A life of crowded hours

Obit ... Peter Lyons visited an ailing Michael Hodgman QC in a nursing home, where he gives an unusually short answer ... In the grip of emphysema ... One of Tasmania's more unpredictable lawyer-politicians ... "What has the amazement of the Australian citizen got to go with it?" asks Gummow J ... Hodgman RIP 

Michael Hodgman (left): loved holding court

A FEW days ago, I called in on Michael Hodgman.

He and I had been in court together many times. We were good friends, but because of distance I had only seen him a few times in the past 20 years. 

He was sitting quietly in a room at the foot of Mount Wellington. There were familiar photos on the wall: Michael with Reagan; Michael with John Paul II; Michael with the Queen. 

He was being well cared for and his beloved family visited every day, but the hurly-burly was done.

Michael and I had worked together in his indefatigable days. A day in court is tiring for most advocates, but his day started at 6.00am and often finished well after midnight. Court came in between.

Tasmania was his passion and he fought hard for the State and its people.

He loved the monarchy; the military; and the company of women.

He drank Cascade beer. He didn't read much outside newspapers nor did he use a computer. He watched a bit of television, but it sent him to sleep.

Most of all he liked people: holding court, buying beers, making them laugh. 

He was a member or the patron of so many organisations: the Greek Club; the Boxing Association; the Naval Reserve; the Geelong Football Club; the Polish Club; the Tassie Devils Basketball team; the National Breast Cancer Council; the Vietnam Veterans Association; the Law Society; the Tasmania Club; the Racing Club; the House of Assembly; and, by the way, the Liberal party.

He would turn up to meetings, often late, but always dressed in the appropriate uniform.

He knew virtually everyone and if he didn't, he would know their parents. He greeted jurors by name.

People flocked to him: the down and outs; those in trouble; cynical hacks; waiting staff and students. He helped anyone who asked. Though many were not in his electorate, he did it for free. He hated meanness, injustice and ingratitude. 

Those who hurt him were never vilified, they were just referred to as "Mad! Mad!"

He was vain and often unintentionally comical. Indeed, his friends despaired because sometimes he could be quite ridiculous in public.

In private, he was sensible and funny and very kind.

The Honourable Michael Hodgman QC MP, as he called himself, first came to my attention when I saw him on a television debate. He was much more polished and articulate than the average Tasmanian politician.

I was about 16 at the time, so he must have been 37. He was the federal member for Denison, a seat which he held for some time and ultimately lost to Duncan Kerr. Along the way he had lost the seat to Labor's John Coates and won it back.

Michael represented the State upper house seat of Huon before entering federal parliament. He eventually became Minister for the Capital Territory in Malcolm Fraser's government.

After Canberra, Michael was in time elected to Tasmania's lower house where he was frustrated at never becoming a minister.

Former federal judge Mervyn Everett was a Labor politician in the 60s and urged Michael to join the party.

"I don't like being caucused," said Michael.  

"There's a difference," Everett replied, "between being caucused and doing the caucusing."

Michael wasn't popular with his fellow Liberal members. Jealousy was the main reason, but there was also a fear that his unbridled tongue might embarrass them.

He was not discreet nor was he interested in soulless political manoeuvres. If he stabbed someone, it was from the front.

Hodgman: Mr LimelightIn court, in parliament and in the pub, he spoke in loud exclamations and each point of significance was repeated, just in case you didn't hear it. 

On the road, bad drivers were "Republicans" or "Socialists" or the worst of all, "Labor Voters".

But a host of Labor voters always chose him first.

He was kind to junior lawyers and teased the senior ones. 

I remember being proud that a magistrate had found my client not guilty of disobeying a red light. 

Michael was indignant.

"That particular magistrate has a quota of two acquittals a year and you've used up one of them on a traffic offence."

He dominated a courtroom. He had a nose for dodgy police practices and won many hopeless cases. He was a good cross-examiner, up to a point, but a few times I had to hand him a note a note which read "STOP".

His memory was prodigious. He once beat Barry Jones on a national television show where the contestants were given a short time to memorise the names of 20 people and then recognise them.

In court, he knew word for word what had been said before the transcript arrived. 

It would be an understatement to say that the magistrates and judges of the Tasmanian courts found Hodgman's appearances before them a bit of an ordeal. He was a trier of patience at times. He wasn't there to help. He was there to represent his client.

He firmly believed that the judiciary voted for him in elections, not because they supported him or even liked him, but because they wanted him out of the courts and back in parliament.

He made up a little party trick pretending in the pub or the robing room to be a diffident judge who knocked on the doors of Denison's constituents.

"Oh, hello," he would say in a nervous but educated voice, "Please forgive this intrusion. I don't normally do this. In fact, on reflection, I never do this. My name is Sir Guy Stephen Montague Green, the Chief Justice of Tasmania, and I'd like to ask you, no, I direct you to vote for Michael Hodgman. Please!" Then he fell to his knees begging.

He once appeared with Leigh Sealy before Chief Justice Gleeson and Justice Gummow in a case called Parker. They were seeking special leave to appeal against an extradition order.

Hodgman: May it please Your Honours. It is our respectful submission that this application for special leave raises matters of enormous public importance affecting every magistrate and court in Australia called upon to determine extradition proceedings, but also affecting Australia's relations with at least 25 other countries, including the United States, where the extradition treaties are similar to the treaty in the instant case.

By way of brief introduction, most Australian citizens would be astounded to know that if a foreign country, say for example the Federal Republic of Germany, wanted their extradition, all that the Federal Republic of Germany would have to do is to issue a warrant of arrest out of a District Court setting out the alleged charges and a statement of the acts or omissions alleged against the person claimed, forward the same to Australia seeking the Australian Attorney General's support, and the Australian citizen could then be arrested and must be held in custody unless there are special circumstances, and will be extradited to the Federal Republic of Germany. The Australian citizen would be surprised, if not staggered to find ... 

Gummow J: That is not right, Mr Hodgman. That is not right at all. That is just not a fair description of the Act whatsoever.

Hodgman: I am sorry, Your Honour. I thought that was a fair summary.

Gummow J: At the end there is an executive discretion, is there not?

Hodgman: That is so, Your Honour. I am not disputing that.

Gummow J: Right.

Hodgman: The Australian citizen, if I might continue, would be, we suggest, amazed to find that at the extradition proceeding he or she cannot deny his or her guilt. The magistrate is not ... 

Gummow J: Mr Hodgman, what has the amazement of the Australian citizen got to do with it? We have to construe the statute and the treaty and the regulations. 

Hodgman: My respectful submission is that we must set the basis of the application and how it is dealt with before Your Honours, and I will then explain why it is crucial that at the hearing before the section 19 magistrate ... 

Gummow J: You can assume some familiarity on the part of the court with the Act and the regulations. 

One day, after a High Court appearance, Michael met one of the judges at the races in Sydney.

"You spoke to us Michael," the judge smiled, "like we were a jury".

Not to be outdone, Hodgman replied, "Your Honour," (incorrectly, he always called judges Your Honour outside of court) "You are the ultimate jury." 

In short, Michael Hodgman was a man who lived by the parable of the talents. Not a day was wasted. 

He was maddening and sometimes over-bearing, but he was teeming with the colour of a full life. Michael was the antidote to today's humourless, grey and programmed politicians.

He didn't just enjoy the limelight. He was the limelight.

As his son Will and I drove up to see him in his peaceful room, I was stuck by the fact that it used to be Michael who always did the visiting.

I knew the emphysema was taking its toll and feared his mind might be feeble.

Not a bit of it. He called out my name at once and I asked how he was.

He caught his breath.

"Dying - is the short answer."

Perhaps the shortest answer he's ever given.