SIR ROLAND V. WILLIAMS.

New Zealand Times, Volume LVII, Issue 2426, 4 February 1895, Page 2

SIR ROLAND V. WILLIAMS.

By Telegraph.—Press Association.• — Copyright. London, February 1.

The Law Journal asserts that Sir Koland Williams’ removal is owing to the fear that he will continue to dispharge his duties in the firm and fearless manner which characterised his treatment of the affairs in connection with the old New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Company, The president of the Law Society says the newspaper agitation is unwarranted. He explains that Judge Williams' attendance on circuit is the direct outcome of the Law Society’s suggestion on a former occasion, and’that Sir Boland’s retention in London to deal with matters in connection with a leading Australian company caused a congestion in circuit work. He also asserts that; Sir Bobert Bomer is only acting as a temporary substitute for ’ Sir Boland Williams, and it is quite certain that the allegations of the Law Journal as to the reasons for the transfer are without justification. Special.—Received February 4,1.23 a.m. London, February 2. It is reported that the Lord,High Chancellor of the High Court of Justice wrote to Sir Boland Williams asking him to withdraw the statements respecting the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile (Company, and that he replied that if pressure was persisted in, it would be his duty to publish the letters. Judge Williams declares that he will resume his seat in the Bankruptcy Court to-day. London, February 3. It is reported that Sir Boland Williams has refused to withdraw his statements. The Chronicle hopes that an immediate answer will be given to the latest charge, and says that if it is true Lord Hepschell cannot remain Chancellor. The Spectator alleges that the original assertions do not contain the least atom of truth. The Times asserts that Sir Bobert Bomer takes Sir Boland Williams’ Court on Monday owing to the latter going on circuit. , ■ .t