A TRADE PROTECTIVE INSTITUTE

Observer, Volume 7, Issue 334, 2 May 1885, Page 13

A TRADE PROTECTIVE INSTITUTE

Judges who could .rebuke the Executive by no means came to an end with Q-ascoigne. In Sir James Martin the sister Colony (writes the Melbourne Argus) has an occupant of the bench who, as various events would chow, rather likes a collision with a Minister. A remarkable correspondence between himself and the Stuart Government has justi been published, and it is tke more noteworthy inasmuch as it deals with a question of importance to commercial communities. Sydney possesses a " Tx*ade Protective Institute," conducted by the Messrs Bretnall Bros. This firm was in the habit of searching the records of the Supreme Court for the particulars of Bills of Salo and of writs and summonses issued, and of publishing the information in a circular issued to subscribers. In May last the firm complained to the Minister of Justice that the " right of search had been refused " by the prothocotary, and the Minister referred the letter to that officer, who passed it on to the Chief Justice — and the war commenced. Sir James Martin penned the following minute : — " Return the letter and minute by my direction to the Minister for Justice without report, on the ground that the calling for the information in question is an interference with an officer of the Court in a matter over which the Court alone has jurisdiction." First the Minister of Justice and then the Premier argued the point with the Chief Justice, admitting the independence of the judges, but claiming that, as the prothnotary is a public officer, receiving public money, and is appointed, and may be dismissed,

by the Crown, he is under departmental control. Ordered to make a report on the one hand, and directed not to do so on the other, the prothonotary was in a delicate position, but he effected a clever escape In a memo, stating why he could not report, he gave the Minister the facts of the caße, and with this that gentleman was satisfied. In one of the latest letters the Minister writes to the Chief Justice— "A I have obtained from Mr Chapman the information required, there is no futher necessity to prolong a correspondence which is so void of official courtesy on the part of ! your Honor —I hare, &c ,J. P. Abbott." Upon this letter the Chief Justice made the following minute—" Let this excessively impertinent letter be returned to Mr Abbott, first taking a copy of it and of this minute.-^J.M., C.J." And there is more of this sort of repartee. As to the Trade Protective Institute, the objection of the judges was to the "publishing weekly a list of summonses " on the ground that " the issue of a writ is an ex parte proceeding, the propriety of which is to be afterwards determined." Mention is made of one case in which "the plaintiff, in proof of defendant's malice, gave evidence to the fact that Fnih defendant had issued a writ against him without any cause, for the sole purpose of getting the notice of the writ inserted in the Association's circular." The judges were informed that such publication is permitted elsewhere, but the Chief Justice, after examination, denies that " any statements of summonses are issued." A rule of Court was then framed, forbidding a search, by other than parties to a suit, but it does not appear that the publication of the particulars of bills of sale is interfered with. The judges could have giventhe rule a wider effect, and the Ministry could have dealt more severely with the judges' officer, and thus both the Trade Protective Institute and the prothonotary have had a squeak for existence.

Instruments registered under tlte " Chattels Securities Act, 1882."