POLICE V. COOKSEY.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XIV, Issue 168, 16 July 1879, Page 2

POLICE V. COOKSEY.

Extract from New Zealander, July 10, 1879. It is rather a pity that the same tests that are applied to Civil Servants of almost every degree requiring them to pass an examination before appointment are not extended to honorary magistrates prior to their being gazetted. Were this the case, there would be far fewer extraordinary decisions than we repeatedly hear of as emanating from some of the Justices of the Peace in different parts of the Colony. For many years past partisanship has been rewarded by conferring this honor, in a very large proportion of those now on the list service of some kind or other to the Ministry of the day has been rewarded in this way. In many cases intelligence has been altogether ignored as one of the essentials in a Justice, and hence most extraordinary judgtneuts. We could quote several that have occurred in this city, and the papers in all parts of the Colony teem with them. As an example, a case recently was heard in Nelson, which shows, in the first place, that amateur magistrates ought not, as a rule, to be trusted alone ; and in the' next, that the recent disorganisation of the police force of the colony is producing ita fruits. It seems that a man named Cooksey and another were standing in one of the main streets in the above city and indulging in a little badinage, better known as "chaff," when a constable came up to them, accused Cooksey of using obscene language, and finally locked him up. Ou being brought before the honorary magistrates the next morning, the charge utterly failed, and the case was dismissed. So fur so good, but the story is incomplete. It appears that the constable was not satisfied with remonstrance, but at the outset pushed Cooksey who was standing on the edge of the' kerb and threw him down. On rising, be retaliated by giving the constable another push, which laid him on the broad of his back. After that Cooksey was taken to the lock-up, and when there was thrown down by the arresting and other constables. When prostrate, the former battered his (Cooksey's) head on the stone floor, and subsequently, as he was escorting him to the cell, seized him by the whiskers and banged his head against the wall. After this the constable charged Cookßey with assaulting him, and though these facts were clearly proved by independent witnesses, the Bench, consisting of Messrs Pollock and Dodson, fined the defendant 10s and costs. According to the report from which we quote, in the Nelson Evening Mail, these wiseacres remarked "that the fine would have been much heavier, but that they were of opinion that the interference of the constable was uncalled for." Mr Atkinson, who appeared for I Cooksey, pointed out that the policeman un- 1 justifiably interfered with and assaulted his i client to commence with, and that he did no more in resenting it than was perfectly legal ; the charge of obscene language waa proved to be baseless, and that really there was no offence. Here then is an instance where a respectable citizen is first charged; with and,

arrested for an offence that be did not commit, he is assaulted and retaliates, be is subsequently brutally treated, and as one charge failed he is brought up on another, and to crown all, the Bench fine him ten shillings and costs. Truly the public may pray to be delivered from honorary magistrates. Comment on such a case would be thoroughly superfluous, and as it occurred in another part of the Colony, we should not have referred to it but in order to draw the attention of the Legislature to the promiscuous manner in which Magistrates are appointed, with a faint hope that a change for the better may be initiated. There are many equally sagacious individuals writing J.P. after their names in the Colony, and it is too bad that the liberties of the people should be entrusted to any but efficient hands, to people who are not only above suspicion as far as money matters are concerned, but have sufficient intelligence to discharge the duties of the responsible office they undertake. Money Is a poor test of fitness for the magistracy, but it has been accepted hitherto as an all-sufficient one, greatly, on many occasions, to the miscarriage of justice. The whole question of the appointment of magistrates is one that might with great advantage be inquired into by Parliament, and if a purgation of the existing roll followed, it would tend greatly towards making a justiceship what it ought to be, a deserved honor where bestowed, and not what it is now, a dignity conferred on mammon, or the unjustifiable reward of political intrigue.