14
convicted), he refused to allow me to send the assets there too, as I had arranged with the solicitors.
After these proceedings had been initiated, the judgment making me personally liable for costs was pronounced, although I had been made aware of its purport previously. I thus found myself personally liable for costs in matters over which I had no control whatever. I had previously found that my predecessor in office had kept possession of extensive leasehold properties (some of which were licensed brothels), which I, as official assignee, was required to take over—properties involving liabilities of all kinds, that in addition to these responsibilities, solicitors were invited by the Chief Justice to sue me for the acts of my predecessors, but when I proposed arrangements to settle, the Chief Justice refused his sanction, so that I had not even the ordinary power of a litigant to make terms with my adversary; and in addition to all this, the Chief Justice sought to deprive me of the protection which publicity would have afforded me; he claimed the right of hearing all the cases in which I was concerned (either as official assignee or official administrator) in Chambers, so as to exclude the Press, and when the cases were set down for hearing in Court he adjourned into Chambers, without even alleging the semblance of a pretext for so doing.
He had, in one of the bankruptcies of long standing, just previously made an order in Chambers on the convict Huffam to pay over to me as official assignee a sum of money—part of what he had embezzled. This order had been served and default made, and it was proposed to make the convict bankrupt upon the debt. The Chief Justice insisted that an action should be brought by me upon the judge's order, although I had no funds for litigation, and although I pointed out that it had been long-established law that no action could be maintained on a judge's order. On my expressing this opinion he became greatly excited, told me that he did not want my opinion, and afterwards ordered me out of his chambers. This was done in a most offensive manner, and as he had on previous occasions acted in a similar way, and had then called in a Deputy-Registrar to make an entry in his minute book that I had been guilty of disrespect, I determined to put an end to further action of the kind, and told him that as he had ordered me out, I should not return or attend again in Chambers. He then sent for the accountant, Mr. Barff, to make an entry in the minute book of my having been guilty of disrespect (there being no Deputy-Registrar then within the building), but he declined to record anything but what he had heard or seen.
Page 15
On the day following, a Court was held for general business, but as soon as my cases (which had been placed in a list) were reached, the Chief Justice adjourned into Chambers, without any apparent cause, or giving any reason for so doing. I objected to attend in Chambers in my capacity of litigant, and thereupon the matter stood over. I should here remark that the Ordinance provides that all bankruptcy matters should be heard in Court, and there is no provision whatever for hearings in Chambers. In probate matters the Ordinance provides that all matters shall be heard in Court unless the parties or one of them desire to have their application heard in Chambers. Thus my right to have everything heard in Court was really beyond question.
The cases were again set down in the list for hearing in Court on the next Court day. The Chief Justice again came into Court, and without any apparent cause, adjourned into Chambers, and I again objected that the cases were for the Court. For the third time they were set down for hearing in Court; the Chief Justice again, without apparent cause, adjourned into Chambers...
Page 270
Cas
14
convicted), he refused to allow me to send the assets there too, as I had arranged with the solicitors.
After these proceedings had been initiated, the judg ment making me personally liable for costs was pro- ounced, although I had been made aware of its purport previously. I thus found myself personally liable for costs in matters over which I had no control whatever. I had previously found that my predecessor in office had kept possession of extensive leasehold properties (some of which were licensed brothels), which I, as official assignce, was required to take over-properties involving liabilities of all kinds, that in addition to these responsibilities, solicitors were invited by the Chief Justice to sue me for the acts of my predecessors, but when I proposed arrange- ments to settle, the Chief Justice refused his sanction, so that I had not even the ordinary power of a litigant to make terms with my adversary; and in addition to all this, the Chief Justice sought to deprive me of the pro- tection which publicity would have afforded me; he claimed the right of hearing all the cases in which I was concerned (either as official assignee or official adminis- trator) in Chambers, so as to exclude the Press, and when the cases were set down for hearing in Court he adjourned into Chambers, without even alleging the semblance of a pretext for so doing.
He had, in one of the bankruptcies of long standing, just previously made an order in Chambers on the convict Huffam to pay over to me as official assigned a sum of money-part of what he had embezzled. This order had been served and default made, and it was proposed to make the convict bankrupt upon the debt. The Chief Justice insisted that an action should be brought by me upon the judge's order, although I had no funds for litiga- tion, and although I pointed out that it had been long- established law that no action could be maintained on a
15
judge's order. On my expressing this opinion he became greatly excited, told me that he did not want my opinion, and afterwards ordered me out of his chambers. This was done in a most offensive manner, and as he had on pre- vious occasions acted in a similar way, and had then called in a Deputy-Registrar to make an entry in his minute book that I had been guilty of disrespect, I determined to put an end to further action of the kind, and told him that as he had ordered me out, I should not return or attend again in Chambers. He then sent for the accountant, Mr. Barff, to make an entry in the minute book of my having been guilty of disrespect (there being no Deputy-Registrar then within the building), but he declined to record anything but what he had heard or
seen.
On the day following, a Court was held for general business, but as soon as my cases (which had been placed in a list) were reached, the Chief Justice adjourned into Chambers, without any apparent cause, or giving any reason for so doing. I objected to attend in Chambers in my capacity of litigant, and thereupon the matter stood over. I should here remark that the Ordinance provides that all bankruptcy matters should be heard in Court, and there is no provision whatever for hearings in Chambers. In probate matters the Ordinance provides that all matters shall be heard in Court unless the parties or one of them desire to have their application heard in Chambers. Thus my right to have everything heard in Court was really beyond question.
The cases were again set down in the list for hearing in Court on the next Court day. The Chief Justice again came into Court, and without any apparent cause, adjourned into Chambers, and I again objected that the cases were for the Court. For the third time they were set down for hearing in Court; the Chief Justice again, without apparent
270
J
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.