WAIPUKURAU

Waipawa Mail, Volume I, Issue 8, 9 October 1878, Page 3

WAIPUKURAU

(TO THE KIUTOR OF THE WAIPAWA MAIL.) Sir, —My subject was to be change and progress. There may he change, sir, where there is no progress ; but where there is progress there will l>e change. By referring to my first sojourn in the Tavistock, when it was a whare with two bunks, and my last, when it was a most comfortable hotel. I indicated both change anil progress. The first house in Wuipiikuraii still stands, the original smitfiv, when* “ French P, t r ’did the first horseshoeing in flit* district. The present smithy i*n the other side of the road, with its surrounding and the variety and amount of work there carried on is a good illustration »*f change and progress. It seems as it were but vesterdav I spent nearly a day in the old smithy getting “ Noll” shod, and now looking from there around on the worksho|»s, the stores, the banks, and other places of business, the numerous | comfortable-looking houses, the public J school and school house, with tlje town j hall anil the churches, overlooking guar- j | dian like the Waiptikuraii of to-day, all proclaiming change and progress to the least observant. And look around and view that graceful structure spanning the Tube Tiike: listen to the whistle and watch the train as it appears round the corner of the bush ; mark the movement of the crank and wheels, and bow the burnished*metal reflects the morning sun : I it i- now on tier bridge, another warning scream from the whistle, and in a few minutes the train is in the Waipukuruii 1 station, and von are saluting friends from ! .Napier, their*faces y-t wreathed in morning si idles. J>oes ibis not chime change and progress; change and progress in the i ut * who have made the bullock dray or punt it, dliine- hat there was no power »*f u;., i>ii an i that the Crown had no pow r f partlou a prisoner thus committed. If i‘ is were tru , tlie judges themselves u.-uld have no powor r»» a!t**r their sen-t-uce. Powers Midi as this were inoustrous; but gentl-men in the House, i-arned in the h.w, had affirmed that such v.m jHisitiveh the la vof the land. He, • however, would Jinn that both the , b-. s. and the leg .1 g.-otl. m m who sup

in England had claimed greater powers than these, which had been swept away when brought to the light of day. They claimed the right of torture, and of pressing persons to death who refused to give evidence ; hut, when these powers were subjected to the light of day, it was found that they had never really existed. Every argument used by his hon. friend the At-torney-General in support of the powers now claimed by the New Zealand judges would apply with equal force to the right of torture, and of pressing prisoners to death. Such arguments shocked his senses. The case of Judge Gascoigne, instanced by the Hon. the Attorney-General, was a punishment inflicted for an assault committed in the Court, and the mehiorable case in New South Wales was one where a barrister assaulted another in the presence of the judge. The Attorney-General had confused assaults with contempt of Court. Another obsolete power claimed by the judges was that of sentencing persons to death for witchcraft, lie wondered that human nature could ever have gone so far astray, and that lawyers were most apt to go astray upon these questions. In tl»e reign of William IH. eighteen innocent persons were put to death as witches. One poor Irish woman who could not speak English was required to repeat the Lord’s prayer; she repeated it in Latin with only two faults, and it was held that tlie devil was instructing lier to repeat it in a foreign tongue, which clearly showed that she was a witch, and they hanged her. Lawyers always strained prerogative. For centuries past lawyers in England had done so, and given decisions in favor of tenure of land which had vested it in a few families and produced most unhappy effects upon the nation at large. If the independence of tin ■ judges were necessary in a democracy, it was more necessary in a monarchy or aristocratic Government. Had it not been for the independence of some English judges, the people’s liberties would not have been preserved. The liberties of the people did not depend upon the judges, but upon the bar, the juries, and sometimes upon the accused. The judges struggled to the last against reforms in the law of libel, and Lord Ellcnboroug’i ended bis days in sorrow because of the changes effected. If ever the [lowers now claimed by the judges did exist, they had died out by desuotud ■. The umvpcaled law of S -otland even now provided that any .) -suit or priest who celebrated mass, or any man who should hoar mass, and conceal the fact, shall be hanged. The lawyers held that this law had died out by desuetude, and no judge or jury would recognise it. The whole country would support him in saying that the judges of New Zealand could not claim these extraordinary powers over a barrister pleading for Ids client. It was said that public opinion was the true check, hut how was public opinion to he ascertained when the IV <s was more under the control of the judges than their own officers. The Press ' did not disturb the peace of the Court, it did not. commit any act of contempt in the pr*-s -nee of the Court. The judges ought not to have the power over the Press which they claimed to exercise, and it was the duty of Parliament to place some restriction upon that power. The possession of such [lowers would rather make the New Zealand Judges like the Fetish of Africa; yet those were the [lowers with which legal gentlemen in the House would clothe the idols which they worship. He would sav the House and tl„. ~001,1,- would how down to no such idols (cheers), hut would preserve the. liberties of the people of this country. The exercise of such powers would subject the judges to popular hatred, and p(Tha[>s to private- vengenee. He believed the best means of creating a healthy public opinion on this question would he to allow the inquiry to proceed, as ft would disclose the extent of the power claimed by the judges, would free the people and release tlis Press from the shackles that- bind it. It was necessary to strike at the root of the evil. The, judges should he told that they must, exercise their powers in accordance with law. He say that a case had been made out sufficient to justify the judges being put upon their trial, but speakers on the other side had made admissions which would justify such a course. The hon. member for Wanganui (Mr Fox) had said the judges were greatly to blame. Then, if one month’s imprisonment was indicted on the Mr Rartou, what punishment should he meted out to the former? (Laughter and cheers.) lie (the Premier) denied the doctrine that Mr Barton had deserved punishment for repeated offences. A man could only he legally punished for a specific olfence. If itliis question was now raised for the first time in New Zealand as alleged, he appealed to the House to set a worthy example to other countries. The Premier resumed his seat amidst applause.