THE EDWARDS APPOINTMENT.

Te Aroha News, Volume VIII, Issue 487, 9 July 1890, Page 4

THE EDWARDS APPOINTMENT.

A LIVELY DEBATE. Wellington, July 5. An animated discussion on the appointment of Judge Edwards a 3 sixtii judge of the Supreme Court cropped up unexpectedly in the House of Representatives yesterday afternoon, when the Supreme Court Act Amendment Bill, recommending the appointment of a sixth judge, was introduced by message from the Governor. The reading of this message was received will) a chorus of “ Oh’s !” and several members offered stienuous objection to the Bill being introduced at all. The House having gone into Committee, Mr Saddon moved, “ That this Committee most respectfully begs to inform His Excellency that the circumstances of the colony and the administration of justice do not warrant the colony in going to the expense of providing for a sixth judge.” He protested most strenuously against this additional taxation being imposed on the people of the colony, and urged that the majority of the people of New Zealand were opposed to this appointment. This observation was received with a chorus of “Hear, hears.” Mr Seddon went on to say that His Excelloncy had been advised to make an unnecessary appointment. It was sti ange that the gen bleman who had received this appointment had not been thought of when there was so much discussion about the appointment of a previous judge. Behind this appointment he believed there were motives which His Excellency was not aware of. It wa3 absolutely necessary that retrenchment should take place, and yet it was proposed to make this appointment, wnich involved not only a salary of £1,600 per annum, but also expenses making in all about £2,000. -If there were arrearsof Native Land Court work, a qualified person could be appointed to deal with it at less cost. The Hon. Captain Russell suggested that the discussion on this matter should be allowed to come on in the ordinary course on the second reading. There were very good reasons for the appointment, and the gentleman selected to fill the office was eminently suited for it. The Hon. Mr Ballance advised the Government to agree to an adjournment of the question. The discussion of this matter would take a great deal of time. It was one of the most extraordinary appointments ever made by the House. They were asked to agree to an appointment of a sixth judge to the Supremo Court Bench to enable him bo administer the native affairs un the EastCoast. They had been assured that the ap poinbment of Judge Edwards had been completed. He had maintained all through that the appointment was not complete until the salary waa fixed, and the introduction of the matter now proved that his assertion had been correct. Unless the Government agreed to adjourn the motion the Opposition would be compelled to oppose it at every stage. The Hon. Mr Hislop said if the leader of the Opposition felt that he had a good case ho could lose nothing by having a proper discussion upon the second reading of the Bill in the ordinary course. If the honourable member meant to obstruct this matter at every point he did not see vyhat could be

gained by an adjournment. There was nothing in the Bill about the appointment of Judge Edwards. Tbeappointment never theless was perfectly legal, and he challenged investigation by any committee to which the matter might be relegated. The Hon. Mr Bailance replied that the appointment of sixth judge directly referred to Judge Edwards. He looked upon the appointment as utterly indefensible, and said it was the intention of his side of tho House to debate this matter in the fullest possible way, in order that the country should be fully enlightened with regard to the appointment of Judge Edwards. Mr Fish moved that progress bo reported. The Hon. Mr Hislop said if the information was all that had been desired it would have been given at once. The appointment was absolutely necessary to relieve the pressure of judicial work.

The Hon. Mr Mitchelson said Government had no objection to progress being reported, but asked that when the Bill did come before the Committee again it would be discussed upon its merits in a fair and reasonable manner.

Mr Samuel expressed the hope that when the matter came up again the first person who spoke would be a Minister of the Crown, and that he would give an explanation of the whole matter. He expressed the opinion that the appointment was a proper one, in consequence of the pressure of business, and said that the responsibility was greater on the Commissioner of the Native Land Court than on the Supreme Court judges. Sir George Grey said this was not a party question. This was the first time an effort had been made either in Great Britain or any part of the British dominions to appoint a Supreme Court judge. Tho question was whether the judge should be appointed upon the Bench of Justico in New Zealand for whom no provision had been made. A crime had been committed against the whole British race, and ho hoped every one of ihe members would resist to the last that crime being allowed to be perpetrated by their assent. Mr McKenzie pointed out that Judge Edwards had been appointed Judge of the Supreme Court for life, and advised the House to validate the appointment. He thought the Hon, Mr Bailance should be the last man to object to the action of tho Government in a matter of this kind when ho had himself given expression to the opinion that judgments given by the judges of the Supremo Court of New Zealand should be subject to revision by a Parliamentary Committee.

The Hon. Mr Bailance gave this assertion an unqualified denial, whereupon McKenzie read from a Press Association report of a speech made by the leader of the Opposition at Wanganui, in 1887, supporting the statement he had made, to the great amusement of members.

The Hon. Mr Bailance said the report was neither full nor correct. Press Association reports were not infrequently incorrect, and conveyed an entirely opposite impression to what the speaker said. Mr Taylor asked whether Judge Edwards had yet received any remuneration for his services, and, no reply being forthcoming, lie took it for granted that silence gave consent. Judge Edwards was appointed nominally Judge of the Native Land Court, but in reality he had at that time in his pocket a solemn pledge that he would be made a Judge of the Supreme Court. He believed tho real object was to keep Judge Ward from being Judge of the Supreme Court.

Mr Fisher charged the Government with attempting to spring a mine on the House, and asked the Colonial Secretary to state what salary Judge Edwards now received.

The Hon. Captain Russell said that so far from attempting to spring a mine upon the House it was obvious from the order paper that the Supreme Court Amendment Act was to be introduced on that day. Further it was at the request of the leading member of the Opposition that the Acting-Premier had courteously agreed to allow the Bills to be introduced at all. Judge Edwards was a duly appointed judge of the Supreme Court, and he received the ordinary salary ; and the Government were quite prepared to prove that the appointment was just, constitutional, and in every way reasonable. Mr Hutchison said the Government now admitted, not only an illegal appointment, but also an illegal payment, and urged that tho Government should call upon Judge Edwards to resign in order that the House might come to the consideration of the Bill uninfluenced by any personal associations. Mr Seddon expressed the opinion that there was no hurry to make this appointment, and asserted that it was one of the jobs that the Government attempted to perpetrate before going out of office. The discussion was interrupted by the usual adjournment at 5.30.

The discussion was continued until about 9 o’clock, during which members spoke forcibly against the appointment, while others, including Mrßeacock, urged that the proper time for debating the subject was on the motion for second reading. Sir George Grey made a vigorous reply, asserting that all times were convenient which sought for justice for our fellowmen, and that by allowing this appointment to continue wrongfully for a single day was a great injustice to the whole colony. Progress was then reported and the House resumed.

NEWSPAPER COMMENT.

The “ Post,” referring bo the collapse oj the no confidence debate, says it c innob congratulate the Opposition leader on the turn things have taken, and insinuates that he took advantage of an opportunity afforded by a snatch division to got ont of a difficult position, and yet, by lack of discipline, allowed his forces to straggle, as did also the larger number of the Government supporters, and allowed the Government to escape what might, by good Opposition generalship, have proved a heavy disaster. The “Post” further says that what has followed the collapse of the debate is absolutely unjustifiable ; the House having acquitted the Ministers by its vote, is now trying them. This converse of Jedburgh justice is an ignoble waste of time, members have not the fortitude to deny themselves the gratification of making speeches, which have since their preparation become obsolete, and their chiefs have not the strength to restrain them. Disiopline has gone to the wind, the air is full of useless clamour, and all the guns are wildly firing blank cartridge. After referring to the attitude of the candid friend assumed by Mr Bryce, the “ Post ” concludes thus : —“ On Tuesday bha Government was badly shaken, but on Wednesday, after its victory in the division lobby, it was crushed out of all semblance of respectable shape with a rotten financial surplus, which is another name for insolvency, and the deficiency bills ready to their hands and an enormous loan for purposes largely in aid of revenue looming near. Ministers have to face the country and give what account they can of their stewardship. The wonder is that they are not compelled to go to judgment at once instead of merely being pub through the tedious formalities of a sham fight.”'