sufficient public interest to warrant its publication. It will help the public to arrive at a just conclusion respecting the conduct of public business iu the offices of the Supreme Court. The mode in which it is conducted iu the Court itself is, I am glad to see, being sufficiently noticed in the Press to enable the public to see something at all events of what is taking place. —I am, &c., George Elliott Barton. Wellington, January 19. “ Wellington, January 17, 1876. “GILLON V. MACDONALD. “Sir, —When on Monday last I sent my clerk to the Court at about a quarter to five p.m. to obtain for me the plaintiff’s exhibits in the case of Gillon against Macdonald, you informed him that the safes were all locked for the day, and that at that hour you could not open them again. My clerk also reported to me that you said even if you could have opened the safes you were not at all sure that it was consistent with your duty to give them up to me. “ On tho next morning, when I personally applied to you, you will remember that you shewed me two receipts for exhibits, one showing that Mr. Kennedy Macdonald received, apparently, the exhibits (including the plaintiff’s) bn the 15th November last ; the other showing that Messrs. Travers, Ollivier, and Co. had previously, on the 26th October, received the same exhibits (including plaintiff’s) from the Court. On search made by you on

Tuesday morning you will remember you were nimble to find the plaintiff’s exhibits in your possession. ■ i’ “Afterwards, being unable to get the documents, I bad to go into Court to do the be„t I could in the case without them; and my partner, by my instructions, applied to Mr. Travers to know whether he had received our exhibits along with his own, and he denied that he had (to his knowledge at all events.) “ Subsequently, seeing one of the papers that had been left in Court by us, he pointed Mr. Travers’ attention to it as belonging to our client, whereupon Mr. Travers stated that he had taken thatdoeument as bis own property, and claimed possession of it as such. Ultimately we were fortunate enough to trace to the possession of Travers, Ollivier, aud Co. the whole of the missing documents, and to obtain possession of them in time for the plaintiff's ease ; but this did not occur until after I had sent in to your department for the two receipts above mentioned, accompanied by a request that you yourself should come into Court to give evidence about it, and had also given directions to obtain forthwith the attendance of Mr. Macdonald as a further witness on the subject. “ I have now the honor to request au answer to the following questions;—!. If you were doubtful whether it was consistent with your duty to give to plaintiff’s solicitor the plaintiff’s own exhibits until the trial should come ou, how came you to give Messrs. Travers aud Ollivier and Mr. Macdonald the defendant’s exhibits months ago? We presume the same rule of duty should apply to them as to us. 2. How came you to take two receipts? Did you first give the papers to Travers and Ollivier, receive them back from them, and then twenty days afterwards hand them to Mr. Macdonald ? 3. How came you .to deliver to them, or one of them, not only their own exhibits, but our client’s also ? “Be good enough to reply to this letter in writing at your earliest convenience.—l have, Ac., “ George Elliott Barton. " H. C. Wilmer, Esq., Deputy-Registrar. “ Supreme Court Office, Wellington, “ January 17, 1878. “ Sir, —In answer to your letter of this morning’s date, respecting the dates of the sitting of the Court in banco, I begto inform you that their Honors the Judges will, in addition to the sitting of the Court on to-day and to-morrow, also sit on Saturday if necessary, in order to exhaust the present cause list, but they do not see their way to sitting on any day iu the next week previous to the day already fixed, namely, Thursday, January 24. “ I would also beg to remind you that it is no part of my duties to enter into a correspondence with solicitors respecting the conduct of the business of the Court. “ Any verbal information respecting such matters I am at all times happy to give to the gentlemen of the profession and to their clerks during office hours, —I have, &c., “H. 0. Wilmer, “ Deputy-Registrar. “ George Elliott Barton, Esquire, . “ Wellington.” “Wellington, January 17, 1878. “Sir, —I beg to. acknowledge receipt of your letter stating that their Honors will sit cu Saturday, also declining to answer in writing the questions set forth in my letter to you of this dav, —I have, &0., “ George E. Barton. “ H. 0. Wilmer, Esq., Deputy-Registrar.’