SIR WILLIAM GRANTHAM.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXI, Issue 97, 7 December 1911, Page 3

SIR WILLIAM GRANTHAM.

The late Mr Justice Grantham was horn on, 23rd October, 1835, and cdu'cated. af King’s College School. Me became a hiirrister of the Inner letn■ide,. iirdSCa and a Q.C. in 18//. He bvits’ :aJ - BenchCr ‘of the Inner J emple'aiidTpt a : time ehairniair of the First JSussok Quarter: {Sessions. In ; LBS6 'hoi Judge,of the High Court of Justice. From 18/4 to 1880 lie was member for East Surrey metric House of Commons, and in 1885-88 represented Croydon. Greatly interesteo in t!io land question, he originated many local organisations to keep the labourer on the land. He leaves a family of two sons and four daughters. In February last Sir William created a sensation at the Liverpool Assizes !,v repudiating what lie described as ■a" charge-• of political partisanship arising oiit of his decision in the l Yar■fddntK' i iii'l9oß, He said that since that time scarcely a week had pgsspd .Avithoutf.'thrfeajenmg ,uid insulting letters being received by 'him. He denied all partisanship, and said ho was astonished at the chaige. It may he explained that at the election mentioned, Mr Arthur Foil, a brother of Dr. Fell, of Wellington, was returned in the Conservative interest for Great Yarmouth. A petition was lodged against his election on the ground of bribery. The petition was dismissed, Mr Justice Channel being in favour of granting it, and Mr Justice Grantham against. The matter was discussed in the House of Commons in consequence of a memorial signed by 347 members. During the debate,- the Late Sir J. Lawson Walton, then Attorney-General, deplored. Hr' Justice Grantham’s demeanour, but agreed that ho was honest and straightforward, though an intemper;lo partisan. After his outburst in February last, the House of Commons igain discussed Sir William. Mr Asquith, said that the Judge had signally violated the obligation of the_ Bench to abstain from criti&ing Parliament, ;nd had created a unique situation. Duo of the London papers thought Sir Wiliam’s outburst was a swansong—a preliminary to his retirement. Such did not prove to be the case.