THE GOVERNMENT AND THE JUDICIARY.

Otago Witness, Issue 2574, 15 July 1903, Page 16

THE GOVERNMENT AND THE JUDICIARY.

SEVERE CRITICISM,

(From Our Own Correspondent.) WELLINGTON, July 8.

Mr Jamas Allen, the member for Bruca, criticised at some length tho at/titud© of the Government in regard to the judiciary. He said: — I wish to refer for a short time to the Porirua case, and in doing so I may state at tho outset that I do not believe for one instant that any judge of the Supreme Court of New Zealand lias been influenced in any way in his actual decision by any Government interference. But that is not the position ; and I take from recent remarks by members of the Privy Council who gave the decision that they did not desire to imply :hat that was the position. They have said later that their remarks had no intended meaning of reflection upon the honesty of the Supreme Court bench here. But I want to approach the matter from the point of view of whether or not anyUiang ■has occurred in fche history of jhis colony to cause these remarks to be made by the members of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council ; and when I look at things in the light of what we know, there are dozens of instances which have occurred in New Zealand — and many of which, no doubt, are on record m the British papers — which could have led the Privy Council to make such remarks : instances where Ministers of the Crown have Bought to influence the Supreme Court bench, the district judges, and the magistrates of the colony. And one has not to bake one's memory very far back, for the words still cling bo the occasion when we were told by a Minister of the Crown that the judges of the colony were Tory judges. We need not go very far back, because we recollect well the remarks made by a Minister when he claimed the rigibt to admonish a judge in the way he had done A Hon. Member: Let the dead rest. Mr J. Allen : I have not said anything about any man at all.

The Right Hon. Mr SoJdon: He is not hero to deifend himself.

Mr J. Allen : I am. not saying anything about any dead man at all. If you try to bring in the man's name on tho floor of the House it is your business, not mimo.

The Right Hon. Mr Seddon : You are quoting lum.

Mr J. Allen : lam not quoting him ; I am quoting a Minister of the Crown, and I have a right to do it. Do you think you are going to shut my mouth by such insinuations as tliat?

Mr Taylor: It is a common trick to do that.

Mr J. Allen : But that trick is not going to frig-hton me. I will como to a Minister of tho Crown now sitting on those benches, and he is hero to-night, and therefore I need not be afraid of referring to him. He fcite opposite me. In an interview at Lawrence he made the remarks that I said about a Tory judge. Now, why did you

raise the other man's name? I did not make that remark about a Tory judge. The Right Hon. Mr Seddon: You refer to a District Court judge. Mr J. Allan : No, it was not a Tory judge, and he Teoollected the interview and he attempted to deny it; and he will recol- ; leot the words that came from the inter- ( viewer afterwards. I do not think the honourable member will deny again that he i made this remarks in regard to a judge of the Supreme Court. Is it any wonder, therefore, that the Privy Council, having these things before them — for I have no doubt they were published in the English papers, — should have suspected that the mem on our Government benches would lower themselves so far as to attempt to influence the Supreme Court judges of this colony? But, air, it is not tho Supreme Court judges alone. We can get further down tho scale than that, and the further- down, the scale we go tihe worse the effect of this influence becomes ; for these lower judges and magistrates are not men removed from the power of influence. They are uofc appointed for such time as they are able to do their work properly; they are appointed at Uie sweet will of Ministers, and their salaries are voted, amd therefore they are not independent ; and it is well known that they are not independent of Parliament and parliamentary votes, which are subject to Ministerial appi-oval. They ;an be punished, and one convenient way of punishing them is to remove them from one district to another; and nothing is more uncomfortable. There is no use humbugging about it. Ministers remember th<» removal of Mr Norbhcroft; and all credit to the Minister who is now in charge of th's branch of tho Executive when I 6ay it is my firm belief that it was due to lus individual influence, notwithstanding the power and wish of tha Premier, that that gentleman was saved further degradation. And, coming to my own distriot, I had a magistrate removed. The usual place, it eeems, to send them to is the West Coast, and that is where my stipendiary magistrate was sent to. An Hon. Member: A good place., too. Mr J. Allen : I have no doubt it is a good place. , . Mr R M'Kcnzie: I wish you had him back again. „ Mr J. Allen : Aiul, sir, I would refer to the case of Mr District Judge Robinson. I do not say that this is an instance of Ministerial influence, but it shows how Ministerial influence works. When lie said in his remarks in the publio press, when asked to adjudicate upon a case in which a member of the House (Mr Hornsby) was interested, that he was a civil servant, and therefore his position might be terminated at any time, he was not m an independent position. I refer members also to the resolutions of the other Chamber, in which they tsud that our District Court judge 3 were not independent, and ought to be placed in positions of independence. I liave no time now to read tho resolutions. But, sir, coming nearer home, the Premier will not deny that he Ud dir<_ct'y influence a magistrate's decision* Be may shake his Lead. j

The Right Hon. Mr Seddon: I deny emphatically. Mr J. Allen: His denial b of little value in face of the fact that the honourable gentleman will not forget this book. The Right Hon. Mr Seddon: What book 1 is that? ! Mr J. Allen : I think the right honourable : gentleman knows it well. The title of it is quite sufficient to make his hair turn grey—" The Shadow of Tammany." And he will not forget the telegram that was i sent by his instructions to Mr R. L. Stanford, the stipendiary magistrate at Palmerston, the closing words of which are : " I trust you will take these matters into your favourable consideration before deciding oa the 4th." The Right Hon. Mr Seddon: Give tho rest. Mr J. Alien: I would give it if I haa time. It was a direct instruction to tha magistrate, which tho magistrate followed, notwithstanding that he knew that it was wrong. The magistrate said the man in question was reported upon by the police unfavourably, and yet that unfavourable report vrzs removed a/t the Instigation of the Right Hon. the Premier, and the magistrate was induced to give a wrong decision in the matter. I have quoted these instances for a purpose. I say the Privy Council, owing to such facts as the>e being within their knowledge, felt bound to say something with wspect to the power that Ministers have attempted to exercite upoft tho iudiciary. Suprema Court judges, District Court judges, and stipendiary magistrates in particular come under the lash either of tlio tongue or action of, Ministers ; and no man, if that sort of thing goes on, and especially the poorest men in the community, can rely on justice. I appeal to the members of this House, and I appeal to tire country, to have this matter put right; to make up their minds, if there ii to be justice in the country, that every man who is entitled to receive it shall receive it at the hands of those who are to judge him; and that no influenof shall be exerted, either by way of threats or innuendoes such as I have referred to, to cause the magistrate to give what may be a wrong judgment and inflict injustice on some poor man appearing before him. Subsequently, in response to a Government invitation, he read the whole telegram. Mr Allan read it as follows: — "Wellington, 11th May, 1895.— R. L. Stanford, Esq., S M. , Palmerston North. — The Defence Minister [the Premier] wiahes me to invite your attention to the oase of ex-Constable G. J. Lawliss, who is applying for a pubhcan'a license, but, I underotand, is likely to be refused because he was dismissed from the force. Inspector Emerson is at Galatea, therefore I cannot communicate with him, and do not know what ho reported ; but ib seems that Lawliss paid the penalty of his improper conduct by hs-ing dismissed, and i£ the police are going to hound him dow» and prevent his obtaining a livelihood it looks like persecution, and I trust you wilt take these matters into your favourable consideration before deciding on tho 4th.— A. [ Hume, Coiuniisiiianer." On receipt of this

telegram Mr Stanford sent tlie following telegram to the Commissioner: — " To Commissioner of Police, Wellington. — Police report LawHss'waa dismissed from force for immorality. Hardly see how J can do otherwise than refuse certificate with such a report before me. Know nothing of circumstances. — R. L. Staotobi>, S.M." In spite of that, owing to ■ misrepresentation, this license was granted.