SCOPE OF WORK

Southland Times, Issue 22038, 10 June 1933, Page 6

SCOPE OF WORK

JUSTICES OF PEACE. EXTENSION NOT FAVOURED. When approached by a Southland Times reporter yesterday to comment on the Minister of Justice’s suggestions relating to extending the scope of the work of Justices of the Peace,, several members of the legal profession expressed serious doubts of the wisdom of such a move. “I do not think the idea has anything to commend it at all,” said one lawyer. “One can see a good number of appeals to the higher Courts if the administration of the lower Courts is going to be too much vested in justices. Justices of the Peace are unconsciously liable to be swayed by all sorts of local prejudices. The public would feel that justice is being better administered in the hands of an independent magistrate. The system does not work well in the Old Country and it would not work here. If it is an economy measure, it is a very ill-timed one.” DUNEDIN COMMENT PLAN NOT FAVOURED. (Per United Press Association.) Dunedin, June 9. A fuller use of Justices of the Peace in the administration of the law as suggested by the Hon. J. G. Cobbe is not favoured by leading solicitors, who consider the practice would occasion greater expense to the • country and litigants owing to the increased number of appeals. A leading barrister said: “None but a man with intensive legal training. i& competent to undertake the administration of justice except in the most trivial cases. This applies with greater force nowadays when a much wider jurisdiction has been conferred on inferior Courts.” AUCKLAND CRITICISM “A FOOLISH PROPOSITION.” (Per United Press Association.) Auckland, June 9. Tire Minister of Justice’s proposal to reorganize the Magistrate’s Courts is viewed with considerable apprehension and has been freely criticized in Auckland. A former magistrate said if the scope of the work of Justices of the Peace were widened there would undoubtedly be a stream of appeals against their decisions and thus the work of the Courts would be complicated instead of assisted. A prominent lawyer described the Minister’s scheme as a foolish proposition. “It shows the danger,” he said, “of allowing the administration of the Justice Department to pass from the hands of experienced legal practitioners to inexperienced laymen as the present Minister is.” He added that Justices of the Peace appointments were usually in the nature of a political reward without regard for aptitude. There had been some good Justices in the Courts, but they were the exception ratherthan the rule. A REAL DANGER WELLINGTON BARRISTER SPEAKS OUT. (Per United Press Association.) Wellington, June 9. Legal circles in Wellington do not view with favour the proposal to make more use of Justices of the Peace in the Magistrate’s Court. A leading barrister said that he thought that Justices of the Peace were generally incompetent to dispense justice. “Amateur judges I think,” he said, “form a real danger in the administration of the law. It is impossible for anyone without training to perform judical duties. They should only be resorted to in emergencies. In my own experience ! have seen many cases, particularly in by-law criminal cases, where Justices were unable to accept any proposition submitted by the defendant but implicitly accepted everything the police or their witnesses said. So far as penalties are concerned there is no unanimity through lack of sufficient experience. As a result the penalties in many cases are greatly in excess of what they should be.” A well known solicitor considers that further use of Justices would detract from the dignity of the Bench. He was opposed to the proposal because only a man properly trained in law was able to decide legal differences. It was manifestly impossible for anyone not cognizant of the canons of the law to attempt to dispense justice comparable with the manner of trained magistrates.