LEGAL.

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XX, Issue 2324, 31 December 1864, Page 6

LEGAL.

'> The^npromo Court session was oponod on tho Ist of the'mb'nth' in ' lifts new - temporary Court-houso, t before Sir ,0-.' A. .-A.vnoy. 1 , Thorn wore no very grave ' offences on tho calender, and the Judge's oltargo was confined to font cases— namely, two of ombozzlomont> 1 and two of obtaining inonoy undor fulno protcuces ; crimes which ho considered w ero greatly on tho inoieasein this province. Thero]woro altogether I some twenty-four cases, but happily nono of those grave charges whioh have leeently been so prominent at onr criminal sessions. Tho civil sessions weie very short,'only two cases bomg'entored for hearing, and judgment being confessed in one, the only case that oamo to ti ill being Ilarclington and another v. , Greenway— a . claim for re-assignment of coilaiu property sold by plaintiff's agent to defendant, and alleged to have been erroneously assigned. A verdict was found for tho plaintiffs. In the local conrt, an action -waft brought by Mr., . Wynn, a solicitor of this city, against ' the Waste Lands Commissioner, to recover the sum of £50 damages, alleged to have been sustained by the plaintiff in consequence of tho detention by the defendant of a Crown grant of laud due to the latter. Defendant rested his defence upon the fact that ceitain fees enacted by the Government were payable before the deliveiy of the giant. His Woiship went carefully thiough the Act bearing upon tho land question by way of gift and purchase, and at the conclusion of his remarks said that peisons acquiriug laud fiee of cost under the 69th clause of the Act were placed in no better position than peisons who coming to Auckland had still to pay the fees for registiatiou. They had the land, but if they wished to convert such land into cash they must tako o-it a Crown grant and pay for it. The judgment would be for the plaintiff. The decision in this caso was looked forward to with interest by many having land grants due, and an adverse verdict \\ ould have been a considerable loss to the provincial revenue. At the sittings of the Supreme Court in its insolvency jurisdiction, on the 20th instant, the following resolution of the Aucklaud Chamber of Commeice, enclosed to the official assignee of the court (Mr. Anderton), was handed to his Honor the Judge :—": — " That tins Chamber, having discussed the management of the estate of Hattray and ILithesou, desires to express it 3 regret that the Insolvency Court has not sho\Ui that promptitude and diligence in endeavouring to uind up the affans of the said estate which the circumstances seem to have requited " To this lcsolution his Honor m ule thefollowing stinging reply: — It appeared to him that these peisons had very strangely misunderstood their pioper positions and their privileges. Although the" 'pioceedings of courts of justice were public pioperty, and the officeis of justice public servants, and, as such, their conduct was undoubtedly a fit subject for public comment, still any attempt to overbear or overawe was a high misdemeauour, and liable to be treated as such by the administiator of justice. It was tho duty of th« Court, or any Couit, to receive complaints made against the conduct of any person or officer of such Com t, and he did not wish thorn to inquire into the truth or falsehood of tho representations made at the meeting, the barefaccdnes'? oE which, he considered, did not inent such an lnquuy. tie might say that it was neither mote nor less than an attempt at iutimidation, committed by certain persons iv a quasi coi pnratien called the Chamber of Commerce, and all he had to consider was whether he should summon these parties before him, and ask them to say why they Jud so commented on the proceedings of the Court and the officer in question. It was a question with the Court, in fact, whether he should not &o summon them before him, and commit thorn all for contempt, although he had never, during the long jierioil of his experience on the Bench of New Zealand, summoned a per»on before him to answer such a charge He had ab 'stained from such a coutse on all occasions, although , it was the prerogative of a judge, because he always thought the very barefaceduess of the act showed that it arose more from ignorance than a strict appreciation of the law. He was convinced that the gentlemen to whom he felt it to bo his duty thus to allude had acted from misapprehension, or lgnorautly, rather than ciimiually. But in a place like the Chamber of Commerce— a body comprising men of intelligence, and who might be considered ns setting an example to those around them — he thought it was necssary he should take some notice of the cause which had given liso to these observations. He considered, howcvei, it was only necessary he .should do .so through tho medium of the pi ess, the lepiesentatives of which he saw weie noting his lemaiks Any thine; calcnlated to point deiision or reflecting on the officers of her Majesty's Supreme Court of Justice was contempt of such Couit, and the parties so offending were h ible t" the punishment fot such offence. If any officer failed in the discharge of his duties, an application could be made in the proper way to the Couit. The couise they had adopted was one calculated to overbear, if not to mislead. If the coirespondeuce was made public, its effect would be to overawe; if only of a pnvate nature, it was still calculated to mislead, and exercise an overbearing effect on the woikmg of the Couit. However much he might be inclined to p.iss it over, it was necessary in giving effect to the Court that some notice should be taken of the application. But he did not propose to do more He would not then take more notice of the matter ; but he felt it necessary to tell them that the ,ut oi which they had been guilty constituted a misdemeanour, and laid them open to line or imprisonment.