A.—4

224

Ith Day.] Imperial Appeal Court. [12 June, 1911. Sir JOSEPH WARD : Excepting that the procedure, as a rule, has been, in the absence of a judge from our country in cases of New Zealand law, only such portion of the New Zealand law as the counsel put before the judges was really considered. That has been the usual procedure I understand from the official communications I have read. The PRESIDENT : That is rather an argument for having him to hear New Zealand cases. Sir JOSEPH WARD : That is why I want to have him there, to take part in hearing New Zealand cases. The PRESIDENT : But it does not seem an argument for having him there in other cases. Sir JOSEPH WARD : I see the point you raise all right, but it does seem to me to be a bar to any proposal so far as New Zealand is concerned, that a judge should come over here, taking nearly six months to do it, to take part in the hearing of possibly only one case. The LORD CHANCELLOR : I do not suggest that; I only suggest that if you wish it that could be done. But 1 go further, and if the Canadian or the South African Governments wish that there should be a New Zealand judge sitting on their cases I am perfectly willing. Sir JOSEPH WARD : We do not object to a Canadian or South African judge sitting, as far as we are concerned, and dealing with New Zealand cases, but in practice the result would be that we would be debarred from taking any part in a proposal such as you have suggested, I am afraid. Viscount HALDANE : Sir Joseph, I had an experience when I was at the Bar in a great many cases from your country, which it seems to me is not irrelevant. There was a great case about the Maori Land Acts, an intricate and complicated case, which lasted 10 days over here. It was an appeal from the Supreme Court, and an appeal in which the opinion of the Chief Justice was involved, so that he could not have sat, but it would have been very useful if you had sent us a judge of experience in those cases, for that case, as assessor, simply to make us quite sure that we had missed nothing. The case was very thoroughly done by a strong tribunal, and lasted 10 days here, but that case could have been taken at another period on notice being given; you might have said " Please take it three months from now, and we will arrange that the judge comes over"; and if you had sent us an assessor for that case it would have been really all that was wanted in order to make sure that every point in that very interesting and intricate mass of statutes was seen to. But the other cases that I remember which came from New Zealand were for the most part cases turning upon the broad principles of English law or equity. Sir JOSEPH WARD : I know the case Lord Haldane refers to quite well. The class of cases which will come here, as a general rule, are cases connected with the native lands in New Zealand. It is well known to the legal profession that they are subject to tremendous differences of opinion, and both the courts in our country and the legal men in our country hold very decided opinions in various directions upon the issues which require to be settled. There is a feeling in New Zealand, right through the country, that it would be of the greatest importance to us if one of our judges were sitting in a properly constituted court here when those cases come along, to enable, not the native law to be interpreted for the home iudges, because they can interpret the native law as well as our judges can, but there are the customs of the natives which come in, and a mass of extraneous things which come into our own courts which require to be considered, and those cases are bound to be fairly numerous.