Untitled

Manawatu Times, Volume III, Issue 50, 3 April 1878, Page 2

A correspondent signing himself " Observer." has taken us to task for our strictures upon Constable Gillespie, and he says "had you watched the proceedings of the Licensing Court, you would probably have seen how inconsisteut are your remarks with the facts of the case." "We can inform the gentleman that we did watch the case, being present iri Court from beginning to end, otherwise we would not have considered ourselves competent to write impartially upon the matter. We dp; not know whether our correspondent exercised a like /discretion before rushing into print, but certainly from the tone of ; his epistle, we should be led to a contrary bonclusion, and inclined to infer that the signature " Observer" was a misnomer, -and that his inforination was second hand. He will be pleased to bear m niind that we did not champion Mr Owen's cause — as he does Constable Gillespie's. Our Qensor writes, why. did riot the: landlord' " challenge the whole of the constable's, Witnesses ?" Had he been m Court, he -certainly would not have sought such information, for he Would have then known that counsel for the defence did challenge the whole of the constable's witnesses, the whole being two, produced m support pf; the loss of the money. Again, we are charged with being unfair for impugning "those charges when you 'know' that the opportunity for testing them has gone.'' The foregoing is so absurdly ridiculous that we do not know what it is supposed to mean, igr it surely cannot he supposed that we were to interfere ' m the prosecution or defence iri court, and consequently could riot make our comments until the case had concluded. Our; experience ha's led us to know that someL thing more than the bare assertion of aL prosecuting constable -is necessary to prove a charge, and perfer accepting' wh at reall y did take place, to what might have taken place. Constable Gillespie might or j might riot have been able to prove Ms charge ; that lie did. not is what we condemned; and what we must still condemn, the opinion of "Observer" tO the contrary." Our correspondent seeks to make a deal of capital out of the " forbearance " exhibited^ but we must confess the effort made 7by Constable;; Gillespie^iri the absence of any witness of his own^ to make eviderice called on behalf of Mr. Owen adverse to his case, and by. a side-wind prove gambling — was jvery much unlike what. is generally known as forbearance. We have said before, and we reiterate _ : no W; that no {police constable should, be mL a-^position to distribute fear or f_vor ; * and that such grievous charges as were contained m the report could have been proved, and were not, is the severest censure tho constable could have placed upon himself. We regret that "Observer" cannot agree with our remarks, but as our motto b,as sL-vays been " the greatest good to greatest number," we must. even forfeit his coriimendatiori to secure what we consider the welfare of ..Jsxe community. Our previous article -*tfk% penned m affair, impartial .spirit. '<$fe do not dai m to be: infallible, and "it is within the range of^ssibilityithat; it may no|; have been as just as we intendediters'jibutd have been, J "That bur motives were sincere/ and liirbiassed by feeling fbr either sides; ye bodly consequently the iJeriiarks of '^Observer* "fall perfectly harmless where they were intended /to Hurt,