WOMEN AS JUSTICES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18461, 26 July 1923, Page 8

WOMEN AS JUSTICES.

BILL BEFORE THE COUNCIL. QUESTION OF MANDATE. v y-. • " ; TWICE . PASSED BY HOUSE. [B5: telegraph.—SPEClAL reporter.] 1; I; ] [ WELLINGTON, Wodnenclay. Ihe Legislative Council spent the whole of j this afternoon discussing "Mr. ; Wilford's: Justice of the Peace Amendment Bill, and at the end of the day the debate was, unfinished. v The" Bill proposes to give to women the right to be justices of the peace. ■ The second reading of the Bill was mo red by the* Hon. T. W. Hislop. • The principle of the Bill. had twice been pasiied by the representatives; of the people, ho isaid, and he appealed to the Council on that ground to allow the measure to become law. ' # The Hon. 0. Samuel said that few juijtices of the peace ever sat in Court and to-day their function largely was to witness and attest documents. There wereabout 4000 justices in the country already and it could not be said that there was need to uxtend the list. Other functions of justices included the reading of the Riot Act, and the holding of inquests. He could not see that women would bo desirous of acting as justices. He did not think it desirable that women should act in this capacity, He did not consider a * woman's intellect inferior to that of a man, but considered women '..were guided more by the heart than by the head. He did not think in the present state of their education women were fitted to , act in a judicial capacity. However, in the peculiar circumstances, he hesitated as to what to do. . .."

Passed By Two Parliaments. _ If the Bill was again before the House in similar circumstances -he would vote as he hid voted in ■ the past, against the Bill, but the BiU had been passed by a former Parliament and by .an entirely new Parliament. An important constitutional petition arose therefore. He did not, however, think there was any mandate of the people, but it must be assumed that the measure had become known to the people. They liad to consider whether the council, a body not elected, should continue to oppose legislation passed by the representative body. Ho thought this was a class of Bill in which one should not continue to refuse to accede to the wish of the representatives of the people. The Bill worked no wrong. The question was one simply of expediency, He would reluctantly and with regrefcv support tho Bill. . The Hon. M. Cohen said the public were well aware of the question, because Jt was freely put to candidates during the. last election. This measure of justice was due to the women for tls© excellent work done bv them during the war. The Hon. W. Earushaw disagreed with Mr. Samuel. If the Bill had been an issue vital to national politics, and one on which elections to the representative chamber wero determined. Mr. Samuel would have been right in his conclusion, but in the actual circumstances Mr. Samuel's " attitude, was not correct. He did not believe it would ."well for the country if : women were .to take an equal part with men in the government of the country. , . The Hon. E. Newman said he had not heard an argument which would induce Mm to vote for the Bill. ■

y:- Sir Francis Bell's Opinion. j. Sir Francis Bell "disagreed with the opinion expressed. by Mr. Samuel. The Council was a ; thinking chamber as well as a voting chamber, and if it were to hold the self-respect of the people it must keep its own self-respect. In 1912, when he was in a minority in the Council, he had never appealed to the Council on such grounds. He doubted if the attitude of Mr, 'Samuel to-day was consistent with an attitude he took up in 1913. He would not vote on the Bill, for if he did it would :be said ' the Government had expressed an opinion, whereas the fact was that members of" the Government were not unanimous. , : _ The on ,* J. P. Campbell opposed the Bill .and hoped women would, not be asked to sit and listen to some of the language itv. as necessr.ry to repeat in the repulsive atmosphere of the Police Court. The Hon. H. L. Michel said that he had voted for • the Bill last year, but this timo considered the weight of argument 'was agftimtt the 1 measure. He would reverse his vote.

The Hon. W. J, Geddiswas satisfied the great majority of women in New Zealand did not want the right to become justices. ' ■ - The Hon. ■R. Moore did not" remember tlje measure having been at all prominent at the last election. - He would not ask a woman of his own family to take a position as a justice, ; therefore he would not ask' other* women to do so. » Sir J. R. Sinclair opposed the Bill. Bill Taken, ¥00 Seriously, ; ' The Hon. W. 11. Triggs thought the Bill had been ..taken, a little too seriously. He did not believe the domestic women Of New Zealand, on whom depended the happiness of our homos, wanted the Bill. However, if a private member could carry the Bill through the House Without opposition tl» fre must be some considerable body of opinion behind it. He thought the Bill would do no harm, that women justices hearing children's Casus might do good, and, in view of the action of the representative chamber, he would support the Bill. ' Sir W. Hall Jones considered that as the elective chamber -had twice passed th Bill with a general election separating the two occasions,. the council should 'support the measure. He would support the Bill. . The Hon. J. Barr thought it - wrong to argue that because the House twice passed the Bill the council was .to be as a dumb animal and quietly pass the Bill, The debate was then adjourned.

PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS. FREQUENT TRANSFERS. THE NUMBER 'OF GRADES. [BY TELEGRAPH.-—SPEIJIAL REPORTER.] WELLINGTON. Wednesday. In reply to a long'question by Mr. R. McKeen (Wellington South), ; the Minister for Education (Hon. C. J. Pan:) stated in the House of Representatives to-day that the question of tho amendment of tho provisions for the payment of the salaries of public school teachers, so as to reduce the number of grades of assistant teachers, . and thus avoid, to a large . extent, the necessity for transfer from school to school, was at present receiving the consideration of the department. Regulations were being drafted to ensure that transfers should, as far as possible, take place at the end of the school year. , ,

RENTS FOR SUB-LEASES. PROVISIONS OF THE LAW. [by TELEGRAPH. — reporter,] - WELLINGTON. Wednesday. '' Will the Minister .for Lands introduce legislation to prevent lessees of Crown lands from rnck-renting sub-lessees, and is he aware that shopkeepers at Newmarket are being rack-rented by a Crown tenant?" These questions were asked by Mr. J. A. Lee (Auckland East), in the House of Representatives.' The Hon. W. Nosworlthy replied to-day as follows: " The Land' Act, 1908, provides that a lessee shall not be entitled to sub-let his land except with the consent of the Land Boayd and Minister, and such consent is not given unless the sub-lease contains equitable terms. It would, therefore, appear, that the lessee in question is not a Crown tenant under the Land Act. If the member will supply me with particulars of the case, immediate inquiry will be made into the matter." v !