THE ARBITRATION COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVII, Issue 17661, 23 December 1920, Page 6

THE ARBITRATION COURT.

■♦ It has been announced that Mr. Justice Stringer, who now presides in the Arbitration Couft, is to be permanently appointed to the Supreme Court Bench- No successor has yet been selected, but rumour has . been busy with the names of Mr. F. V. Frazer, one of the Public Service commissioners who was on the magisterial bench at Auckland, and of Mr. E. G. Cutten, who is now senior magistrate at Auckland. Both have had experience in industrial arbitration, and it will be very generally agreed that either would make an acceptable and capable president in the Arbitration Court. But before' the appointment is made the Government should consider whether sound principles have been followed in the past in selecting the president of the Court. The law says he must be eligible to be a judge of the Supreme Court, and that he may from time to time be appointed as temporary judge of that Court. In practice this has been interpreted to mean that a judge serves an indefinite term in the Arbitration Court, and finally steps up to the Supreme Court Bench, making way for a younger man, who follows the same course. Free use has been made of the power to call on the president of the Arbitration Court to relieve the Supreme Court judges, and there have been times when this has led to complaints of irritating and unnecessary delays in the hearing of industrial disputes. Certainly the Supreme Court has not suffered by the association, but it is not so clear that the course here outlined is the best for the Arbitration Court. Industrial arbitration has become highly specialised. The judicial faculty and the legal knowledge which fit a lawyer for the Supreme Court Bench are not alone sufficient for a president of the Arbitration Court. Indeed, it is not too much to say that an exceptional lawyer, highly qualified for the Supreme Court Bench, might fail as an arbiter between capital and labour. It is conceivable that the time of a learned judge might be wasted on industrial disputes, and if, while filling the presidency of the Arbitration Court, he is looking forward to appointment to the Supreme Court as a release from uncongenial drudgery, the probability is that a good deal of his time will be wasted. The more hopeful course would be to select a judge who hzs the qualities for the position and who will be content to specialise as an industrial judge and to make arbitration his lifework. It may not be necessary or advisable to alter the law giving the president of the Court the standing of a Supreme Court judge, but it would seem to be advisable to break from the practice which makes the appointment a movable one and a stepping-stone to the Supreme Court Bench.