The Akaroa Mail. TUESDAY, MARCH 13, 1877.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume I, Issue 68, 13 March 1877, Page 2

The Akaroa Mail. TUESDAY, MARCH 13, 1877.

It is not usual—indeed it is deemed contrary to journalistic etiquette—to comment on cases in which criminal proceedings have been taken, whilst such cases are sub judice. The reason for this is obvious, namely, that it is not.well to attempt to influence men's minds before the trial of the accused, in order that the jury, whose duty, it is finally to investigate the case, may approach such investigation perfectly free from bias. Cases however may, and do arise, where the circumstances are such, that it would be dishonest for a journalist to keep silence, even whilst the matter in question is under legal investigation. It is the duty of a journalist, in the interest of the public, ever to be on the watch, in order fearlessly and promptly to expose those whose- laches may have indirectly led to the commission of crime on the part of others. Wo affirm that it is the duty of an honest journalist to do this, and thus to bring to the bar of public opinion those whom the law of the country will not touch. We have been induced to make the foregoing remarks, from a perusal of the report of a case in which Mr. Robert Anderson Buchanan, late clerk to the Resident Magistrate's Court at Akaroa and Custom House Officer for that port, was committed for trial on three charges of embezzling money, which came into his hands in virtue of his office. In commenting on this case, we have no wish to screen the accused, who, according to the evidence, admitted that he had received and had not accounted for the various sums which he stood charged with embezzling. We find no fault with the prosecution being ordered, nor in the manner in which it was conducted ; what we have to deal with are those circumstances, which, according to the evidence, must have arisen to render such

a prosecution necessary ; circumstances, which we think we shall be able to shew, insensibly and indirectly led on one, who to have been naturally careless, to the commission of an act which has Blasted his reputation for lifeA. Mr. Buchanan's appointment took! effect from the Ist July, 1873. and he continued in office-' until suspended by telegram from the Minister of Justice on the 20th January, 1877. His salary for the combined posts of clerk to the Resident Magistrate's Court and Custom House Officer was £135 per annum, a paltry remuneration iit must be. admitted, for /the Services of one holding.appointments of such responsibility and trust. According to the reported statement of Mr. Duncan, the Crown Prosecutor, the accused had neglected to send in certain, returns to the Government, knowing perfectly well that such neglect would involve a stoppage of his salary, and we find Mr. Nalder, the accused's counsel, affirming that his client's salary had been stopped since June last, and that upwards of £90 arrears was due to him. Mr. Male't, in his evidence said, that " the gross amount of fees unaccounted " for, independent of trust account fees, " belonging to the Crown, amounted to "£45 18s." Mr. Malet also stated " that Mr. Buchanan could not have " conceded the information in respect to " his accounts more readily or more " cheerfully than he had done." Such is a very brief resume as collated from the evidence of this painful case. It is stated, however, that these malappropriations have been going on for three years, in sums varying from two shillings to eighteen shillings. If this be true, and we have no reason to doubt the correctness of the information we have received, we would ask how is it that things have been allowed to go on unchecked ? Either there has been no audit of the accused's accounts, or the person to whom the audit was entrusted has grossly neglected his duty. In either case there have been grievous laches, either on the part of the Government or some of their officers. If such an audit had taken place, it is probable that what was at first only an act of thoughtless carelessness, would have been nipped in the bud, and thus the commission of crime would have been prevented, and the country spared the expense of the prosecution, and it may be the maintenance of one who otherwise would not have been a criminal. Again, the Government have stopped Buchanan's salary since June last. When a reasonable time had elapsed for the transmission of the returns, why did not the Government direct an enquiry into the circumstances of their non-transmission, and if only culpable negligence was proved against the offender, he could have been dismissed, if even criminality on his part was brought to light, the commission of the crime of which he now stands charged, would have been prevented, for be it recollected, that each of the alleged cases of embezzlement brought forward at the Resident Magistrate's Court, took place in November and January last, long after the stoppage of the salary. It is somewhat singular, too, that these cases amounting in the aggregate to a considerably less sum than the .total'amount of the defalcations, should have been selected for the purpose of bringing the charge; probably it was because on these a conviction against the accused could easiest be obtained. It may be that such a conviction will be obtained, but this will not satisfy tlie public. Nothing short of a thorough investigation into the whole of the circumstances connected with this painful affair will meet the requirements of justice ; an investigation, too, conducted by persons who have no interest to serve in so cloaking matters as to shield from blame those, who, have at least been guilty of gross neglect in the discharge of their public duty.