The Ashburton Guardian. Magna Est Veritas Er Prevalebit WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4, 1885. Exuberant Vegetation.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1479, 4 March 1885, Page 2

The Ashburton Guardian. Magna Est Veritas Er Prevalebit WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4, 1885. Exuberant Vegetation.

Delayed.

A Foolish Prosecution.

Ashburton is perhaps the township in the colony which can show the most rapid increase in size since its first settlement, and of this fact the residents within its boundaries are justly proud; but it will take many years, probably, before all its vacant sections are built upon or otherwise rendered productive of revenue, either to their owners or, to anything more than a nominal extent, to the Borough Council. A large number of those sections are held for simply speculative purposes, and are lying unoccupied, waiting until a renewal of prosperity, either sudden or gradual, sets in and produces a demand for sections sufficiently brisk to induce their present owners to realise. This is one of the misfortunes the place has to put up with, and what cannot be mended nor prevented must be endured. But there is one trouble in connection with these sections which can easily be removed, and therefore need not be endured. This trouble is patent to any one acquainted with the town. Many sections are overgrown with rank tussocks and other dry vegetation, and even a casual observer must remark how great is the danger from fire of which those dense growths are a source. The Borough Council has power to compel the removal of this danger, and should not lose an hour in exercising that power < It was only on Sunday last that a grass fire took place in the Domain, and just on the other side of the street from the Domain frontage, a fire arose among the luxuriant tussocks there, which might have occasioned serious damage but for its fortunate early discovery and prompt extinction. Nor is the Borough Council itself sinless in this matter. On some of the streets, notably the part of Wills street running past the lower portion of the Domain, long dry grass is densely growing, and the incautious dropping of a match by a thoughtless smoker may light a fire even in the street that may extend—who knows where? It appears to us that the clearing of this superabundance of waste growth is a work calling for immediate performance, as well for the safety of property as the creditable appearance of the town.

In no other part of the British Empire has, what its votaries are pleased to designate “ the national sport,” assumed, proportionately, such huge dimensions as it has in the Australasian Colonies. Whether this distinction is a matter for congratulation or not are questions upon which neither our readers nor any other section of the community will be unanimous. So many abominable excrescences have identified themselves with horse racing that it is difficult to distinguish its distinct from its corporate effects, but one - thing is certain—the status of the sport in the colony can only be maintained by our Racing Clubs, and particularly our metropolitan Clubs, being conducted in a manner to place them above the breath of suspicion. The nominations for the New Zealand Cup, the most important event in the New Zealand racing calendar, have been published forty-eight hours after the time advertised for cl sing, without any expU; nation, so far as we can learn, being' vouchsafed for the delay. The high character of the Canterbury Jockey Club 'makes it unnecessary for us te disclaim any intention to insinuate that its Committee has been guilty of the slightest impropriety with regard to the receipt, of entries. We have no doubt that the circumstance is capable of explanation in a manner ~that would be satisfactory to all concerned ; but remembering the prominence recently given to the question of late entries, we think the Club should have been specially circumspect in the matter of their nominations, and, if the delay was unavoidable, the publication should have been accompanied by a statement of the cause.

A case came before the Resident Magistrate yesterday which only escaped being melancholy by being ludicrous. Four very diminutive lads, sons of well-known and highly respected burgesses, were charged '• that on the 15 h February, at Ashburton, they did unlawfully and wilfully commit damage to and upon certain personal property there of a private nature, and belonging to one Frederick Macfarlane ; that is to say, to and upon an express top and frame of the value of L 6, by there and then breaking the sjid express top and frame contrary to the Malicious Injury to Property Act.”— Small wonder that the youngest of the defendants, a little fellow of about four summers, was moved to tears by the reading of this fonmdableindiotment;although we doubt if any of the lads were old enough to comprehend the character of tho accusation. However, the Resident Magistrate, . the Olerk of the Court, a solicitor, four police officers, four reporters, innumerable witnesses, and a full Court, devoted two hours to the investigation of the charge against these desparadoes. Evidence was adduced by the prosecution purporting to show that two of the defendants had upset the frame of a waggon, which had been left to its fate by its owner, but the defence had no difficulty in refuting this evidence, and clearly establishing a contention that the defendants had done nothing more heinous than sit under the shade of the , property they were charged with maliciously injuring. Had the information been unamended and a jirimd facie case made out, the Resident Magistrate would have been compelled to commit the lads for trial f and on conviction by the Supreme Court they would have been liable to a length - ened term of imprisonment. The solicitor for the defence in very forcible but very appropriate language stigmatised the proceedings as monstrous, and his opinion will be so generally agreed with that we need not dwell upon that aspect of this disgraceful fiasco. What is now of more importance is to ascertain who is responsible for tho proceedings—the complainant or the police. If the former we ore distinctly of opinion that he should be mulct in the costs of the prosecution and the defence; if the latter they should re- f ceive a severe reprimand for what, at least, I was a grave error of judgement. I