PUBLIC MEETING.

Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle, Volume I, Issue 6, 16 April 1842, Page 23

PUBLIC MEETING.

A public meeting was held on Tuesday evening last, at Miller's Tavern, to take into consideration the conduct of the magistrates relative to the conviction of William Murray, which was noticed in our last paper. W. C. Young, Esq., in the Chair : The Chairman opened the proceedings. He observed that, in meeting for the purpose of expressing opinion on a matter of such moment, they were exercising the undoubted and familiar privilege of speaking.freely upon matters touching the general welfare in assemblies of 'the people. He dwelt at some length on, the unquestionable necessity for obeyingtHe law, even if it .were not just, so long as it was law : bat strongly advocated

the necessity and justice of protesting and petitioning, nnd using all lawful means, for changing the law when it was unjust. Respect was due to the office of the magistrate— but that unjust decisions from the bench would weaken confidence in the administration of justice. Harmony and good feeling were of great import, but public liberty was of greater stilL He earnestly warned his fellow citizens against the insidious nature of arbitrary power, and would uphold the absolute necessity for crushing it in the very shell. He briefly stated the facts of the case, and concluded by inviting all to come forward and express their opinions freely and without fear, as they courted inquiry, and assembled not to condemn, but to discuss. On the resolutions passed at the former meeting being read, Mr. Richardson observed that the circumstance which gave rise to the third resolution, had been denied by the gentleman to whom it referred. This he felt bound to state, as it was partly on his authority that the resolution in question had been adopted. Mr. Duffy moved the first resolution : — " That this meeting cordially approves of the spirit of the resolutions adopted at a meeting held on the 7th instant, and earnestly deprecates the decision of the magistrates in the case of William Murray, as being calculated to weaken the authority of the laws, and destroy the confidence of the people in those by whom the law is administered." I Seconded by E. J. Wakefield, Esq. The second resolution was proposed by the Hon Mr. Byng, who pointed out the necessity for uniting in coses of this description, where the individual to whom the injustice was considered to be done was prevented by obvious considerations from pressing his case upon the notice of the public;,, and urged, in quoting the well-known words of ■' Nelson, the importance to all that none should shrink from performing their duty in a matter which so nearly concerned -the interests of all: — " That this meeting distinctly disclaims any desire' to raise dissension in this settlement, and is opposed to the formation of factions in a young community; yet, without questioning the high character of the magistrates of this district, and with every disposition to support them in the exercise of just authority, this meeting is of opinion that the inhabitants of Nelson would prove themselves ill qualified for the exercise of the franchise with which they are so shortly to be invested, if they were to exhibit fear or indifference when their rights are threatened by an act of injustice to a , private citizen." Seconded by Mr. Budge. Mr. M'Shank rose to say that he was unable to reconcile the circumstance that, in the same re- ' solution the high character of the magistrates should be conceded, and at the same time that they should be charged with an act of injustice. And further, thai as yet the public had not had the means of forming an opinion on the subject. All they had learnt of it was from the columns of the Nelson Examiner, which had given but an imperfect account of the transaction. He felt assured that, if it were the fact, as had been stated in the resolutions adopted at the previous meeting, that the magistrates had fined Murray for one offence as a punishment for another, there would have been more public indignation manifested. After a few observations by Mr. Budge, Mr. Richardson moved the third resolution : — "That Messrs. [names to be filled up] be requested to prepare a protest for signature and publication, which shall state that the aforesaid decision is considered harsh and unjust, because a penalty was inflicted upon a citizen for an offence which he had committed in common with many others, in order that he might be punished for another offence, of which the law could take no notice, and the commission of which the evidence adduced did not go to prove." Mr. R. proceeded to say that the present meeting had certainly not been called for the purpose of questioning the character of the magistrates, but for the purpose of expressing their dissent from a principle which had been adopted by the "Great Unpaid" in England, and from which the worst consequences had resulted, that of punishing a, man for one offence, because the law did not enable them td do so for another. He said that it did not at all follow that the private character of the magistrates was impugned by a questioning of the justice of their decisions. It was quite possible that the principle which they were here met to oppose, might be looked upon by the magistrates as expedient to be adopted. He differed from them ; and he believed that he followed the higher and better path when he dropped the expedient, for what he considered the true and the just. But to differ from a man was one thing, to impugn his character another. Mr. Richardson further stated that, in reply to Mr. M* Shane's expressed doubt that the magistrates should have adopted the course in question, he could say that the defendant Murray was distinctly told from the bench that such was the case ; that, being unlicensed, he could not be informed against as keeping a disorderly house, and therefore the present mode of punishing him had been adopted. Seconded by Mr. Moore. Mr. M'Shane again rose, and after making a few observations on the first three resolutions passed at the former meeting, commented at some length on the fourth, and stated, that unless it was the wish of that meeting that this colony should declare itself independent of Great Britain, he considered the resolution a most improper one. The magistrates were appointed in conformity with the constitution of the mother country ; and whatever opinion individuals might entertain as to the manner in which they were appointed, he considered it most unwise to do anything which would tend to subvert the authority of the magistrates appointed, an effect which he considered the resolution in question was likely to produce. The Chairman rose to state that there must be some mistake as to the object of the meeting. It was certainly never intended to censure the private . character of the magistrates. Had it been soyhe— would never have been a party to agitating ihe matter. He entertained, and he was sure' bis friends entertained, great respect for the magistrates. For one, of them he entertained /more r than respect — a sincere regard,, ,T J his,wasja.flues- ' tion of public interest ; a jnattet in whichaupnett ■ were bound to speak out freely. The magisteate* ri might decide unjustly, and yet' their motives of as ' disinterested, as honest as 'possible. In reply to "'

Mr. M 1 Shane's remarks respecting the resolutions, there was no desire to set the existing laws at defiance : bat undoubtedly he was of opinion that the Magistracy ought to be popularly constituted. But at the same time, it was never contemplated in using the words " arbitrary power," to complain of the magistrates exercising lawfully the powers delegated to them. The arbitrary power complained of, was die power of wresting the law to serve a special purpose — the power of convicting a man for an offence of which he had received no previous notice. This was the arbitrary power of which they were most justly jealous, and which made it necessary for them to unite in common in order to prevent a dangerous precedent ; and that they might, when iirat they saw the very germ of oppression, stand up together in defence of their rights as colonists, and for their liberties as citizens. The following gentlemen were then nominated to draw up the protest : — Messrs. Poynter, Spence, Duffy, Young, Byng, Richardson, and Budge.