Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.


(Continued from Page //.J

The Committee called Mr Larnach, who gave his evidence in his customary free and easy way, and he declared tbat tbe land was worth at least twice the amount of the mortgage, and notwithstanding the fact that it had been valued for the purposes of the Property Tax by the Judge, who was himself an. officer of the Government, and who in his return to the Government was expected to state the value fairly and properly, at all events, he had allowed his land to be valued at LBOO. Yet, notwithstanding thin fait, Mr Lainach in his jaunty way said that the value of this land was something liko LI, 500. He would just like to draw their attention to Mr Larnach. It was he who in the first instance had moved in the House for the appointment of a select committee ; it was he who was so very mindful of appearances, and who wished to pose as the proteotor of justice and the upholder of goid taste. They would probably remember that he was the gentleman who, as Colonial Treasurer in the Grey Administration, went Home in 1877 for the joint purpose of floating our loan and for floating this company that had been formed in Southland He also believed that Mr Larnach was one of the agents who induced the "green" public of London togive auoh a high price for the land adjoining | this property of Judge Ward s, and which had been the means of leaving tho shareholders minus their capital and leaving the property practically in the hands of the debentuieholdors. He did not think that tho valuation of Mr Larnach could be taken as of very much value. Mr Larnach having given his evidence, it would naturally have been supposed that Mr Valentine would have been called. But this signiflcant fact had become known to the chairman of the Committee: that he (Mr Hielop) had seen Mr Valentine in regard to the value of this land, and that the member for Waikaia bad told him his views in regard to it; that he had told him that it was a stony piece of country, and that its outside value was somewhere about L2 per sere, while Mr Larnach had valued it at 1,3 10s per acre. Now it had become known to Mr Larnach what Mr Valentine's views as to tho value of this land were, and the fact was duly communicated to the chairman of the Committee, and as a natural consequence Mr Valentine was not called for tho purpose of giving evidence before the Committee, lie Bubmitteil that that wib a very significant fact indeed. But, instead of Mr Valentine being called, the Hon. Mr Reynolds, who was a member of the Committee, and was sitting as a judge on this very matter, was asked to give evidence. He also thought it was another signi? ficant fact that while the Committee declined to call Mr Valentine, who lived on the land adjoining thia of Judge Word's, andknow every acre of tho land that had been valued, they had asked Mr Reynolds to giye evidence. No opportunity whatever had been given for any person els 3to give evidence In the face of the fact that the land of Mr Valentine's adjoining, which was superior land to Judge Ward's, being valued for property tax purposes at L2 7s per aero, Mr Reynolds had had the boldness to assert that Judge Ward's land, stony though it was, was worth V 6 10s per acre. He only instanced this as showing the utter want of candor and want of thoroughness in the investigations of the Upper House. No opportunity was given to any person for the purpose of disproving the statements made by Mr Larnach and Mr Reynolds, and as a matter of fapfc what was stated in evidence was not seen |>y him (Mr Hislop) or by anyone else until it was printed. Well, this Committee having conducted its proceedings in this way, haying faithfully promised that there would be po statement of opinion whoa the question came up to be decided, havirg only considered matters which were not relegated to them by order of tho Legislative Counoil, came to a conclusion which had been duly published throughout the colony. And he asked the public to believe with him that, in the first inrtance, this Committee had m>t performed their duties, inasmuch as they had not investigated tho judgment delivered by Judge Ward as to whether it was a good judgment or not, neither had they investigatsd the findings on which that judgment was founded as to their correctness or otherwise, and tho Committee had not consideied the effects of such a judgment upon the judicial affairs of the colony. They had not called the best evidence at their disposal as to the matters before them, and he asked his hearers, after viewing Boberly all tho circumstances connected with the position of the Judge and those connected with the Legislative Council, not to attach too much importance to the decision the Committee had come to,— (Applause ) M ith regard to the action which he had himself taken in connection with tho matter, he knew that had been adversely criticised, not only by political opponents but also by a portion of the Press. He did not intend to answer the criticisms of the Press, because he knew that a good deal of this criticism was writton before full information upon the point at Issue came out, and he rccognfsed how difficult it was for a paper having once taken a tide, however ill - founded its decision might be, to change its front, even if It should afterwards find that its utterances were not so accurate aB they might have baen, or its conclusions bo just as they might h*ve been with a full knowledge of tho facte. But he oould show that in almost every instance the adverse opinions of the Press had been influenced by circum«tM>ces outsidfl the real issue in question, He, however, did not iutend to answer these criticisms of the Proßß, no: would he deal further with the considerations which led the Committee of the Legislative Council to their decision. He would, in»tead, come to tho reasons tbat had induced him to tak* the steps he had taken. What weighed with bim in coming to tho determination, he had como to was this : he found that members of the House found nothing in tho policy of tho Governmont which they oould traverse, and nothing whioh they could successfully find fault witli in the adminfstratiin of the affairs of the colony, excepting in regard to this matter, but through the adverse criticism? some of the supporters of the Government had seoeded, reducing the majority of the Government to something like six. He found, in fact, enough to justify him in coming to the conclusion that in a 1 probability while this question was before the House nothing else would receive consideration, that public business was being obstructed, while at the same time the real consideration which was at the root of the whole matter was being ignored, 'and that it was- being read-? a means by wh'oh adverse oriticism was being hurled upon the Government as a whole. He recognised too, that underlying this questien there was a question of the greatest import to the colony, and seeing that there was little likelihood of this question being properly brought before the country and viewed in all its bearings po long as he was a member of the Governmont, he considered it his duty to resign, not only as a Minister of the Crown, but as their representative, in order that he might be able in the first instance to disouss the matter fairly and squarely with the electors, and that afterwards it might be fairly discussed by the country as a •whole.—(Cheers). It was only fair, in *iew of the fact that this criticism of his action-had been promulgated throughout tho eountiy, that there should be laid before this meeting criticism of a different character. It was indeed gratifying to him'that he had been supported in his action by tfte best authorities on suoh subjects in the colony, He had taken care that information on the 'subject should be dissernlnated, and had had copies of the printed correspondence sent to those who m'ght be considered authorities ; and he had the satisfaction of knowing that his action bad on the whole been approved by these authorities. He should proceed to state to the meeting tbe opinions he had received from the leading barristers throughout the colony. He had numerous letters from all parts, but would content himself with reading one from each of the main centres of population. And he would not take ihose letters which were most favorable to himself, but would selflot those which came from gentlemen who were considered representative men. The speaker then read the following comir.unications :—-••.

Thanks for the Word correspondence. It was very necessary in your interests that itsljouldttopinted, because garbled statements were being accepted as (acts. Now that the whole case is before the public your friends will hive no occasion to sing small. It is very satisfactory, and seems to me, apart from ihc main point, to establlrh threo definite propositions : First—That had there been an appeal, Ward could never have convicted Christie of the offence charged (i«., on the evidenco before him). Second—That having convicted the man of an offence which he knew ww not sustainable on the evidence, be tried to lustify bis conduct by brinsrtnß into the case considerations which were not before the Ootirt at the trial, and which, if in tho mind of the Judge, he wps in duty bound to put on one side. And not content with being moved by such motives himself, he sought I to influence the Minister's mind to support hisuots by a private suggestion of the same to him. Thirdly ond lastly, that Ward is absolutely wrong re mandamus. Fancy a Judge pretending that the Supreme Court would compel a debtor and defaulting mortgagor of a company to hold the balance iif justico in a proceeding by it against another of its dohtors.'and that fho base of Enajehart (12 W.U ) Ins tfye slighest beating pn the p4se of Christii-. How can tho public have any faith' in tfjo administration o.f justico if Euch ideas are hcjd a?' to the congidorationß which should hinder a Jpdge from attempting to bojd the balance between litieants '! or it a Judge at a distance of I§o miles from the judgment seat instructs the clerk of the Court to make substantial alterations in orders of imprisonment—and, If needs be, to issue new ones—in cases ivbeie he knows the Court itself could not do so after having once closed the sitting l I can see nothing wrong in what you have done, but by reading the result you have got Into a sonpe. and for n politician that is rather a serious mittt r. I think your long memo, really completely cleirs y< u ; but it requires a long memo., and that is to your disadvantage. I have read over to-night tho ' Hansard' shei ti you sent me containing your speeches on the Judge Ward business. I think the papers have prived thtt

you were young enough, and courageous enough, to put aside the obviouß danger of misinterpretation of your own motives in order to expedite the course of justice. In the like circumstauces I hope I should nave the like courage, but am not sure of myself. I think we agree that the possible interpretation that a Minister having a private interest was interfering with the Courts, which is adlfferentmattterfrom the misinterpretation of motive affecting yourself only, tliould have received more consideration from you ; but in iny view that should have no weight ngainstthe argument in favor of expediting the petition and report thereon-it has only weight in the consideration of the question whether you should in your letter have referred to the question of the Judge's inteiest in the case. I will not say that your action was calm, or that it was in every respect well judgod ; but I do say and maintain that it was houorable, just, and right, and leaves you nothing to look back upon with reproach.

I have carefully read the correspondence in re Ward, and yout speech on 9th August, and you have completely vindicated yourself. It was. of course, somewhat unfortunate that your firm should have beeu acting for Christie; but that does not affect the issue n the case. The administration of justice must be maintained in all its purity.

He had now given them the opinions of his critics and the opinions of those who upheld h ; m.—(Applause, and Voices: "We'll put you back," and "It's a hundred to one on you.") It might be said with regard to the criticisms that, as some were from political foes and others from either political or persunal friends, they were perhaps not so fair as they might be, but as to the letters just referred to some of them were sent voluntarily from peisons to whom he had never spoken in his life, and these gentlemen gave an opinion from an outside point of view. But if anything was wanted to show that the stand he had taken was a correct one, it would be found in the fact that persons outside th 6 colony persons who had no knowledge of the people here and nothing to do with the case—had upheld his action. He could refer to what was said by a writer in another colony a writer full of authority with regard to public affairs—and what this writer said would probably have weight with people here in enabling them to arrive at an impartial decision. He was speaking of au article published in the Melbourne 'Argus.' That article showed an absence of that wretched political and personal feeling which actuated the writers of some of the articles that had appeared in this colony; it was a philosophic article founded upon the doctrines that had been evolved by tho history of judicial iastitutions At the risk of wearying his hearers, he would read part of that article. The ' Argus * said; "Of late, and almost for the first time in colonial history, seriouß charges have been deliberately levelled against Judges in two different colonies." He (Mr Hislop) might say that, with regard to that sentence, the ' Argus' was not quite right in its facts, because charges had before now been made against Judges. But that might be allowed to pass. The article went on to say:—

We do not take account of the grumbling which H the one epjace of the disappointed suitor, or of the criticism that sometimes befalls a judgment, or of suet) attacks as have been made in New South Wales upon Mr Justice Windoyer. The judicial robes do not prevent men from being guilty at times of overleniency or over-Beverity, or of giving too many illogical arguments to back up a fair sentence, or of travelling beyond their scope to lecture society at large. Still lea* dons their position protect them from being criticised by people who imagine that they have fallen into one or all of these mistakes. But no considerable portion of the community believes that In euoh instances tbey are actuated by unfair motives. At present, however, the allegation of prejudiced motives has been made both in New Zealand and Yictoria. To be strictly accurate, a direct charge of partiality has been launched against a Judge in this colony, and in New Zealand one is openly blamed for having placed himself in a palpably false position. The general nature of the complaint against Judge Quintan is too well known to need repetition. A number of members of the legal profession have accused him of upfair and prejudiced judgments, and as the charge is dirept, the proof or disproof will turn wbplly upon the evidence. The New Zealand episode bag arisen in a different way. It began'in a case at Qamaru, Iu which a person was prosecuted by a trading company. After the trial was over it transpired that the presiding Judge, Judge Word, was in debt to the company, and it was questioned whether his Indebtedness was fully covered by securities. Loud was the clamor, and it speedily reached the ears of one of the Ministers, who represents the district in the House of Representatives, llr Hislop wrote an official remonstrance on behalf of the Government, and the Judge was i 1 advised enough to retort in an angry and recriminatory tone. Then the Minuter of Justice enteieJ into the fray, and both Parliament and the public demanded to sec all this unique correspondence. It is unnecessary to enter into details). The Minister relied upon the wholes' me rule that the Judge should not have tried a case in which he laid himself open through hiß own private business relations to have his integrity impugned. Instances were given in vbicb Judge Ward bad I iinself objected, on much less serious grounds, to other Judgeß sitting upon a particular case. And though there has been great excitement in New Zealand, and he baß fretted and fumed threugh many letters, he can hardly escape from the fact that his position was wrong, misleading, and liable to expose him to suspicion. His judgment may have been perfectly correct. It may be that, oonsoiouß of his own difficult position, he leaned to the side of the prosecuted rather than the prosecutor, All students of human nature acknowledge that men will sometimes incline to the side apparently opposed to their interests, in order to free themselves and their conscience from any charge of unfairness. Nevertheless [and he (Mr Hislop; would draw particular attention to this sentence), the inexpediency and fatuity of allowing a Judge to try a case when be is indebted to one of tho parties is evident. And whether the New Zealand Government was right or not in the method of its rebuke, it was certainly right in principle.

And if anything further was v. anting to show that the main principle upon which he desired to have the matter settled was light, it was the generous, philosophic, and statesmanlike view of his aotion expiessed by Sir George Grey (applause.)—tn his speech on tho subj j ct, and which speeoh ho (Mr Hislop) could not holp saying stood out in contrast to the narrow, bigoted, and ungenerous view expressed by another member of the House, who took advantage of his absence from the House to criticise his action. Kir George Grey's conduct stood out in bold relief against such a miserable spirit as that which actuated the hon. member last referred to. He (Mr Hislop) did not like to detain his hearers eo long, but this spOßoh of Sir George Grey's was so much to tho point that he must ask them to bear with him while he read a portion of it. Sir George Grey said :

I am desirous of saving a tew words on this su'jeot, and they must bo vory few. The impression left upon my mind with regard to this transaction i 9 that the Minister of Justice and one ct his ooilcaguoa believed that the Judge had eat on a case in which ho bad an interest of such a kind that a Judgo iu Great Britain similarly situated oould not have sat on tho benoh to hear the case lam quite satl?fled that they earnestly and honestly believed they were right.—(Heir, hear.) It was their duty to take some step or another in the transaction, and what I have found through a long life fs this: that if, in some case in which it is believed that a wrong act, or an imprudent act, or an impolitic aot, on the part of some great official has been committed, and he is interfered with, then generally the oourse adopted is to take objection to tho manner of the interference—to some word that was said, to some simple act that was preferred ; and the original question is in a great degree lost sight of by considering that minor point. In dealing with a vast variety of oises in various couutries, and through a long life, I have found that it is almost Impossible to go into the investigation of a subject of tho nature of that which has occupied our atteution without taking some step that may bo objeoted to. The majority will approve of the step that was taken, but there will be a minority who will object to what was done and direct their attacks to the | authority that had to interfere uoon that specific point, and who very often will appear to be a very muoh greater offender, thaa the perspn in legard to whom the original motion was taken. I am quite satisfied in my own mind that Ministers on this occasion'did what they thought was necessary ai.d what was best.—(Hear, hear.) I do not mean to Bay that they may ( not have .made some mistake, committed some indiscretion in action, or. used some worJ which might have been better supplied by another word—that I will not go into; but L cannot find it in my mind to condemn the inisters in what the? did. So far as I am acquainted with the transaction, I believe they honestly strove to do their duty as they thought rieht—a duty which, I believe, they felt to bo a m,ost arduous and most unpleasant one, and as far as { am concerned, I will pass no censure on them in reference to axy action thoy took in the matter. I pardon all parties, and I pardon them especially for having had a difficulty of an extraordinary kind to contend against—such as it was almost impossible for tbcm to successfully carry out without taking some f-teu or ether to which objection might be very posUlly taken,

Mr Hislop proceeded as follows: And now, having given you the views of ray critics—my political enemies—and the views of gentlemen who voluntarily wrote to me, and the view of a disinterested outsider like the ' Argus,' I shall very shortly give you my own views of the matter. [ Now, with regard tp the particular matter in hand, there hayo been circulatfd throughout the colony various rumors with regaid to an alleged iuteiference with the course of justice. If my enemies in the Upper House could possibly have brought me in guilty of interference with the course of justice tbey would have done so, butinthattheyhavefailed.-(Cheers.) Thesame remark applies to the House of Representatives. The attempt has been made there and failed likewise. (Cheers.) And all that they can now find fault with is with regard to the manner in which I carried out my particular object. It was not contended that in writing that particular letter I had any personal object in view, or that I had acted indiscreetly or improperly The only thing that was fouud fault with, and that in a tort of vague w»y, was my manner of doing it. Unfortunately, in the past, communities have regardedjthe manter of doing a thing as of more importance than the matter of it. We find that at the commencement of this century a person could indulge in all sort* of debaucheiy, and commit the grossest immorality, yet be received in good society; while another rpan, who was correct in these respects, because hp pjeked bis teeth with a fork or ate vegetables with a knife, would only be considered f}t for the kennel. Unfortunately in the history of humanity the manner of doing a thing has been considered of much more importance than thi real matter itself. Unfortunately we still bad, irt regard to our public condnot, more attonrion to the manner of doing a thing than to the real matter at issue, I do not pretend when doing any act of government to be always perfect My enemies, however, rather aooused me of transgressing in rega'd to the manner of doing it than the

matter. What I contend for is this: that in regard to the matter in hand uiy contention!! are in the main right, and I am always willing to be judged more in regard to the matter at issue than as to the manner of my doing any particular action. Now, what brought tho matter under my attention was this: a qu.nition was raised in my mind as to whether a Judge under certain circumstances, which had beeu related to me, had a right to sit on a particular case, Now i have many authorities here—but I am not going to quote them to-night, as I have already detained you sufficiently loDg-which go to show that a Je dge has no right to sit in a cse where by kindred, financial reason?, or ether causes he may be considered to be biassed in favor of one side or the other.—(Cheers.) And now, as I have already said, I have contended for a principle. I have not contended with regard to any particular individual officer or any particular person who might be affected. What I have contended and am contending for is the abstract principle; and I hold that it is a wholesome principle to uphold in regard to all the judicial officers in this colony.—(cheers.) The particular circumstances in regard to this case which were brought before me were these : that Judge Watd had sat in the case for the purpose of trying a man at the instance of the prosecuting company, to whom the Judge owed a sum of LBSO, the security for which was less than the sum that he owed. And these circumstances are aggravated by the further circumstance which had already become known to me —that the same Judge, while acting as a Judge of the Supreme Court, had sat and heard two cases under similar circumstances: that in one, a civil case, he had not only sat, but had done so when there were five other Judges to choose from. In the case in which he so sat he was indebted to one of the parties in the sum of L 1.250, and the security was not sufficient to cover that amount. In the other case he sat as a single Judge, and in this cjse he bad obtained from one of parties a sum of money for which there was practically no security at all. When all these facts, which were supported by indisputable evidence, were brought before me I should have been wanting in ray duty I should, in fact, have been guilty of moral cowardice and been unworthy of the name of man —if I had not reported to the Minister of Justice that such circumstances had arisen. (Loud cheers.) Moreover, I say that the question simply arose: What was the best method of arrivine at a true understanding about this particular case ? I ask: What would any well-tliiukiug or honorable person present wish, supposing his property were under a mortgage of that sort? What would he like the conduct of the person in authority over him to be ? Should it be, as is often done in politics, by secret influence, by backhanded influence, or by going round the bush, that the matter should be brought before the authorities, or perhaps have some adverse pressure brought to bear upon him? Would he not rather wish that the person who first heard of these things should go straightforwardly to the person about whom these adverse remarks had been nude, tell him that such things were being eaid to his disadvantage, and ask him whether they were true or not ? - (Cheers.) lam quite satisfied you will agree with me, aB will every right-thinking person, that the man is to be commended who straightforwardly tells the other of reports which have been spread ahout to his detriment. I am, however, free to admit this: that one's motives are liable to be mitinterpreted; that possibly it was an unwise thing for me, associated as I was with the case, to have done directly what I did do. That is to say, it would have been more in the way of politicians and of the world generally to have done indirectly what I did straightforwardly and directly.- (Hear, hear.) As I have said, I may have erred in the way of drawing attent : on to its effect on the administration of justice. What I claim from yon and from the people of tho colony generally is this: that what I did was in the interests of upholding those whole-: some rules which have been laid down from time immemorial, and which aie cornmended to us an the outcome of common sense and common justice; acd I say it would ba improper to condemn one for being candid, for over baldness and for over ttraightfnrwardness, and I repeat that what I contended for was a correct principle, aud one that was necessary for upholding the administration of justice. There is very much more involved in this question than at first eight appears. Weh»ve at the present time, as has been going on almost from the time that society first existed, a struggle between the natural rights of mankind and of oapital. We eco it in almost any phase of society that we like to take. We see it in the matter of landlord and tenant, in the matter of commerce, and in the ordinary relations of debtor and creditor. We see the struggle going on in England at the present time in regard to those unfortunate strikes. (A Voice: "What about Home Rule?") Yes, and In Home Rule. Foriunately, under the constitutional system of England, what we have seen standing out apart altogether from Buch considerations of money and capital is the purity of our political system. I a>>k you to consider the impottance of a pure judicial system in upholding Ihe rights and interests of the oommunity against those who hold the capital. And what do we see going on around us now?-(A Voice: "Lunacy and poverty.") I believe someone said "poverty." at all events, we have seen something of that. And I will tell you, also, what we have seen. Through improvidence in the past we have seen ourselves mortgaged up to the eyes to outsiders. We have seen, in consequence, mortgagf es in front, behind, and all round us, and we have seen the mortgagees swooping down on our lands and squeezing out the pettier and preventing settlement from going on. We have seen to some extent capital taking tbe place of settlement.andalmostoustingtheordinary trader from tho country. Phis has bei>n going on in various places, and the question is whether it shall become our master instead of our servant, and eo prevent a fair settle ment of this country from proceeding. I want to know from this meeting whether it is oontent that capital shall have power in this way. I ask: Are we to allow even for a moment that our jadicial officets shall place themselves under obligations to capital, and the pure administration of justice thus bo looked on as a thing of the past ? The real question which is before this meeting and before the oountry is : Shall we allow our Judges, who are paid sufficiently large salaries to keep them out of the speculative field, to place themselves in the position of being servants to oapital, or allow it to be supposed that they have placed themselves in a position which would cause the oommunity to look upon the administration of justice with suspicion and discontent. (Cheers.) Now, gentlemen, I have endeavored, notwithstanding the provocation I have received on all sides, to place this question before you, so far as it affects myself, fairly and properlv and without any exaggeration whatever. Under the circumstances of tho gross provocation that I have received all r mnd I might, I think, have been excused if I had shown some amount of temper. I ihajre endeavored to set before you "the great principle as to whether our judiciary should be kept free from suspicion and' above reproach j and if the result of this election will be that this community wll show its appreciation of those rules in regard to our Judges that have been laid down in the past; and will uphold one who has sufficient strength and backbone to contend for these prirciplea against immense majorities, I think that my resignation, and J the c.onseaue.nt 'inconvenience vd myself and to yourselves, will not have been in vain, and will not have been thrown away, (Loud cheers.) In the straggle now going on you will have this satisfaction aB well as I : that we have the symiathies of the best part of the community. I have also the satisfaction that during the past two days I have rectivtd letters expressing sympathy with me in the struggle I have taken p »rt in. I hope that the same feeling which actuates the writers and which permeates the best part of the community elsewhere will show itself, as I believe it will, in the majority of this electorate. I have just received this letter from one person, who says : "Remember always that you have left many leal hearts and true behind you, whose constant hope will be thit you will cany the co}ors to victory." Another letter I received tonight from Timaru. It is as follows i— ,

I see by the newspapers that you interd addressing a mectlnjr in Oatnaru on Wednesday night. You have many sincere well-wishers here who sympathise with you, and at the same time feel proud that your present position is brought about by your sturdy and independent aotion in insisting upon Justice bein<r pure at its source, and that its administration ehall not be brought into question or suspicion Please oommand me either for Wednesday night or at any other t'me or in any way in which yon think I can be of any use to you in the eleotion or otherwise.

I took the liberty to reply to this gentleman stating that I had sufficient faith in the honesty and the fairness of this electorate to believe that tbey at all events would not see anyone suffer for upholding the true principles which I have this evening enunciated in regard to the judicial bench of this colony. And I believe that the struggle I have made for the purpose of upholding the proper position in' regard 4o the administration hi justice will receive* ihe commendation of this meeting an<} of the electorate. (Cheers.) I have to thank you for the extremely patient hawing you have given me. I have taken so long to lay before you the principles which are at Btake and whioh led me to act as I have done, that I have no time to refer to any other matters in regard to whioh I am aware very strorg feelings are entertained in the constituency. 1 shall take another opportunity of wet ting you for the purpose of explaining those matters and of replying to the oriticisms which (nay be directed to the remarks I have made to-night. The issues are, as I have already etfd, of very great import to the publio as weU

da to mynelf; and potion none mo;o important coulil engage tiic attention of u democratic coni'iumity, f<»r. iinkus those who are charged with the administration of justice do their duty in a way that sh*ll be abo»-e suspicion, that slnll be impartial, add .--hri'l jjive general satit-fnctUm to the public, you will have lemoved the one ctvfi - [iuard which remains to a democratic 1 community.—(Loud applause, nr'ngbd with hisses aud groans.) Mr A. Watson rose from the body of the hall to propoHo a vote of confidence in Mr > islop. Amid the disorder vuich prevailed at this stage all that could In heard of Mr Watson's speech was that he had known Mr Hi-slop for fourteen or fifteen year*, aud his action as their representative would compare favorably with that of any other repiesentßtive in New Zealand. Mr J. S. Roberts seconded the_ motion, I which was declared to be carried unanimously.

Three cheers for Mr Hislop were called for and given with great vigor, though met by counter cries from the other side.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

Bibliographic details

MR HISLOP AT OAMARU., Issue 8010, 12 September 1889

Word Count

MR HISLOP AT OAMARU. Issue 8010, 12 September 1889

  1. New formats

    Papers Past now contains more than just newspapers. Use these links to navigate to other kinds of materials.

  2. Hierarchy

    These links will always show you how deep you are in the collection. Click them to get a broader view of the items you're currently viewing.

  3. Search

    Enter names, places, or other keywords that you're curious about here. We'll look for them in the fulltext of millions of articles.

  4. Search

    Browsed to an interesting page? Click here to search within the item you're currently viewing, or start a new search.

  5. Search facets

    Use these buttons to limit your searches to particular dates, titles, and more.

  6. View selection

    Switch between images of the original document and text transcriptions and outlines you can cut and paste.

  7. Tools

    Print, save, zoom in and more.

  8. Explore

    If you'd rather just browse through documents, click here to find titles and issues from particular dates and geographic regions.

  9. Need more help?

    The "Help" link will show you different tips for each page on the site, so click here often as you explore the site.