ATTACK ON A JUDGE.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXII, Issue 27, 1 August 1911, Page 8

ATTACK ON A JUDGE.

MR. JUSTICE HIGGINS REPLIES • TO MR. WADDELL.

"SHELTER OF PRIVILEGE.""A GRAVE- INDISCRETION.'*

. • Oiv^ taking his .eeat id the Federal * "'Arbitration Court at. Sydney las? week, <« Mr. Justice Higgins referred to. the at»tack which was mad« on him -by Mr. " iWaddell. while criticising lft& Industrial ; Disputes Act, in the New South Wales 1 Legislative AMeriibly. ', Mr. Jttstice Higgins, as reported by the Sydney papers, said: — "I think it '<■ my dttfcy on tho first opportunity to re- > '?er to a grave matter which 'has ocearred since we adjourned, and which - relates directly to the court and to .' this citse. , It «eeffle that a Mr. Waddell, ' a- membeivof the Legislative Assembly of " Now Se-ttth Wslefl, and a foMnef Minister, used in that Aseettibry, under the ftadter of Parliamentary privilege, terms most violent ami opprobrious with regard to myself. Se said, amongst, other things, that I am not a just jitdge, and that there is no man who ever disgraced his position more. Now, that language really affected my personal feelings. I should be inclined, as no '/.particulars wore given or proof offered, to treat the attack with silent cony tempt, although I frankly admit that, "as 1 did not -kiiow Mr. Waddell, the accusation, .striking as it did the most \ sensitive nerves of honour, did give me intense sain.. The position is very novel ami delicate, and I nitist speak with salutary judicial restraint. "If the fact that he caused pain'givea (Mr. Waddell any satisfaction he is welcome to it, but there ie the injury io th© public to be considered, for any- ■ .thing said tending to shake the oonfitfence of the community in its Jadges has evil cMJSequencefl of a far- " reaching character. In the annals of •Brifcifih justice sccußSPtions such as Mr. ".Waddell has ( m*d<s are happily very rare, and it ie difficult to overrate the importance of this fact a*? affecting thepeace and order of British communities. In cottffleetion wMi my Arbitration Court in particular much of my best work has been done in quiet confer^ ence behind the court^ procuring agreements without arbit*aiiat>n, and for this purpose the president must have the ■ confidence and respect of both sides. 'Mr, Waddell, like any other citizen, 'is to show that any Judge is a disgrace to his position, 1 but he should . ,take tho responsibility for an accosa* +ion 'so grave. H©' should not call a. bad name and run away. Ke should state, at least, what is the disgraceful act, and give particulars and proof. (But what do we find here? Merely the tiwld and whirling words of reckless *|»nd irresponsible ill-temper. "1 observe that Mr. Hughes, the political head of my department and the Acting Prime Minister, has definitely asked Mr. Waddell to point out anything unjust on my part, aim that Mr. Waddell has declined to do so. Well, he cannot be- compelled ttfanswer, but we are entitled to draw our own. conchifiions. He did speak to the press, but (as I presume) because he waa no longer under the shelter of Parliamentary privilege, he carefully avoided restating hisdbtwive language, He treated the public .to a hc-nuly on the right ito criticise the. conduct of judges-=--•a homily inspired, no doubt, by the. recent Mercury case. No one says— I do not suppose' it "was ever urged"that Judged' are innntme from criticism. 'Criticism,' says Ma 1 . Waddell, 'has a healthy effect on Judges.' Ho doubt of it. I wish we had more of it, but it is humorous to find what Mr. Waddell -calls criticism.- He say* that I have disgraced my 'position, and have sullied the, .ermine which (he says) 1 wear (though I do not), is this criticism '! Is this what is healthy for Judges'/ It might have a healthy effect on me if I knew where 1 did wrong, but mere vituperation will not turn me fr/>m my evil ways. It k the old story—violent language is not strong language; it is a sign of weakness. But this something more than complicates the matter. Looking over Hansard, i find that Mr. Waddell wae the first to mention, stay, name. No one Aad dragged it from its decent obscurity until Mr. Waddell spoke. The debate was on an industrial Bill for New South Wales, and Mr. Waddell was showing how laws of such ft character were injurious to pastoral-ists-and farmers. It was in this connection th*t he attacked me. "Now, I understand that Mr. Waddell is largely interested in the station* concerned in this very case before me, and i* otherwise connected with the pastoral industry, but his name does not appear as that of a respondent. His partner's name appears, and bat iov an accident I should not have learned thati Mr. Waddell had any interest in this case. To use hh privilege as a, member of the New South Waks Assembly for an attack on a Federal judge, in ,eurh circumstances, is, to say the least, a. grave indiscretion, However, I am. not to be bullied or browbeaten in pursuing my duty. I am subject tot tho control of the federal Parliament 1 , and of no other person or assembly in Australia. It is true that Mr. Waddell attacked me in a, way which leaves mo helplesa and defenceless. Not only did he make hi» speech under the protection, and apparently without the censure, of j that Assembly, but he made it when the Court had risen for vacation, and 1 I was far a.way and had no chance of replying for weeks. But, helpless though I am, this I can do-— this I will assure counsel on both skies that I will do— j t will not swerve one inch from the line of my doty as I saw it before Air. iWaddell spoke and ac 1 see it still, I atn aware that my work in the Arbitration Court affects directly far more periwna and ttiuch greater interests than my •work in the Higth. Court] that it deals, with subjects which are largely invoiced in political controversy 5 and that 1 am peculiarly liable to bitter attacks. But 1 caflnot hope to please everybody. I can only try to do what is right. Mr. ,Waddell will be no worse off in this case than if he had cot talked, an<t he will bo no better off. ln t the crisis, of a great struggle in fche United States Abraham Lincoln spoke to this effect (I give the words to the best of Jrty re» membrance) :— 'With malice td fl&fle, with charity towards all, with firmness in the right, a* God gives us to see the right, let us carry on the work that we have begun.' That is the •pirit that I mean, to itmtate. ( "t see, by the way, that in a press interview Mr, Waddell hns seen fit to wake another charge against me of a very different nature. He says that I took a, hand in a party fight in ronnection with the Fedpral leferefldum of April last, Now. this is the first opportunity that I have had to say, and f ttow say explicitly, that that change is nbsolttfcely and utterly falfe. I do not my false to tho knowledge of Mr, Waddell, fw it may he- that he accepted fhe statement from some newspaper. 1 Tile truth is, 1 tjave a lecture at Balftiaitl last year, in which t referred to the evils caused by the rigidity of the United States Const itutiou. The lec- • tare was prepared and delivered at a • time when tlvre whs no- tWetenthtm ' 'tinder discussion, in tb* cojmfcry or in - -Pariiament, It *><* ki^A? '«Po*tert, without comment, in one or two Sydney

newspapers. That same lecture was delivered in Melbourne lust March. Nothiag was further from my wish or from my mind than ta apply the statemefitd or arguments, to Australia. I have always recognised that judges must not interfere with politics for very cogent reasons, and I hope that certain State, politicians, may learn not to interfere with Federal judges. I am almost grateful to Mr. "Waddell for giving me this opportunity of putting the matter fight."