THE DECISION ON COSTS.

Manawatu Herald, Volume III, Issue 6, 21 September 1880, Page 2

THE DECISION ON COSTS.

* Whatever difference of opinion we may have had with our Feildmg contemporary, -we have hitherto given that journal credit for a desire to act in accordance with the amenities of respectable journalism, but we fear that our opinions must alter. Recently we criticised adversely the action of the Resident Magistrate in awarding to one defendant costs at the rate of 10s, and to another at the rate of a guinea for attendance at Court, and pointed out that as the Magistrate distinctly classed both as biainess men, the same allowance should have been made in each case, and no favour shown. The Feilding Guardian, in Saturday's issue, thus refers to the matter : — " The heinous offence in the matter of allowance of costs that the Marton R.M. has been guilty of, according to some of the fault-finding newspapers, is that in two defended cases he allowed one defendant (a butcher) who produced a receipt for the amount he had been sued for, 10s for his expenses, and another, a professional man, one guinea. What won't vindictivelydisposed newspapers find to cavil at after this ?" We plead guilty to the sneer oi being a " fault-finding newspaper," as we are under the impres-

sion the public support newspapers in order to find out faults if they" exist, and have them corrected ;. but we <io itoi admit the charge of being viudicfcively - disposed. On the contrary, it is always to us a greater pleasure to defend a Government official than attack one, and as regards Mr Ward particularly, we have on several occasions put on the war paint when we conceived he was receiving unfair treatment. This fact the writer in the Feilding Guardian knew only too' well, and considering that but a few weeks ago we had defended Mr Ward from the aspersions of a journal which attacked him in reference to a case in which the writer in the Peilding Guardian was interested, we think that in applying the epithet to us in this instance the Guardian wilfully maligns Us. We have hitherto uniformly agreed with the Resident Magistrate in his conduct of the public business, and hope we shall continue to do so ; but we cannot allow our private feelings to interfere with public duties, nor can we admit the rule that because on some occasions we have supported ! the Resident Magistrate our mouth must be closed when we think his actions should be criticised. In the case we referred to Mr Ward showed " respect of persons," at least such was our impression, and as he distinctly classed the defendant who received the guinea as a business man, the remark of the Guardian as to one being a " professional " man is un* worthy of notice. We should have been more severe upon the writer of the Guardian "local," but for the fact that his connection with that journal ceased on Saturday last, aud he would therefore not be able to reply.