Untitled

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5329, 26 April 1878, Page 4

The power given to the Judges of committing for contempt of Court is absolutely necessary, if the Supreme Courtis to be held in any respect by the country, and if the rights and liberties of individuals are to be protected. If the Judges have not power to keep order in their Court, if their actions and motives are to be traduced and libelled by any ill-con-ditioned practitioner who may choose to seek an infamous notoriety, then we may say good-bye to all guarantee for the safety of life,. character, and liberty. There have notbeen wanting signs of late tha. we are liable to fall under the worst tyranny a people can be subject to, the unreasonable overbearing impulse of a momentary majority. It is but lately that the Wellington electorate choose to send as their representative to Parliament a man lying under sentence of contempt of the highest Court in the country. How gross that contempt was, and hovy deliberate it was, we need scarcely remind our readers. The Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Richmond did not punish Mr. Barton till they had exhausted every hope of inducing him to respect himself and the Court in which he practised ; until, indeed, the public all over the colony were complaining of the continuance of the scandal We have before drawn attention to the fact that Mr. Barton does not confine his attacks to the two 'Judges now residing at Wellington and that many years ago he was committed by Judge Gresson for gross contempt of Court at Dunedin. He has lately taken care to prove himself that we had not overstated his proclivity for wholesale insubordination. Onarecentoocasion Mr. BARTONtook upon himself to make sweeping, though vague and general, charges against the Resident Magistrate’s Court at Wellington. Mr. Crawford, the Resident Magistrate, and the Clerk of the Court demanded an inquiry. Mr. Ballance communicated with Mr, Barton on the subject, and the only effect of the communication was a tirade against all the Judges with whom Mr. Barton, had at any time been brought into contact, and a practical refusal to substantiate his charges against the Magistrate’s Court. When Mr. Barton writes the following nonsense it is really charitable to suppose that the very thought of a Judge upsets for a time his mental equilibrium: —“I note also, that when Mr. Jones boldly persisted in charging the AttorneyGeneral with corruption, and when Parliament, at the expense of the taxpayers, directed the prosecution to cleat the Attorney General’s character, Judge Williams, with the assistance of Judge Johnston, contrived to exclude all truth of the proof of Mr. Jones’s charges, and thus endeavored to reduce the jury to the necessity of finding Mr. Jones guilty. 1 also note that this judicial juggle was perpetrated under cover of a repealed English statute, only capable of being treated as law in New Zealand in case the Judge should consider it applicable to the circumstances of the colony.” If ever any public man had fair ground of complaint as to the manner in which he has been treated, it is the late Attorney-General, Mr. Whitaker. Over and over again he attempted to bring to a point the absurd charges that were constantly levelled at him by Sir George Grev and his trail—and when at last he brought before the House a charge so gross, of absolute personal corruption, and of prostituting his high office for the sake of private advantage, that even many of his opponents were, or pretended to be, disgusted, he has been unable to obtain an investigation of the charge. An attempt was made under cover of Supreme Court procedure to get back again from a specific charge against him to a general attack on his conduct throughout a long career ; and when this attempt was necessarily set aside, the counsel for the defendant relied on the sympathies of a Dunedin jury rather than attempt to support his client’s allegations, and he was not disappointed. Mrs. Reid, and Mr. Jones, andsome others, havehadreason to bless Dunedin juries. All that can be said in the case of Jones is that the jury found on their oaths that the undefended allegation that the Attorney-General had used his office for the purpose of furthering his private ends was not a libel. It is no wonder that so many of the best men in New Zealand talk of giving up political life, and that there is some danger lest our public affairs bo left to the care of those who will have no cause for sensitiveness on questions of character and honor. We intend to republish some comments on the result of the J ones trial in Dunedin from the Lyttelton Times, a paper which has been bitterly opposed to the late Government, and which has of late been notoriously a partisan organ. The view taken by that paper may give to those who have not troubled their heads about the case some idea of the unsatisfactory nature of the verdict even to the enemies of the late Attorney-General. But Mr. Barton is not content with asserting his peculiar view of law and equity; ho is not satisfied without imputing wilful partisanship to two more of the Judges. This conduct on the part of a barrister of the Supreme Court is so scandalous, that we shall expect to see the matter dealt with by the profession, as would be the case in England. But unfortunately, owing to the position of the Bar in New Zealand, scattered as it is over the two islands, there is no professional esprit de corps among barristers in New Zealand, and there is no sound Bar opinion among them. The local socalled law societies are worse than useless. They sometimes meet to discuss a particular question, but seldom come to any determination which the members themselves respect, or expect any one else to respect. The Judges, therefore, are placed in a very difficult and uncomfortable position, compared to that which they occupy in any country where the Baris a body constantly practising and meeting in the same place. In any other country Mr. Barton’s conduct would not be possible. It is true that the Wellington Bar, where Mr. Barton is practising, has uumistakeably shown its feeling on the subject; but it is practically powerless, being, as it is, a small fraction of the New Zealand legal fraternity. If rumour is correct, the Judges cannot look to the present Government to maintain the dignity of the Supremo Court. Sir George Grey’s attitude towards that Court when Governor is well known. Some of his remarks in the House have not tended to give public confidence as to his views of the relations between a Government and a High Court of Judicature. It has been been freely stated that the Government intend to support an inquiry into the conduct of the Judges in sentencing Mr. Barton to' imprisonment for contempt of Court. This, of course, means that the Judges arc to bo put upon their trial for the action they thought fit to take in maintaining order and decorum in their Court, and in protecting themselves, when sitting in judgment, from repeated and deliberate insult. There had better be a Parliamentary inquiry also into the conduct of Judges Johnston and Williams in deciding as they did on the pleas in the trial of Jones, at Dunedin. Has not Mr. Barton said that they “contrived' to .exclude all proof of the truth of Mr. Jones’s charges,” and that this was “a judicial juggle V’ And is not this enough under a Government of . anarchy to put the Judges of the Supreme Court on their trial ? In all British communities the most scrupulousrespect has always been paid to the highest Court of Judicature ; it has been protected against all interference

of Parliament except in' extreme misconduct, when the removal of a g was necessary ; and great h■ „ taken to shield it from all poUUoal i ehce. But we are entering, as Sir UE Grey tells us, on a new and glorious . The past is done with, and we mu longer be guided by obsolete prece 6 • Universal equality is offered as a re\ for universal submission to a saviou; , society. Absurd as it may seem community of Englishmen, this sox stuff has been preached throughout colony, and it is supposed in 80 quarters that Parliament will bend knee and accept the . Premier at his own valuation. When that is the case, we shall expect to see our Courts of Justice discredited, and our Judges dragge through the dirt. Mr. Barton is a corollary of Sir George Grey.