THE SCALES OF JUSTICE.

Waikato Times, Volume 88, Issue 13474, 3 May 1917, Page 7

THE SCALES OF JUSTICE.

As expressed by correspondents, wiiose letters are welcome, but for whose views we have no responsibility.

(To the Editor). Sir.—As one who has taken an interest in Judicial matters for some years, 1 cannot pass the article which recently appeared in your paper entitled: "Natural or Artificial Justice—which " by J. E. Hamill, without some comment. This article opens up a big question, and to my mind a question which needs the application o- r the dissecting knife in a most vigorous manner. Why is it that such a question has been allowed to remain in the background, when the very foundations of our Empire are claimed to rest upon the principles of real justice and fair play—British fair play Mr Hamill refers to the "frequent perplexity of Judges in arriving at decisions." The question of interpretation seems to me to be the chief stumbling block here, and induces the query, "Why cannot Justice be clothed in the language of simplicity?" The licensing laws, as a ease in point, have provided a great field for the most varied and far-reach-ing decisions. We find Magistrates giving out numerous interpretations of the law, which is sufficient to prove that the law is being built up of individual interpretations and not upon the actual Statute itself; what, if a concrete declaration or affirmation- of that particular law, should be above the false structure of various and erratic individual interpretations. As' Mr Hamill states, the complex and unwieldlv system that has evolved must be based anew on the foundation of natural and not artificial Justice. As also noted by the writer, great abuse i'las: beer) permitted to enter in connection with examinations of witnesses and one of the principal gateways for the introduction of .such injustice is known as the gateway of "credibility"—the license allowed to "test the credibility of the witness." Passing on, I come to the crowning error, in my humble oninion, of the administration, of Just ; ce, as it stands to-day—the jury system. I have heard a prominent criminal lawyer refer to it as "a most glorious institution," with emphasis on *!><> "glorious." Of course, it is—to him, for hero we find another gate "that stands ajar" for the full and untrammelled display of theatricals, the gentle art of drawing the very red herring across the indistinct track (to laymen only), and the dangerous, but effective (if you know your men) method of perfuming the air around the jury-box with the aroma of tliat deadly lwit subtle essence known as "colour," be it politi oal or religious. Some time before the war tests were made in Germany in regard to the matter of evidence, scenes

of various descriptions were dramatised, so to speak, and the "evidence" was then taken of scores of "witnesses." The result showed that every one of these witnesses gave a different account of the occurrence, yet everyone spoke the truth as to the main facts;' and it is just here that the able counsel introduces the red herring act.. Do awav with the jury and the gentleman in the \vi - ' an empty stage. Now, to my n Bench of three Judges should deal with all Su. preme Court cases of importance. The danger of misinterpretations here would he next to nil. The Judge weighs the evidence, nnd is the only person capable of doing it equitably, and he administers the law as ho finds the law. He is not open to local influences, nor can the wiles of the clever advocate preiudice his judgment. With the law as it now stands, T submit that a Bench "f three Judges, holding a two-to-one majority, 's without question the nearest approach to the setting up of an efficient tribunal to perform the delicate operation of adequately adjusting the scales' of liuman Justice.—l am, etc.. JURIST.