THE JUDICIARY BILL

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIX, Issue 230, 25 September 1908, Page 6

THE JUDICIARY BILL

I ITS PROVISIONS EXPLAINED. (By Telegraph.—l'arliamcnrary Reporter.) | WELLINGTON, Thursday. I In the Legislative Council this after--1 noon, the Attorney-General moved the second reading of the .Indiciary Bill. He i said he proposed to have the bill sent ito the Statutes Revision Committee, where he would quote figures showing' . that the change proposed was a desirable l one. The. primary object of the hill was !to set up a real Court of Appeal, and ; Co abolish District Courts. The system. I proposed would be more efficient and ' ' more economical than the. one existing. iAt present inconvenience arose through j the present system requiring all the 1 judges to assemble for the sittings of i I the Court of Appeal. Many of the ap- j j peal cases brought before the Court were I | too unimportant to require, the atten- ] I tion of six judges. AVhile thp Appellate ' | Court was sitting, work in the centres ! i was accumulating, and the judges had .'to work under this knowledge. He! ; wished in no way to reflect on the lbs- ' I trict Courts, hut the system of District, i Courts was obsolete. The judges of New! i Zealand to-day were overworked men. I At least two of them had to work \ i nearly every Sunday this year. It was! j the work that was done behind the i scenes which entailed the labour. In re-! i cent years there had been an enormous ] increase of work, and it was quite clear that another judge would have to be I appointed. Three should form the Court j of Appeal, anil four should transact the | ! Supreme Court work. In England three judges, only sat on the Court of Appeal,; and the Nigh Court of Australia consist-; cd of three judges. He maintained that three judges were ample for the purpose, and he further declared that there was no reason why Wellington should have a monopoly of the Court of Appeal. He proposed to make regulations providing that the Appeal Court should sit in Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, and Dunedin. Dr. Findley concluded by stating that the bill could not be passed this session, but if the Government was lin the same posifion nest year that it. j was to-day, he hoped to put the bill on j the. Statute Book next session. The hill was read a second time and ! : rcfen-ed to the Statutes Revision Com- j mittec.