Indiscretion.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 878, 28 December 1888, Page 27

Indiscretion .

While we consider that the long delay which has taken place infilling up the vacancy created on the Supreme Court Bench by the lamented death of Mr Justice Johnston is unsatisfactory and wrong, we cannot recognise that the Acting Judge, Mr Ward, has any legitimate grievance in eoneequouce. We notice that an Auckland contemporary makes an ad misericordiam appeal on his behalf in tho following piteous terms : —- The many friends of Mr Justice Ward will regret to hear that he is still ill—*ufferieg from a heart attack. This can scarcely be wondered at in view of the dreadful worry and suspense which he must have undergone. Moreover, it in discreditable to the Government as showing not only want of consideration for the Judge, but also disregard of the public interest, an unruffled and equable frame of mind (mens cequa in arduisj being indispensable for the calm and impartial administration of justice. Now we cannot think that the learned Judge, on whose behalf this appeal is made, will feel otherwise than deeply pained and mortified at the course adopted by his indiscreet champions. So shrewd and clearaighLed a man as he is can hardly fail to see that this sort of championship uotonlydoes his chances more harm than good, but is also personally humiliating to him. It is idle to talk, as some do, about any man's claim (o a public position. There ia no such thing. The sole claim that exists is that of the public to have the best available man appointed to any vacant, position of public trust and responsibility. If the Government are satisfied that Mr Ward is tho best man available for this vacant puisne judgeship, then they undoubtedly ought to appoint him without regard to any possible “claims” of friends or supporters. But if Ministers do not believe him to be the most suitable man for the position, then they areas clearly bound not to appoint him, no matter how loud an outcry may be raised on the part of his friends, or how sharp the disappointment may bo to himself. The responsibility rests with the Government, and they will have to justify their action, whatever it may be, to Parliament, so it may be taken for granted that whatever course is finally taken by so experienced a veteran iu public life as Sir Harry Atkinson, he will bo fully prepared to defend. It appears to us, therefore, that no good end can be answered in discussing this question further. The Government have a clear duty-to perform, and that is to fill up the judicial vacancy with an eye solely to the interests of the public, and “without fear, favour, or affection.”