103

H.—l3

the appointment of Mr. Edwards under the law as it exists. Igo to the Act of 1858—to the clause giving unlimited power of appointment which we find there —and I submit to your Honours that power is given to appoint Judges from time to time. These words, "from time to time," cannot be got over. Then I come to the Act of 1858, the Civil List Act. I am only going to refer to it shortly, and we will see what interpretation the Legislature has given to the Act of 1858—the best interpretation that can be put upon an Act, by an Act of a subsequent date. We find that in the Civil List Act of 1858, which purports to be an Act to amend the Constitution Act, the salaries of the Chief Justice and of two Puisne Judges are specially mentioned. The Chief Justice : Does it say " two Puisne Judges ".? Mr. Harper : Yes ; the " first Puisne Judge," and then "second Puisne Judge." It says the Chief Justice shall receive £1,400, and the other two £1,000 each. When that Act was going through Parliament Mr. Justice Johnston was not appointed; he was not appointed until November, 1858, and that Act was in transit to England to obtain Her Majesty's consent to it. I presume his Honour got paid from the time when he accepted his office. It is not to be supposed that he did his work for nothing; and at that time the only law in force regulating the Judges' salaries was the schedule to the Constitution Act, which was at a lower rate. The Chief Justice received £1,000 a year, and £800 was paid for a Puisne Judge. It was not until the 25th July, 1859, or nearly a year after the passing of the Act, that it was found out whether or not it had received Her Majesty's consent. During that time Mr. Justice Johnston must have been paid in the ordinary way, out of ordinary revenue, for he was appointed in November, 1858. The Constitution Act says distinctly this, in section 59 : — "No Bill which shall be reserved for the signification of Her Majesty's pleasure thereon shall have any force or authority within New Zealand until the Governor shall signify, either by speech or message to the said Legislative Council and House of Representatives, or by Proclamation, that such Bill has been laid before Her Majesty in Council, and that Her Majesty has been pleased to assent to the same ; and an entry shall be made in the journals of the said Legislative Council and House of Representatives of every such speech, message, or Proclamation, and a duplicate thereof, duly attested, shall be delivered to the Registrar of the Supreme Court, or other proper officer, to be kept among the records of New Zealand." What we submit to your Honours is this : that Mr. Justice Johnston's appointment took place before any salary was ascertained or established. There was no law in New Zealand then, any more than there was in the interval between the reign of William 111. and George 111., ascertaining or establishing salaries. Sirß. Stout: The Constitution Act provided for a salary. Mr. Harper : It was for a salary of £800 a year. Sir B. Stout : Exactly; and there was a vacancy when Mr. Justice Johnston was appointed. Mr. Justice Gresson was not appointed till the day after " The Civil List Act, 1858," came into force. Mr. Harper : I will pass over Judge Johnston's case. It may be that technicality is met by another technicality, and sets the law at large. I will pass over this, and also pass over Mr. Justice Gresson's appointment, and we will come next to the Civil List Act that was passed in the year 1862. Under that Act there was no longer any appropriation for the Judges, specifying the Judges. There was a lump sum of £6,200 to be paid for the Judges. That Act was presented to the Legislature here on the 15th September, 1862, and it was after reserved for Her Majesty's consent. After that Act was presented to the Legislature Mr. Justice Richmond was appointed—in the next month—that was, in October, 1862 ; but that Act was not consented to until—l have not the exact date, but, at any rate, it was not until the middle of the next year. Sir B. Stout: It was not until the 11th July, 1863. Mr. Harper : Your Honours will see that not only was that Act not in force according to the Constitution Act, and that it had no force or validity in New Zealand, and not only had an appointment been made before it came into force, but provision for the Judges was made in a lump sum of £6,200. Where was the ascertainment and establishment of Mr. Justice Richmond's salary at the date of his appointment? We see in the law previously in force that the Chief Justice was to receive £1,400 a year, and two Puisne Judges were to receive £1,000 a year each. That was the law when previous appointments were made; but when Mr. Justice Richmond received his appointment the Bill then subject to reservation simply provided that a sum of £6,200 was to be divided amongst the Judges. Of course w Te know how it has been divided up; but the Legislature did not divide it up—there was no ascertainment or establishment of any one single Judge's salary. The only way in which that could be ascertained or established would be —and I am diverging here for a moment—to go back to the original appointment of the Judge, and find out what he was told that he was to get, at the time of his appointment, by way of salary. And this, even, would not do it, because we see nothing about the salaries of the other Judges : and their salaries were raised, as a matter of fact, by this Act. With regard to this Civil List Act, we have these two points, and we press them : the fact that this was not an Act at all when Mr. Justice Richmond was appointed; he received a salary of £1,500 a year out of " Unauthorised expenditure," or something of that sort. And, again, there was no distinct ascertainment or settlement of his salary in the Act. Then we come to the Civil List Act of 1863, and this again repeats the same lump sum which was to be divided amongst the Judges. It gives a sum of £7,700 to be given to Judges; there is no allocation; it says " amongst the Judges ; '' there is nothing _to show that the existing Judges were to have their salaries increased, or whether it was to provide —as it really was to provide—for an additional Judge, Mr. Justice .Chapman. He was appointed while this Act was in transit to England, on the 23rd March, 1864. And here, again, there was no ascertainment or establishment of salary at the time