:
4804.
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
C.O..8
885
MY LORD DUKE,
No. 466.
(NEW ZEALAND.)
LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.
Lincoln's Inn, May 16, 1867. We are honoured with your Grace's commands, signified in Mr. Elliot's letter of the 26th April ultimo, stating that he was directed by your Grace to transmit to us the copy of an Act of the New Zealand Legislature entitled "An Act to exempt members "of the General Assembly from attendance in certain cases in courts of law," and to state that it will be seen that under sections 3, 4, and 5 of the Act if a member or officer of the Council or House of Representatives, as required when the Assembly is not in session, to attend during any session either as a party or witness to any civil, or as a witness in any criminal, proceedings he may apply to the court or a judge for exemption, and that such exemption shall be granted to him unless the court or judge be satisfied that public justice would be defeated or injuriously delayed or irreparable injury be caused to any party to the proceedings,
Mr. Elliot was also pleased to call our attention to the two following points upon this part of the Aot :-
1. That the exemption claimed is not for a certain number of days more or less, as the case may reasonably require, but for the whole of the session, and for 10 days afterwards, nor does there seem to be any power or discretion vested in the court or judge to grant exemption for a shorter time.
2. That the limits to the discretion of the court or judge appear to be very narrow,
as they are bound to grant the exemption unless the ends of "public" justice—a term perhaps hardly applicable to civil suits between private indivduals would be defeated or injuriously delayed or irreparable injury would be caused to any party to the pro- ceedings.
Mr. Elliot also added that it is not difficult to imagine a case in which it may be of great importance to the creditor of a member to prove and enforce his claim speedily, and to whom, therefore, delay would be injurious, and yet it might well be held that this was not a case of public justice defeated or injuriously delayed, nor of “irreparable " injury being caused to the creditor.
That by sections 7 to 10 inclusive the Speakers of the Council and House of Repre- sentatives during the session have the same duty imposed upon them to grant a similar exemption as is imposed upon the court or judge by the earlier sections. That it appears to your Grace that the objections above urged to those earlier sections apply with even greater force to these later sections; inasmuch as it must be more difficult for the speaker to arrive at a just conclusion than for the court or a judge, if, indeed, it is imperative upon the speaker to make any inquiry at all, which may be doubtful under the wording of section 9.
Mr. Elliot further added that he was desired to observe that your Grace believes that there is no precedent in the Colonies for such privileges being granted to members of a legislative body, and that they seem to him to be largely in excess of those enjoyed by the members of the British House of Commons as stated in May's Parliamentary Practice, pp. 135–141.
That under these circumstances he was to request that we would favour your Grace with our opinion upon the following questions:-
1. Whether there are any precedents, Colonial or otherwise, for such extensive privileges being granted to members of a Legislature?
2. Whether we are of opinion that these privileges are necessary and proper to be granted to members of a legislature !
3. Whether the exercise of such privileges, if allowed, might not injuriously affect
the rights of ereditors!
4. Whether the exercise of such privileges, if allowed, might not injuriously affect
the rights of prisoners or prosecutors in criminal cases?
In obedience to your Grace's commands we have taken this matter into consideration, and have the honour to
0 16978.-641. 95.-5/86.
11 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO