IS HUMOUR SACRILIGIOUS?

Greymouth Evening Star, 18 March 1922, Page 3

IS HUMOUR SACRILIGIOUS?

(To the Editor.) Hir, —Though his Majesty s judges are worthy of public honour and respect there are among them some who think that dignity attaches to their persons rather than to their office. I am not suggesting that Mr. Justice Adams is of that class, but his action in expelling the public from the Supreme Court to-day because they had a highly-developed sense of humour is not in accordance with the custom of smile other judges. 1 always was interested in the beautiful ceremony of a Supreme Court sitting and I well remember how in the time, of the late. Sir John Denniston a humorous situation would be lost neither on the public nor on the judge, for his .Honour’s stern face would many a time break info a pleasant smile as ho ‘‘joined in the joke.” Yet there, was 110 jurist' more insistent on the real dignity of the Supreme Court bench. Even more renowned contemporaries of his have been guilty of expressing puns and witticisms from the bench • as a matter of fact, the wit of certain judges was a. by-word in Gray’s Inn many years ago. Taking into consideration tlie congested nature of tlio Court, the crowd yesterday was very well behaved, and was worthy of more, friendly handling from his Honour, especially on his first visit to the district.—l am etc., HUMAN NATURE. March 17, 1922.