“HAP. 1] THE TENURE OF JUDICIAL OFFICES 1339
In the case of Natal, however, special provision was made
by the local Act?! that it would be lawful for the Crown on
the address from both Houses of Parliament to remove the
judges, and it is clear that the power of amotion which was
granted by Burke’s Act remained unaffected. In all these
cases the right of the Crown to dismiss for misbehaviour
by a scire facias or a criminal information at the suit of the
Attorney-General presumably remained unaffected, though
the power is of no real moment.
A new departure to some extent was made by the Common-
wealth of Australia Constitution Act, 1900. It was there
laid down with regard to the judges as follows :—
S. 72.2 The Judges of the High Court and of the other
Courts created by the Parliament—
L. Shall be appointed by the Governor-General in Council ;
2. Shall not be removed except by the Governor-General
in Council on an Address from both Houses of Parliament in
the same session, praying for such removal on the ground
of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
3. Shall receive such remuneration as Parliament may fix,
but the remuneration shall not be diminished during their
zontinuance in office.
Under the Judiciary Act of 1903 there were three judges,
50 whom two were added by Act No. 5 of 1906. The salaries
are £3,000 a year, and £3,500 for the Chief Justice.
It will be noted that proved misbehaviour or incapacity
is laid down as the ground of removal? but it is clear that it
would still have rested on the Parliament to decide what
proof it would ask of such incapacity or misbehaviour.
' No. 14 of 1893, ss. 43-5 (the usual provision against alteration of
salaries is made in s. 45).
' 63 & 64 Vict. c. 12, Const.
' Therefore no other mode of removal (as by scire facias, &c.) would be
available ; see Quick and Garran, op. cit., p. 730. The British practice
(Todd, Parliamentary Government in England, ii. 857 seq.) allows removal
(1) for misbehaviour, (2) on address of Parliament, which may be based on
less than misbehaviour. In Australia and the Union there must be mis-
behaviour, and an address is the mode of procedure indicated to show that
misbehaviour has occurred. See also Harrison Moore. Commonwealth of
Australia? pp. 200-5.
