The Temuka Leader SATURDAY, AUGUST 10, 1889. JUDGE WARD.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1928, 10 August 1889, Page 2

The Temuka Leader SATURDAY, AUGUST 10, 1889. JUDGE WARD.

Wb do not think that Judge Ward has been fairly treated. The position is this; Judge Ward condemned to four months 5 imprisonment, Christie, of Oamaru, for fraudulent bankruptcy. Mr Hislop, whose firm acted as solicitors for Christie, happened to. be in Oamaru at the time, and though not actively engaged in the defence was in court during the trial. Immediately after Christie was convicted a petition was got up, praying the Governor to pardon Christie. This petition was in the handwriting of Mr Hislop’s clerk, and it is therefore presumed that Mr Hislop had Admething to do with the getting of it up. The petition is addressed to .gis Excellency the Governor, and the usual course, we believo, is first of all to lay the petition before His Excellency before any : one else interferes in it. Then His Excellency passes it on'tohis responsible advisers -•-that is, the Government of the day—they in turn send it to the convicting Judge to make on it any comment he deems fit, land then the Government advise the Governor as to whether a pardon should or should net be granted. That is the usual course, but Mr Hislop while down in, Oamaru constituted himself Governor and Government all in one, sent the petition straight from Oamaru to Christchurch to Judge Ward* and demanded from him an explanation on a variety of points. ,He'demanded to ! know the; meaning which the Judge attached' to certain legal points, and then asked whether it was true that he (Judge Ward) was indebted to the prosecuting company. This led to a bitter correspondence, and to the matter coming before Parliament, but, now the whole' aspect has been changed. Christie has instituted legal proceedings: in the Supreme Court against Judge Ward, and though the Governs ment have gone to the extent of laying the correspondence before Parliament, and publishing it in all the papers in the colony, they refuse to allow thp House to disquss the subject oh the ground that it would be wrong. to in- ; terfere while the case, is sub judice. This is a paltry attempt to burk the question. The question involved in the Supreme Coart hinges on legal quibbles and technicalities, with which Parliament has nothing to do. What Parliament ought to inquire into is the action of the Minister of the Crown, who constituted himself, so to speak, Judge and Jury, Minister of Justice, Governor, Government, &c., on the spur of the moment in Oamaru, to bring Judge Ward to account for hia actions, and whether there was any justification for such extraordinary interference with the administration of justice. These questions have nothing to do with the legal technicalities. They strike at the very root of our boasted liberty. If the administrators of the law are to be mere puppets for men like Mr Hisl.o'p to kick about aa they please, where is our safety ? We notice, too, that Parliament recognises this. Notwithstanding that the Premier has intimated his intention of treating as ai want of confidence motion any further attempt to l©fc : daylight in on this disgraceful business, the HonV Mr Wilson has given notice id the Legislative-Council to move for a special committee to inquire into the facts of the ease.,- ; Iu the Lower House Mr Larnach is to ask the Government “ (i) Whether in the case'of Christie, of Oamaru, Judge Ward ordered the clerk of the Court to amend the warrant of committal by alteration of the mistaken date. (2) Whether the Minister for Justice communicated by letter or telegram with Judge Ward, demanding to know on what authority/ the Judge had so Ordered the clerk. (8) Is it true that the ( Colonial Secretary threatened the said clerk with punishment if he obeyed the order of the Judge ; and, if true, is it usual for Ministers to interfere in this way with a Judge in the exercise of his authority, or with any officer of his Court. 55 Here are new facts coming to‘light. A mistake. occurred in the warrant of committal, hut Judge Ward ordered the Clerk of the Court to correct the error. The Colonial Secretary, Mr Hislop, then in Oamaru, threatened to ,punish the] clerk if he obeyed, and in consequence of this Christie was allowed to go scot free. This is the meaning of Mr Larnach’s question, and no doubt he would not make such assertions if he did not know they were true. It appears from this Judges must play second fiddle to Mr Hislop, and that they are not masters in their own Courts. The telegrams and correspondence on this point have been kept back by the Government, and Parliament is now demanding them. We hope Parliament will insist on the most searching investigation in this matter.; It is the most serious question which has engaged the attention of Parliament for a long time; for if Cabinet Ministers are’ permitted to corrupt tfie foqptains of justice in this matter, the liberty of the individuaUs imperilled, . ,