CONTEMPT OF COURT.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIV, Issue 9409, 1 April 1909, Page 2

CONTEMPT OF COURT.

CASE OF REV*. F. J. MURDOCH. As mentioned in our cable messages ', the Rev. P. J. Murdoch, clerk to the South Melbourne Presbytery, was ' committed to prison tor contempt o£ Court, the contempt being ms refusal to produce in a civil action in which he was a witness a certain letter. Next day, reports a Melbourne paper, when the case was again called on. Mr M’Arthnr, who had been engaged to appear for Mr Murdoch, said : I am instructed to inform you-that the Presbytery have ’ authorised Mr Murdoch L ! , Mr Justice Hodges: I don t want to hear a word about the Pretbyterv. I have nothing whatever to do with the Presbytery. . Mr M’Arthfir: I am making a statement on behalf of Mr Murdochs and not for the Presbytery. His Honour: I am not concerned . with What the Presbytery may say to Mr Murdoch, or what he may say to the ‘ Presbytery. I am conecrned with only one thing— whether l am going to allow a member of this community to defy the law, and prevent justice from being administered, Mr M’Arthur: With all respect and courtesy to the Court, I propose to make two statements to your Honour one of which you may s »y entirely immaterial. I *bink ®he proper attitude for you to adopt is His Honour: I am much obliged to yon for the advice. Confine yourself “EuESSSt ttttak I have been perfectly courteous to you, and 1 think I have the fight to expect the same courtesy from you. His Honour: Given your courtesy, • I don’t want your advice. - Mr M’Arthnr : I am instructed, whether it is material or not, the Presbytery have authorised Mi Murdoch to produce the documents. His Honour: I don’t want their authority. That is not relevant to

Mr M’Arthur: The second statement is that Mr Murdoch is now willing to produce the document and give any undertaking your Hounour may order to produce the document. The application I have to make to your Honour is that, upon his complying with such an nnfortaking as your Honour may think fit, Mr Murdock be released from gaol. His Honour: This certainly seems a novel matter in the adimmstration of justice in this country. The hist difficulty in the case was ihe difficulty that a witness, an educated man, an intelligent man, a man of letters, an ordained minister of a well organised church, was unable to distinguish between possession and ownership. Probably the difficulty has arisen through the minister stepping out of his sphere of metaphysio and psychology into that of law. Sitting in this Court of this State, I am no respecter of persons. I am no respecter of creeds. I know no person for his power or his poverty. I know no person for his belief or disbelief. The law is the same whether he he Jew °* Parsee or Mabomedan. Whether he be a follower of Confucius or Hrabma, or Buddha, be gets tbe same law administered. He has the same rights. I could no more allow members of the Presbyterian Church to administer oaths to one another, that they would not produce documents that were necessary for the vindication of a man’s character, or the conviction of a criminal, than 1 would allow two Thugs by similar oaths to do the same thing. It would be an amazing thing—subversive not only of the administration of justice, but also of all cr^ ? n( * decency in the community. And just/ as I could not allow an agreement between a small body to defeat the ends of justice and slay either a man or his character, so neither can I allow a body of the Presbyterian Church to do what I could not allow a weak and comparatively powerless body to do. It can make no difference whether a person comes into Court in rags of whether he comes in all the respectable habila* ments of the Presbyterian Church, the law must be the same; the right must be the same ; justice must be the same; and I have difficulty in understanding how any man who ' professes to be a good citizen, I have difficulty in understanding how any body of men can take an oath from a man to violate his duty as a citizen. And I have only to say that if oaths are. constituted in that way, and oaths are taken to break the law, those gentlemen will find themselves not in the witness-box, but will find themselves ‘Jn the adjoining Court, in the dock, on a charge of conspiracy. Ido not mean to say, or do not desire to say anything disrespectful of the Presbyterian Church. Not only have I connections which belong to the denomination, but I have a profound respect for its traditions, its past and its present; but it has been reserved to that body . with a great past to set an example to less educated, to poorer members of this community, in endeavouring to defy the law and defeat justice. My reason for declining practically to hear the attitude of the Presbytery was that I have nothing to .do with the Presbytery; if the Presbytery had come here in the same attitude they might have been lodged with Mr Murdoch. His Honour then made a formal order for Mr Murdoch’s release. On being released the rev. gentleman was surrounded by brother clergyman and warmly greeted.