Parliamentary Gossip.

Thames Star, Volume IIII, Issue 1744, 5 August 1874, Page 3

Parliamentary Gossip.

Wellington, Sunday, t A private correipondent informime ttai yesterday Judge Ward was several hours before the Inquiry CommittaeVand made a statement in general terms like that con- ' ■ tained in hia telegrams. He insisted' that either there was gross partiality on the part of the chairman or grois negligence. He contended that as he was a barrisler,-at-law he (Judge Ward) was entitled to practice as counsel, and that the order of Judge Chapman, given ex parte, permitted the inspection of all telegrams passing be- '' tween him, as such counsel, and his solicitor and client, to the prejudice of defen■dant; and this fact entitled him to complain of partiality in this particular case. He spoke bftht intimate relations between Judge Chapman and Mr. Macassey, and the general public dissatisfaction regard- , ing these which prevailed in Dunedin, and as his private business , was interfered with by Judge Chapman's order he complained. Possibly he was irritated at the moment by the extraordinary illegalnature of the order, and telegraphed accordihgly. • Regarding Judge Chapman's excuse made on rescinding the order that it was' made in the hurry of business, Judge'Ward said there was no colorable warrant for such a statement on the records of the Court. That in cases of , orders in Court Judge Chapman was 1' in the habit, on application bebg made, of asking," are all your papers right P " And on being answered in the affirmative, to say, " take the order at your own peril." If gross partiality had to be waived in this instance;there was gross negligence on Judge Chapman's part. To one or pther of these points ne adhered. Regarding the issue of similar orders for inspection of telegrams, Judge Ward declared that manifold repetitions of wrongs did not warrant the wrong of the order he complained of, and that all wer,e equally illegal. In course of examination ' amusement and hilarity were produced by this question of Mr. T. B. Gillies,' " who put it with that well known sardonjjc twinkle: " Did you in Dunedin, Judge Ward, lay that you had had* rows with all

tfie other judgei, andtfiat now vou%eW ff to have ©ne with Chapman?' Judge Ward: "I cannot recall such a statement ; but it is very likely I did, for there was this dispute imminent, and there was what you may choose to call a row some years ago with the other judges." The commit! ee does not appear to be making I much headway. I'am; informed that one witness not yet called, can testify to the offer of a bribe 1 of £50 ; tpione or other ojf the telegraphists to secure or steal copies of • telegrams. . TheY(sfcorj,^ that* Mr. Murison is ill "is all gammon."?/sMr. Larnack is here, and is bjelieted:to know all.:the circunistancefi; but:is udder honour to Mr. Murison to disclose no;thing\without his permission,—D. S. Cross correspondent. j