CHARGE AGAINST JUDGE EDWARDS.

Taranaki Herald, Volume XL, Issue 9087, 20 May 1891, Page 2

CHARGE AGAINST JUDGE EDWARDS.

( Continued front yesterday.)

Mr Harper, in his argument, maintained that the absence of provision for salary did not invalidate the Commission, which, having been issued, coujd not be cancelled unless there was express limitation by statute of the number of Judges. The only ground on which the Commission could possibly be cancelled (in the absence of misconduct) was that the Crown had granted what in law it had no right to grant. In conclusion, he said the appointment waß perfectly proper in all its surroundings, and the dignity of the Bench had been upheld.

Mr Chapman (also on behalf of defendant) argued that the correspondence showed Mr Edwards was to be appointed Judge in addition to the Commissionership. The constitutional principle invoked by plaintiffs' counsel as to fixing the salary before the appointment derived its f orco from the English statutes, which were not in operation in New Zealand. He contended that the constitutional precedents of England were not applied to this colony, and that the appointment of Judge Edwards stood on exactly the same footing as those of some of his brother Judges. Mr Theo. Cooper argued that in the statutes was to be found the reservation to the Crown of the right of the appointment of Judges without any limitation as to number. -Section sof the Supreme Court Act, 1882, provided that the Court should consist of one Chief Justice and such other Judges as His Excellency should from time to time appoint Mr Cooper claiuiod / that, unlees' the terms of the Act were strained, Judge Edwards' appointment could noiTbe declared invalid. At this stage the Court adjourned till next day.

On resuming on Wednesday morning, - Mr Cooper finished his speech about noon, when

- Sir R. Stout began his in reply. It is understood that the case" will go .to the Privy Council, whatever the result may be.