THE PORIRUA TRUST.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXV, Issue 103, 27 April 1903, Page 2

THE PORIRUA TRUST.

CHIEF JUSTICE KKSENTS PRIVT OOUNOIL'3 IMPUTATIONS. PEE PRESS ASSOCIATION, Wellington, April 25. Sir Robert S'out read a long criticism of the Privy Council's attack on the Appeal Court, this morning. He d'scrined it as a dir-ct attwk on the probity of the App :1 Court, and proceeded to take the judgment point by point. His miiu contentions wero that the Privy Council was ignorant of the local laws governing native matters, and that in some p!ace3 they had misapprehended tho bearing of fact's ac'uaily before them. Some of their suggestions could not have been made by any counsel in New Zealand, mr by anyone convo oint with our history. The reference to Bishop Selwyn betrayed ignoranee. " Any person," he said, reading their Lordship's remark* would assume that this Court h'td declined jurisdiction, had denied justice, and had lost its independace through dreid of the Executive Government. These imputations are bjßsless, and I hardly think it becoming in tho highast tribumil of the Empire to make such ch irgts against any Court, unless they are conclusively proved. Further on he says: " Then their Lordships do not attempt to agswer jhe pertinent question the Court of Appwil iisked or meet the argument ussd, but indulge in language that is happily raie in judicial judgments pronounced in the cjiony. Whether it is a fitting thing for the highest Imperial tribunal tomak? puoh unfounded aspersions it is nob for me to siy. I feel the aspersions, under the circumstances in which thny have been made, are a greater reflection on the Privy Council than gn the Appeal Court of New Zealand." Sir Rob"rt. S out explains that he was not a party to iha Appeal Court's judgment" The attitude he took up wa* Approved by the Privy Council, but ho feels that when the C ur' of whic ; he has tho honour to be presid. d'- is attacked »y such a body as ihe Privy Council is is his duiy to explain the position to his f llow c donis s. After thus d-feiiding the Court ovt>r the Pjrirui case, he states that this in not the ouly judgment the Privy Council has pvououDced under misapprehension or ignorance of ou,r local l-tws, and briefly refers to three:—Piimm r v. tl-e Corporation of Wellington, Eccles v. Mills, and Tamake v. B >ker. in the last, be says, the Counc'l was ignorant of the date when wa became a self-governing colony, and of ihe iaws regarding native lauds. If the dicta is. that case wero given tffect to r o lind title in the colony would be sife. Sir Robert Stout considered that this ignorance of local laws and customs wis a very serious mutter and likely to weaken the tiu j boud ot union anionshis Majesty's suUjeJte as far as Now Zealind is concerned. I'ua Pivy Council had shown that it koows nvtour statute;', our conveyancing teuu-, or our history PROTESTS BY OTHER JUI)G;S3, Latsp.. Sir Robert S cii also read a s:ate- | neat"by Judge Willi una <mph>ti:dly protesting against the accusation "f subservience to the Government. No -ucb suggestion had ever bot-n made ill it was uttered by four strangers sitting 14,000 miles away. Their de cisioos must continue to be reviewed, but whether the Judicial Oommitteu was tho proper body to do so was now a question for consideration, as that body displayed every oharacteristia of an alien tribunal.

Judge Edwards delivered a short and r-ry vigorous protest, taying that if ;hare was any foundation for the ibargcH, the Judge* guilty of coniluct for which they ought to bi revived. A blow had been struck at the t anifcy cf tie Empire. ' Mr Travera begged leave to say that ' the confidence of thy c;>l-.<ny in Jouit remained quite unshaken, and ( sympithy wag extetdud to tneOourt/l for i he unmerited att ck upon it. j i Tne thief Jus-Jc thanked Mrj Pavers. I