The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1873-05-03
TIE PACIFIC
Commercial 9Obertisrr.
SATURDAY. NAY 8.

49, NN~DN
n%ection with the cause oeL5re which has recently
agitated English law-courts, the disputed claim
u the Tiehborne baronetcy, has been the oPpor-
tunity just afforded for 4 great Judicial assertion
Of the rights of Judges. Freedom of speech has
its undeniable nights, too; and in England lately
as in the United States, even consideration Of the
public peace have been regarded as inferior in i'm
Portance to this mighty privilege: indeed it is be-
coming aim 1st a question whether the liberty OF
4 man to say what he likes anyhow and anywhere
Is not growing dangerously absolute.
But it appears that the right of executive law
officers, as well as that of administrators, to be
considered urprejudiced and unbiased in the per-
formance of their duties is held as limiting even
freedom of speech. Legislators, it is true, court
public criticism, for popular opinion is what
makes them, and it's expression is what guides
them, IN really free countries; so that ''parlia-
mentary privilege" is very seldom exerted, and
newspapers and public speakers enjoy the utmost
latitude short of actual libel. But those whose
sworn duty is to represent in their own persons
the majesty of the law declare their right to the
character Of purity, and the truth of their claims
in the particular instance Of which we speak is
tremendously cOrroborated by the public support
accorded to their assertion.
We need but briefly review the facts. Legal
decisions have lately been given against the new
found claimant to large estates. Various knowl-
edge Of supposed facts, rs well as general love of
fair-play, has called forth Il large amount Of pub
lie comment upon the case; aud the fact that the
estates arc at present held by an influential Ro-
man Catholic family while the claimant is a Prot
cstant has further caused considerable religious
partizanship. At public meetings held in aid of
the claimant, whose resources have been heavily
drawn upon by the cost of litigation, two MEM
bers Of Parliament, one barrister and the .. claim
ant " himself have cast aspersions upon the hon
csty of witnesses and the purity Of judges; where
upon they have been arraigned for contempt be-
fore a full bench, and a complete apology and re-
has resulted, with severe penance in
cases.
1t Is evident that great Importance is attached
in every free country to the character of those who
are chosen to administer justice; not only must
they be negatively pure, that is, not convicted of
misdoing, but (since positive purity can only be
assumed from the absence of its opposite) they
must be beyond suspicion. Were it possible with
any show of reality to impute to the judges even
a tendency towards prejudice, for whatsoever
reason, there is no doubt that public opinion in
would not have sustained recent action
with regard to Mr.. Whalley, NJ. P, Mr.. Onslow,
VI. P, Mr. Skipworth and the Claimant"
The judges who made so severe a declaration of
heir lofty innocence were able to do so with the
proud consciousness of right. With no ground
for ambition save as excelling in purity and wis
ION, with no possible hope of gain except in that
preferment which q proper discharge of their pro-
fessional duties might bring them, and with no
occupation beyond the performance of their legal
functions, for all of which qualifications they had
been selected from a large body of lawyers, with
The assent of that body and of the public, as the
most fit, judges in short and judges only, they
claimed what ought manifestly to be theirs.
OF course we see that in order to secure such
ability and unity of purpose as is necessary for
the material of the Judiciary no parsimOny should
be observed by governments in paying for the re-
Iuired qualities. We do not pretend to say
or not in our own country sufficient pro-
7ision is made for this object; our judges them
can accept or decline what is offered. Still
ess are we prepared even to hint at the possibility
If public doubt as to the purity of the bench; we
]elieve it to be composed of men whose single
minded efforts are for the proper discharge of
heir high duties. But it is for them and for all
If us jealousIy to maintain that they shall be
Known in no other capacity than that of judges,
nd that any suspicion of unavoidable bias by
'easOn of influences apart from that bench shall
,e met by the proud answer, alike from parties, +
Jress and people, 1t is impossible"