AN INQUIRY UPON AN INQUEST.

Manawatu Times, Volume III, Issue 32, 5 April 1879, Page 2

AN INQUIRY UPON AN INQUEST.

Two inquests have been held upon fires during tlie past week, to, one of which more especially we wish to make some i reference m this issue, leaving our re- • marks ! upon' the other until our next. With regard, to the first — that held upon the Palmerston Mill,— we hold, that although the formality of an inquiry was gone through, and the time 6." seventeen persons occupied for fo'ii'r ' hours,' there was really no coronial investigation, inasmuch as three-fourths' of the supposed jury never visited the ' scene of the fire as jurymen. After the Coroner had called over the list of names, he informed those present that was necessary toy the jury to visit the scene of the fire before proceeding to take the evidence. He then hastily left for the mill, — which was about threequarters of a mile distant — followed by about six of. the eighteen persons summoned, the remainder stopping m the room until they had been sworn m as jurors. We believe during his absence the Coroner took legal advice as to whether citizens did not, become jurymen from the moment the verbal notice : for attendance was given, but finding the decision was not favorable to that view, arid that the contumacious twelve had not been legally members of his court — which view was evidently upheld by the various written authorities appealed to! on his return — he very wisely smothered, his vengeance, and informed those present that it was not very material that a jury should see either a body or the site of a fire. Notwithstanding the high official portion of l)r. Kocksthow, we beg to differ with him upon this point, and may draw attention to his first statement— that it was necessary. JNow, if ifc were not nc.essary, then we say lhat to cause | eighteen men to travel a mile aod waste their time for which there Was nc reason, was a gross absurdity ; if it were necessary, then twelve of the subsequently swocn jury did not comply with the provisions, and the inquiry was a farce ; but whatever way it is looked atthe Coroner is convicted of a glaring attempt to interpret the Act to suit his own action. Having thus given i)y. RocKSTaow's reading of the manner m which he should perform hi,s duties, we will now quote from the " New Zealand Justice of the Peace," to show that, that gentleman, either wilfully orignorant.lv, violated the conditions to be observed i at all inquests, and departed from the specified procedure to serve his own ends. Section 1137. — Tlie foreman is then sworn singly, to inquire, &c, touching the death of the person on wliose body they shall have the view, the rest of the jury being first warned to attend to the oath : and then the rest of .the jury e'thcr shall at once, or by threes and fours, be sworn to observe the same oath. Section 1138. — The Coroner then gire.. the jury a brief charge, acquainting th em with the purport of the inquiry, and proceeds along with them to view the body. So'dtiott U39— The t#w must be had by

| tie Coroner and Jury at the same time ; and tho examination should be minute and careful, and of the whole body. Prom this it will be seen that it is not only necessary that the jury should view the matter upon which the inquiry is to bo held, but it is imperative that the inspection be when the jury as a whole are together and m presence of the coroner. This being the ease, then the Coroner's slatement that it was not necessary to inspect the scene was incorrect ; and also his assertion that as most of the jury were resident m Palmerston, and had seen the locale of the lire at some time, was decidedly wrung, not being m the presence of the Coroner. But, perhaps, it may be urged that the inquiry under consideration being pn a tire, was not bound by the same regulations. Unfortunately for such an argument, the 1173 rd section, which treats unon " Inquests on Fires," is most specific upon the point, iv the following manner : — The proceedings at and connected with the inquest m such a case, will be, as far as they are applicable, the same as on an inquest on a dead body, and the inquest ought to be he,ld at some convenient place near the scene of the fire, so that the jury may havo. a view thereof. In fact, so. specific is the Act upon the necessity of the body or matter being inspected by the jury, that a coroner's inquisition. can. only proceed super visum corporis, that is, upon view of the body ; aud, therefore, it was enacted that there could be no inquest where no body was found, br where the body wa,s so putrefied that a view would be of no. use. When a person is missing, and there are grounds for. suspecting that he has been killed or illegally dealt with, or when, a body has become so putrefied that a view would be useless, the ordinary magistrates are the proper persons before whom proceedings should be instituted. From this it is positively apparent that without a view of the body — or scene of the fire, which is equivalent — coroners' jurors have no powers, nor cannot exercise any functions. Even had Coroner Eocicstrow been ignorant of the Act under' which he was officiating, before the inquest, he certainly cannot shelter himself under that pretext for his subsequent action, inasmuch as before proceeding to open the inquiry he despatched a mounted messenger for the Act bearing upon the subject, and made himself acquainted with its contents iv the juryroom. Still/in the face of the information theh acquired, he proceeded with the investigation, perfectly aware, that twelve cf the eighteen jurymen had not viewed the ' V body." By such a proceeding, sooner than acknowledge that he had made a mistake, he vitiated the whole proceedings, and robbed eighteen citizens of half a day's time, when m his heart he' knew his Court was not properly constituted, and the whole proceedings a mockery, a delusion, and a farce. And now, with a short reference to a piece of tyranny, rather than stupidity, we will close this article, leaving our remarks regarding the second inquiry to our next issue. The second sub-section of Section 1130 of the Act of 1867 directs the constable to summon "a certain irumber, not being less than twelve, but m a foot-note to the " Justiceof Peace " it is stated that as m tliinly-populated districts it has been sometimes found impracticable to get twelve jurors together, a signed inquisition with a, smaller number is allowable.' The Act says that the verdict should be, where practicable, the verdict of twelve, at least, and Dr. •Rockstrow has seized upon that apparent authority for a greater number to swell the jurors m his Courts to half as much again. Supposing that the Coroner's. Court on Tuesday had been properly constituted, it was a gross piece of tyranny '^o detain six jurors more than were necessary; but under the circumstances, and knowing th. a t the proceedings were null and void, the action of tl^e Coroner was of a nature for which he should be taken to taslc'by the Government and the people whom he has fooled.