JUDGE AND COUNSEL DIFFER

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 273, 15 May 1912, Page 8

JUDGE AND COUNSEL DIFFER

UNUSUAL SCENE IN COURT. By Telegraph—Press Association. Auckland, May 13. An unusual scene closed the sitting of the Supreme Court to-day. Mr. T. Cotter, K.C., who appeared for the Waihi Gold Mining Company in a ease in which the company was sued for monies alleged to be due as Customs duties, pursued a form of cross-examination which was strongly objected to by Mr. Justice Edwards.

During his cross-examination of three witnesses, Mr. Cotter was repeatedly told by the Judge that he was wasting time, and that the case, which was one of a large number, must be shortened. Mr. Cotter said he was quite ready, as the Judge knew, to accept the ruling of the Court, but sought to explain his reasons for putting the questions as he had'done.

His Honor declined to hear the reasons, and refused also to take down certain questions and answers which counsel asked him to note. "If you are not satisfied with my notes. Mr. Cotter," he said, "you can got somebody else to take them." He further told Mr. Cotter to put his questions without making speeches about them.

Mr. Cotter still urged certain questions, but was repeatedly told by the Judge not to interrupt, and finally the barrister was brought to a verbal standstill.

"I really must ask your Honor to treat me with common courtesy," he said, and sat down.

Mr. Cotter then proceeded to pack up his briefs, stating that his intention was to conduct his case properly, and that Mr. Tunks, who appeared with him, would continue the questions. He then retired to another seat on the bar.

Mr. C. J. Tunks said he was placed in a most xmcomfortable position. He was not prepared to continue examination.

His Honor: "The case will be adjourned till 10 o'clock to-morrow morning. In the meantime counsel will please realise that questions must be asked as direct questions, and not waste so much time."