"A VIEW FROM THE NINETIES" / Charles Lilley Oration Brisbane Girls' Grammar School Saturday 15 March 1997 The Hon. J.M. Macrossan, AC Chief Justice Supreme Court of Queensland Let me speak first of Charles Lilley. It is indeed a distinction to be asked to deliver the oration which is the first named in honour of an outstanding figure from our past. In the life of nineteenth century Queensland, Lilley made a significant contribution in law, politics and education. The Brisbane Girls' Grammar School, which his efforts largely brought into existence, is thus a most appropriate venue for our gathering. Lilley early chose a legal career but then went into the Army. As a young man in his twenties he came to Aus.tralia. Soon after admission to the Bar, he became a QC. The available sources are in disagreement about his actual birthdate, but it is accurate enough now to say that, entering politics he became Attorney-General in about his mid thirties, and then either before or within a year or so of turning 40, he became Premier.. His influence upon the legislative programmes of the State and his involvement particularly with education and in the work and development of the style of the Supreme Court i~ its early days have been sufficiently chronicled in other places and I shall not d~lay with them now. It in no way .diminis.hes Lilley's achievement to record that combined with his drive as .a reformer and innovator there seems to have existed a strange lack of restraint and a deficiency in judgment which in the end brought him down. Pressures· arose which led to his leaving the office of Chief Justice of Queensland but not before he had served a lengthy term in that position. What can be called his good side and his great abilities received wide recognition which posthumously has endured. This makes his imbalance in office marked as it was by immoderate disputes with Parliament and the Executive and his notorious inability as Chief Justice to restrain an undue partiality towards his barrister son, all the more a matter of regret. The point is that the flawed personality was not the whole of the man. The public wants to be able to trust and look up to those who, in society, play a public role yet in varying degrees it finds it is constantly disappointed in the expectation it entertains of leading figures when in some way or other they are shown by ruthless inquisitors to share human weakness. The modern style in biography looks to expose everything and where once a veil would be drawn, the investigator now intrudes with relish and no detail is sacrosanct. The public reads it all with a mixture of shock and disbelief but is, I suspect, partly comforted to know there is no exclusive property in character frailties. Indeed, why should it astound us when we learn that, say, a scientist pre­ eminent in the field of theoretical physics was mean and difficult in his domestic relationships? The human tendency to idealise is very strong and when disappointed it can produce a powerful backlash. Interestingly enough, leading figures in some fields are relieved of any requirement that they should conform with idealised expectations. For sporting heroes and pop stars, it is enough if they steer clear of the criminal law. If they manage that, they will have done all that is asked of them . People working in the public arena must, however, do more. In choosing a title for this address I was influenced by my realisation that we stand interestingly close to the end of the century and of the millennium. This heightens the drama that always seems to be involved in approaching the end of a decade. Even common or garden pecades have a symbolic significance. Changes which show up within our broad environments or come about in the appearance of the world around us seem not to result from the passage of single years. Such short spans appear to ma ke no great difference. But larger changes occur by stealth and whole decades, when they pass, can completely transform the observable shape of things. Although all decades make natural dividers and points of reference, this time we have a decade with a special dimension. Having come to a decision to present some general overview in this address, I found that the title suggested itself. We still have the best part of t~ree years left in the decade so we sit well at ease within it. Behind these preliminary remarks, the sobering thought intrudes that since I come to a school to speak to my audience, there may be some present whose youthful years lead them to think the real world began only very recently - all the rest being prehistory. If that is so, their parents will enlighten them . I have decided on a non-specialist address as being best suited to this occasion. It is true that the simplest of all addresses to construct, if experiences and viewpoints are to be shared, is a straightforward chronological account. That approach provides a convenient arrangement of all of the observations offered and everything falls into place after a fashion. It becomes even easier when the related experiences consist wholly of the speaker's personal involvement- a form of verbal autobiography where practically every sentence starts with an "1", either express or implied. Charles Lilley Ora tion • •A View from lhe Nine tie s • Th e Hon. J.M. Macrossan, AC 15 M arch 1997 2 However, some fair level of ego is called for there and the result is not necessarily compelling since success depends upon how good a storyteller the speaker is. I thought that such an approach would not really fit in this evening even if I had been prepared to trust myself in that style. I have aimed at saying something removed from the narrowly specialist category. My own principal experience lies in the law but when I speak of matters that arise out of that, I shall try to keep in mind a lesson from the past. I was present a number of years ago when an oration was given by an eminent legal authority to an audience consisting mainly of non-legals. At the end as we were filing out from the hall, the few lawyers present were saying things like, "That was fairly superficial stuff'', but the others were saying, "What was that about? Why were we treated to all those legal turgidities?" I detect twin dangers here, or putting it in classical terms, the perils of Scylla and Charybdis loom. I am conscious of the need to steer between. Let me start with some remarks about the public position of judges. You may think I have already given away something of the judicial style with its tendency to qualify in the interests of accuracy, but I now wish to be more specific. One strictly disposed English commentator said re ce ntly that the public utterances of judges should not stray beyond the bare necessities such as, "Please shut that door", or "Please open the window". This, you may think, goes too far, but it is undoubtedly true that strong inhibitions rule judges in their public expression of viewpoints. The expectations concerning the limits they should observe ha ve accumulated over time and have come to constitute a substantial cu lture. The judges, by and large, tend to conduct themselves in co nformity with it. Perhaps this makes them a little different from the average citizen. It might even make them duller but thE? induced inhibitions are certainly there and the y have their effect. There are cyclic~! fluctuations in the pressures felt by judges within their public position. Currently judges particularly feel the need to take care. It is always expected they will. avoid .comments that are openly political, but the matter goes much further than that. There is a noticeable tendency nowadays for pressure-g roups and the media to seize upon some isolated observation by an individual judge which may be unwise or at least be said to be mistaken and then attribute error and lack of judgment to the judiciary as a whole. These attacks have the potential to operate as a powerful form of public censorship and would certainly do so if the judges were to allow themselves to be driven into elaborate public defences of their position. They would soon become politicised and it is not the judges' role to be politicians. While it can be accepted that some place must always be conceded to legitimate and balanced criticism of the work of judges, the goal should be to ensure that judges are left effectively free to pursue their tasks in a proper, independent fashion. Anyone who has thought about this topic wants the independence of the judges to be secure. That is essential if their judgments are to be respected and accepted. Charle3 Lilley Oral lon • •A View /rom th e Nineties • The Hon. J.M . Ma ctouan, AC 15 March 1DD7 3 Perhaps judges used be accorded a higher degree of unquestioning respect in a more stable age in the past less inclined to question and dispute all viewpoints and every proposition. We, by contrast, find ourselves more in an environment where numerous groups within the community contend vigorously for influence and the umpire's decision has no easy acceptance. Some of the old stability has gone. Still, power and fame can lend great weight to the expression of opinions on the basis that it is not so much what is said as who says it.