ULTRA VIRES.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 490, 24 April 1909, Page 6

ULTRA VIRES.

- THE OHINEMURI COMMISSION.' SET. TJP BY THE KING. β-ot cancelled by tee cotjet. When the Court of Appeal opened yestorlay judgment was delivered with respect to tho action between Frederick Cock, Thomas. Gavin, H. W. Moore, Hugh Poland, and J. B. Taylor (plaintiffs) versus tho AttornoyGonoral and Mr. Justico Sim (defendants). .This was an action to dotormine whether there was power in the Ciovernor to appoint a commission to inquire and roport npon an allegation of bribery, which had been levelled against plaintiffs, who wero, in" 1900. members of tho Licensing Committee for tho Ohinemuri district. It had been alleged ~ against plaintiffs "that in connection with an application to thom in June,' 1900, by ono Maurice Goggan Power for. a, license in roepect of certain promisee situated at Waihi (in lieu of his then existing license in respect of promises situated at Paeroa). money was paid to several members of tho committee- as bribes to support tho application. Mr. Justico Sim, who had beon appointed commissioner, was instructed to have before him all documents which he might deem necossary, and to examine on oath or "otherwise oil witnesses whom he might think capable of, affording, information. It was also provided, inter alia, that, if any chargo was made egainst any person, it should not bo inquired 'into until at least 48 hours after a,copy of the charge had boon served upon him. His Honour was also empowered to inquire as to the necessity or expediency of any legislation in the premises. According to plaintiffs, the Governor had no power or authority .to issue tho commission,' and Mr. Justico Sim 'had no jurisdiction to take evidenco or report, npon tbo charges. It was claimed, therefore that the commission should bo cancelled, ' : and that Mr. Justice Sim should 'be restrained from conducting tho inquiry. On behalf 'of defendants, it was denied that ( at tho date of the commission, no legislation had been proposed or contemplated by tho Government in the matter of charges relating to the bribing or corruption of mombers of licensing committees. Tno Governor had, it was asBarted, power to constitute the commission. It had been agreed that the following questions should be decided by tho Court :— (1) Was the Governor authorised under the Commissiona of Inquiry Act to appoint the commission to inquire into and , 1 ' report' ( (b) Upon the allegations and charges of bribery and (b) As to the necessity or expediency of any legislation in the premises ? 'And was' the Order-in-Council, either wholly, or to any,extent, null and void? (2) Assuming, for the purposes "of the action, that tho Ordor-in-Council purported to be a Royal Commission undor the Letters Patent constituting the office of Governor, was the Governor authorised to appoint a commission' to inquire into the matters set out in the preceding ,'

• paragraph ? (3) Had Mr. Justice Sim,under the authority of the Order-m-Council (whether issued under the Commissions of In- . quiry Act, 1908, or treating the same as purporting to have been a Eoyal Commission issued under the Letters Patent constituting the office of Governor) jurisdiction to inquire into,* and report upon, the allegations; and, for such purpose, to exercise all or any of the powers conferred upon the commission? Mr. Justice Williams, on behalf of tho Court, said that Mr. Justice Sim, who had boon appointed to inquire into the allegation made against members of the committee, was also President of tho Arbitration Court. 'As his Honour was anxious to arrange the sittings of his Court it was very desirablo that decision in tho case should be given as promptly as possible, The Court was unanimously of opinion that plaintiffs wero entitled to prohibition. It would formulate its reasons for that decision in a few days. That was'all that it was necessary to say at present. The question of costs could, of course, Btand over. '