WHAT MAY HAPPEN TO A MAN IN NEW ZEALAND.

Dunstan Times, Issue 1264, 21 May 1886, Page 3

WHAT MAY HAPPEN TO A MAN IN NEW ZEALAND.

Mr Tole should keep his eye on Nr Baddeley, 8.M., at Ashburton. That gentleman gives some very extraordinary decisions now and then. We (‘Press’) desire to draw attention to one in particular, concerning which we have taken some trouble to ascertain the facts. A man named Toner was charged before Mr Baddeley on Friday, the 9th iust., with the larceny of some saplings of nominal value from the bush belonging to the Alford Forest Company. The facts, as proved (or uncontradicted) at the hearing, were as follows Toner is a small farmer, living near Alford Forest, of Bond character, and fairly well off. who has be ; R a long time in the district. He recently required some sticks to use as “ riekers,’ that is to say, for the purpose of roofing some stacks. He consulted a friend as to where he con'd get them. He was told that no doubt he might take them from a piece of land known in the district as Pye’s hush, which had been unclaimed for many years past, and from which the settlers hid been in the habit of cutting timber as they required it. Tne boundaries of this bush were described to him, so that he might distinguish it from the Alford Forest Company’s land There was no dividing fence between the sections, neither was the road frontage of either fenced. Acting on this adv oe, Tonor went, as he thought, to Pye’s Bush, cut the poles he require I, and placed them in his cart. B -fore he left, however, one of the Company's m°n passed by, who informed him that the land he was on was the Company’s land. Toner, who had carefully avoided going on what he thought was the Company’s land, replied that he thought the man was mistaken, hut that, anyhow, Mr Herring, the Company’s manager, would not mind his taking the sticks. No objeot'on was off red at this interview to the removal of the sticks. Mr Herring, however, when he heard of it, did object. From Mr Herring’s admissions at the trial it appears that be has had previous disputes with Toner, and was not on very good terms with him. He str.aightway sought out a constable, and proceeded wHh him to Toner's house. T is constable arrested Toner straightaway, without any warrant. He wanted T ner to walk the whole thirteen miles to Methvcn, and on his objecting, threatened to handcuff him an i even to drag him by a rope at the tail of a horse. Toner, we should add, is a weakly man. Ultimately a horse was procured, and on it Toner and the constable proceeded to Methve.n. The prisoner spent one night in Methvcn under arrest, and was then taken to the gaol at Ashburton, where, fortunately, he was bailed out on his own recognisance. The arresting cm stable in his zeal was not content wi hj the mere arrest. Thouab the stolen poles w ere visible outside tho hj ouse—no attempt having been made to conceal them—this zealous guardian of the peace searched through Toner’s house, opeiod his drawers, ransacked his cupboards, just to see what he could see. He does not *eem to have Veen actuated by the idea that 10ft long birch -saplings could not be kept in a chert of drawers. The idea which took possession of him was that a man who was guilty of the enormity of stea'ing saplings was a man who would steal anything, and he wanted to satisfy himself on this point. We cannot help thinking that when Mr Tole inquires into the propriety of Mr Baddeley’a decision, the Inspector of Police might also ioquiie into the constable’s trealmeiit of Mr Toner. He should be told to read the re port of the trial of the action brought by Mr O-ear J hneon against a certain Christchurch c mytabie who was too anxious to use the handcuffs.

After all these ficta were brought out before Mr Bartdeley, he required several days to incubate His judgment, and then ho found the man guilty of larceny, and fined him 40s. Nobody can deny that Toner acted wrongfully. He took things which

w-re not his. and in a civil action to tecover thn value of the thints taken—a few shillings only—ho might very properly have been adjudged to pay not only that value, but perbapsan additional aura for damages. But surely it was a monstrous injustice to brand as a felon—for that is what this conviction amounts to- a man who in broaddaylight, in the presence of an agent of the true owner, and under an honest impres* sion, however erroneous, that he was entitled to do so, cnt down and removed a few saplings of little or no value.