MAGISTRATE CRITICISED

Hokitika Guardian, 27 November 1920, Page 3

MAGISTRATE CRITICISED

BY MR T. M. WILFORD. (Per Press Association.) WANGANUI, November 26. During the hearing of the charge of perjury at the Supreme Court against F. S. Easton, a well-known racehorse owner, this afternoon counsel for defendant (Mr T. M. Wilford) in his .address to the jury insinuated that proceedings should never have bean investigated .by the Magistrate (Mr Stout), who, counsel remarked was a very young man, and who may have been influenced in his decision by interested persons outside the Court. In summing up Sir Basset Edwards said he very much regretted that Mr Wilford in his zeal for his client had made reflections upon the Magistrate which should not have been made Mr Wilford had insinuated that Mr S'tout had investigated proceedings on amount of something he had heard outside the court. This was n reflection which • should not have been made. The position of a magistrate was a very onerous one and he was entitled to all res poet. Mr Wilford had insinuated that Mr Stout was a “raw boy.” Mr Wilford: “No Sir.” His Honour: “You said the words ‘very young’ Mr Wilford: “Young, as a magis- ' trate, Your Honour. I myself appointed Mr Stout a magistrate and could not have any reflection to make upon him for that reason.” j His Honour went on to say that there was not the slightest justification for any reflection upon Mr ■Stout, who as all judges at times had to do, hrd a painful duty forced upon him of ordering a prosecution for nerilurv. Mr

Stout had been a barrister and ‘obsitor of the Supreme Court of New Zealand, and as such was perfectly qua lin ?d to hold the position of magistrate. He at all tim»s carried out bis duties without any flummery, and there was not the slightest Justification for the reflection which had been made upon him. At a later stage Mr Wilford asked His Honour’s permission to make an amende honourable in connection with the remarks he had made concerning Mr

Stout. On permission being granted Mr Wilford made tile following explanation : “I did not intend : n any way to reflect upon the ability, character, or integrity of purpose of Mr Stout. iAb Minister for Justice in 1918, I appointed him to the position lie now holds I ascertained, and personally knew, his fitness for the position before I appointed him. T intended to convey 'n my remarks to the jury, not that be had done any wrong, or had acted in any way except judicially, but, that young in office, as he was lie may have been unconsciously influenced by a certain person at Foxton who had admitted he was on bad terms with Faston, who was an official of the court there. ’’ His Honour: “You insinuate the Magistrate was influenced in the action he took by a policeman r.t the court?” Mr Wilford said it was hard *o say how far the Magistrate bad been unconsciously influenced by an official of the Court at Foxton, who had admit-

ted being on bad terms with accused. “In any case,” remarked Counsel, “I have taken the ’very first possible opportunity of making the amende honourable to Mr Stout.”