THE Temuka Leader. THURSDAY, MAY 20, 1892. THE EDWARDS CASE.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2361, 26 May 1892, Page 2

THE Temuka Leader. THURSDAY, MAY 20, 1892. THE EDWARDS CASE.

The “Judge” Edwards trouble is at an end ; the highest legal tribunal in the Empire has decided that he is not, and never was, a judge, and there is nothing left nCW but to treat him generously. Mr Edwai'd ß Wits a P" pointed by the Atkinson Governing)' as a Judge of the Supreme Court in defiance of the opinion of the other Judges. It was the greatest and most unjustifiable job on record. The other Judges told the Government that another Judge was not necessary, that the five Judges on the bench already were able to cope with the legal business of the colony, and the majority of them also said that they believed the appointment illegal.- In defiance of these facts, and of all other considerations, the Government appointed Mr Edwards a Judge at a salary of £IoOU a year and £IOOO a year travelling expenses, and the opinion lias frequently been expressed, in Parliament and out of it, that they did so merely to keep Judge Ward off the bench. It will Te remembered that Judge Ward acted as relieving Judge for 12 months during the absence of Judge Gillies, of Auckland ; no sooner had Judge Gillies returned than Judge Johnstone, of Christchurch, obtained leave of absence, and Judge Ward took his place. Judge Johnstone died shortly afterwards, and for nearly 12 months no Judge was appointed, because the eligible men, such as Mr Conolly, refused it, realising that the appointment was Judge Ward's right. At last Mr Deimistouu, of Dunedin was appointed, and Judge Ward resumed his seat on the District Court bench. Shortly afterwards a dispute arose between Judge Ward and Mr Ilislop, with the result that the latter had the worst of it and lie resigned and was re- I elected. Knowing full well that there ’

| was no hope then of their continuing | in office, and feeling certain that their j successors would do justice to Judge I Ward by appointing iiim to the next vacancy, the Atkinsonians appointed Mr Edwards, so as to prevent the possibility of Judge Ward ever reaching the Supreme Court bench. Thus the thing was the result of spite, and now the consequence is not only disgrace to the Atkinsonians but very serious expense to the country. Mr Edwards drew his salary for about 12 months and to this must be added the cost of lawsuitsin this colony as well as in England. That was the legacy the Atkinsonians left to their successors, but the most extraordinary part of the whole thing is that the present Government have been blamed for it all. They have been blamed for not validating the illegal acts of their predecessors and saddling the country with a salary for Judge Edwards, and no less an authority than the respectable Mr Rolleston has done this. But every right-thinking man will feel satisfied that the present Government did the right thing. Immediately on taking office they warned Mr Edwards to desist from acting as Judge, and when he refused to do so they stopped bis salary. What else could they have done ? They believed that he was not a Judge, and now it has been proved that he was not. It would have been wrong to allow him to continue performing the highest functions in the land without authority, for nothing but very serious complications could arise from such a course. The present Government have acted perfectly right all through, and now nothing remains for them to do but to treat Mr Edwards generously. It is a great pity that the late Government cannot be rendered personally liable for their conduct in relation to Mr Edwards, for theirs was not a mistake, but an action taken in deliberate defiance of law as expounded by the Judges of the land. All men are liable to err : but the appointment of Judge Edwards was not a mistake, and this is proved by the fact that an effort was made in the next session of Parliament after his appointment to legalise it. That was the course adopted ; he was first appointed and allowed to perform ! judicial functions, aed after this the Government of Sir Harry Atkinson attempted to pass an Act to legalise their action. Under such circumstances we should be glad it they could be punished for it, but we do not suppose they can, and consequently it behoves the Government to treat them liberally. Wefeelcertain they willdoso. ; He has been practically ruined through no fault of Ids Q\yp, but though he has no legal claim on the Government wo feel sure that the country would be , glad to see some reparation made to him for the loss he has sustained. It i may be said that Mr Edwards went into the trap with his eyes open ; that he was a lawyer and ought to have 1 seen that UN appointment was illegal. ' Allowance must be made for the temptation put in his way, A map to whom the highest position in the laud ' is offered, cannot be expected to scrutinise it too closely. Ihe government have behaved splendidly throughi out, they have vendicated the i independence of th e Supreme Court i bench; they have acted ’0 a wanum- , that will act as a warning to future Ministers to beware of attempting to violate ppnstiutional principles, and they have saved to the taxpajeis ' £2boo a year. Let them show their political opponents now that they can be generous as well as just, and make some reparation to Mr Edwards - for the terrible loss he has sustained.