Extracts from speeches of Honorable Members in the House of Assembly, during the Second, Session of the Fourth Parliament, 1867.

"Wednesday, 17th September. Native Lands Court at Turanganui. Mr. Carleton, in moving that the correspondence between the Government and the Judges of the Native Lands Court on the sitting of the Court at Turanganui, laid on the table of this House, be considered, presumed the whole case was shown in the correspondence which he held in his hand.

He had risen for the maintenance of a principle, and it was seldom he did rise except for such a purpose. He cared very little for details, but he had a very clear appreciation of principles, especially those in which page cxii they had been brought up in the mother country; and whenever he saw a principle infringed, whether by a friendly Government, or one to whom he was in opposition, most assuredly would he rise for the maintenance of that principle. The special principle which he had then risen to maintain was that no interference could be tolerated as to the Courts of law. It was not only on that occasion—not only in reference to the Native Lands Court—that interference had taken place, but it had also taken place with regard to the Supreme Court in a manner that was highly objectionable He did not specially refer to the present Administration, for he looked upon the General Government as one and continuous. He had seen correspondence with the Judges laid on the Table of which he was ashamed; and on all occasions whatever, upon which he perceived the slightest inclination to any interference with the Judicial Courts, so long should he rise to protest against it in the strongest terms. He could not tolerate an attempt to brow-beat a Court of law. He hoped that the House would think fit to maintain the perfect independence of a Court which had been constituted by itself.

Mr. Stafford said : He entirely agreed to the terms his honorable colleague had made use of in reference to the conduct of Mr. Munro. He could only say it was very fortunate for that gentleman that he had not had to deal with him instead of his honorable colleague. He (Mr. Stafford) should not have let him off so easily, but would have gone a great deal further, and have stopped his salary, and then he would have allowed him to rush to that House, as he appeared to have done. He would bring the question to an issue inconsequence of the language used by the honorable gentleman; and he would let the House determine, so that there could be no mistake about the matter. He would tell the honorable gentleman that, so long as he had the honor to be one of the advisers of the Crown, he would take such action as circumstances might require, even if it should be to suspend the operation of the Judges of the Native Lands Court, whenever such a course was for the public interest—aye, even if the Judges were swept away altogether. He and his colleagues would take the responsibility upon themselves, when they thought public interests demanded it. If, therefore, the hon, member thought that was an improper position, or one which would not be upheld by the Legislature, he had now a fair opportunity of taking issue upon the subject. He, for one, should never hesitate, so long as he had the responsibility of administering public affairs, to arrest any action whatever, which he thought to be injurious to public interests, oven though it might be taken under the name of a Court."