MYERS v. CROZIER.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 17284, 27 September 1916, Page 4

MYERS v. CROZIER.

FOUR-YEAR-OLD ACTION

STATEMENT BY MAGISTRATE.

BARRED FROM HEARING CASE.

Tho well-known case of Myers v. Crozier, in which John Scott Myers seeks to establish the paternity of his daughter's illegitimate child, was called again at the Magistrate's Court yesterday, when Myers appeared in person.

Mr H. W. Bishop, who was on the Bench, said, addressing Myers, "This case of yours is before tho Court again. It has been sent from- Ashburton —I do not know by what authority—and adjourned to this Court. Without making any comments on the way iu which it lias como here, I am going *o dt'al with it on the strength of the dictum of the Supremo Court. I hare here his Honor's judgment, and it seems to me, without in any way referring to tho merits of the "case, that by this judgment I am absolutely barred from hearing tho case unless I wish to bring myself iu conflict with the Supremo Court. , I understand that there is no further evidence than has already been brought, and it seems to me that I am bound by what tho Judge himself calls ' a judge of the Court of final resort.' I will therefore quote voir one or two passages from the judgmont:—

At tho close of tho ease I observed that I did not suppose that after the publication of the facts stated in my judgment any Justice of the Peace would grant another summons in this matter. Had I thought it possible that not only could such a Magistrate be found, hut that actually tho samo. experiment would be again' successfully attempted. It should havo stated my opinion on the whole matter much more definitely than I then thought it necessary to do.

" He evidently did not anticipate," Mr Bishop remarked, " what some justices would do."

I have already indicated my.opinion that a Magistrate ought to be 'governed both as to the facts and the law by the previous finding on the same facts by tho Judge of the Court of final resort.

Quoting further from the judgment. Mr Bishop said that tho case . had lasted from August 2, 1912, to that date (April; 1915), two years and seven months, to which had to be added another year and a half. In that time nine affiliation summonses had been issued in respect of the one transaction, four of which had been dismissed by Mr Bailey, two withdrawn, and threo heard and allowed by Mr Day. There had been (excluding tho then appeal) two appeals heard and allowed by the Supreme Court. In addition four charges of perjury had been made by the complainant and dismissed.

"And I see no reason," the judgment continued," "why, if this unseemly conflict between the lower and higher Courts should be allowed to continuo he should not bo able to obtain payment until tho infant has attained tho age when the order would exoire by effluxion of time

" Ho says," said Mr Bishop in conclusion, " that ho does not think that any Magistrate would hear the case.' "Would you refer to the last part of the judgment," said Myers,'"what does he say there P" . "'That tho whole of the evidence is false," said Mr Bishop. "That none of tho evidence is believable." "Will you allow me to put my side of tho case," persisted Myers. "Not at all," said tho Magistrate. "I consider that my hands are hold by the Supreme Court. The case is dismissed. Call the next case.