§ MR. CHILDERSsaid, he wished to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether the Secretary of State for the Colonies has been able to advise Her Majesty on the subject of the Petitions addressed to Her in June 1866 by both Houses of the Legislature of South Australia praying Her to remove Mr. Justice Boothby from his office of Judge of the Supreme Court of South Australia; whether the Secretary of State has been advised that the Statute of the fourth of George the Fourth, under which the Judges of the Australian Supreme Courts can be removed from office at the will of the Crown is still in force, notwithstanding the provisions of the Constitutional Acts of those Colonies purporting to make those Judges removable only on an Address from both Houses of the Colonial Legislature; and, if so, whether he will introduce a Bill to give effect to the intention of the Constitutional Acts; and, whether he will lay upon the table Papers on these subjects?
§ MR. ADDERLEYsaid, in reply, that with respect to petitions from both Houses of the Legislature of South Australia addressed to Her Majesty in June, 1866, praying for the removal of Mr. Justice Boothby from the office of Judge of the Supreme Court of South Australia, Her Majesty had been advised to refer them to the Judicial Committee of Privy Council, and they had been so referred. It was obviously right to make that reference, because despatches accompanied the petitions, and statements were made which required judicial investigation. There was a petition for the removal of the same Judge in 1862, and it was found on investigation that one of the allegations it contained was unfounded. The Statute of 4 Geo. IV., under which the Judges of the Australian Supreme Courts of New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land could be 1495 removed from office at the will of the Crown, did not apply to South Australia; but the Act for South Australia enabled Her Majesty to remove Judges upon the petition of both Houses of the Legislature; and it was under that Act that the present proceedings were taken. The papers contained ex parte statements, and while the matter was sub judice it would be better not to publish them. The Act of Geo. III., called Burke's Act, remains unrepealed, empowering the Queen to dismiss a Colonial Judge. He was not aware whether there was any Correspondence on the state of the law, but he would make inquiry. No Bill seems desirable for giving effect to the Constitutional Acts. The Imperial Acts, 18 & 19 Vict. c. 54 and 55, the Act of 9 Geo. IV. c. 83, so far as it is repugnant to the Constitutional Acts, is declared to be repealed. Practically the Judges hold during good behaviour, but are removable by the Crown on addresses from both Colonial Houses of Parliament.