TRIAL BY JURY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXII, Issue 18949, 21 February 1925, Page 9

TRIAL BY JURY.

1 ANSWER TO CRITICISM* CHIEF JUSTICE AMUSED, v] THE RICH AND THE POOR* [BY TELEGRAPH. —OWN COR RESPONDENT. J WELLINGTON. Friday. A .reply has.been made-by the Chief Justice, Sir Robert Stout, to the criticism by members of the legal profession against the new rules regarding trial by jury. When the statement that breach of pro< mise cases, which have been tried by juries for very many years would now be heard before a Judge alone, was mentioned, Sir Robert Stout was greatly amused. "la all my experience," he said, " I don't r®» member being on the Bench while « breach of promise case.was being tried. If they are anxious that these cases shoulcj go before a jury I am sure no Judge will offer any objection. " There is nothing new in the regular tions," continued Sir Robert Stout. "At present no equity case is tried by a jury except by order of the Court. We have put contracts, which are simply another form of equity proceedings in many cases, on the same footing. Actions for wrongs are still to be by a jury. No change is made in that respect. " As to the rights of Parliament being abrogated," said the Chief Justice, " Parliament has by the Judicature Act left tho question of how trials are to be conducted to the Judges. That has been the law since 1882. " Equity suits are far more important than contract cases, and there are far mora of them, and yet they have never gone to a jury. I don't know of an equity case that has gone to a jury, and I have never heard an objection raised. Why should rich people's cases go to a jury whila the poor man's case must go to a magistrate ? In the Magistrate's Court, where the poor people have their actions mainly tried, and where there is jurisdiction up to £2OO, no juries are allowed. If a jury is demanded to get justice for the rich, why not for the poor also?"