RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

New Zealander, Volume 2, Issue 86, 23 January 1847, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Tuesday, January \9lh, 1847. Korakorau, a native, belonging to Puka Puka, near Orake, was brought before the Court on a charge of ltrcany, preferred against him by another native, named Poa Poa. Poa Poa was examined, and stated that lie resided at Puka Puka ; when lie left that place on Monday, there was in his box the sum of£l 165.; the prisoner was the only person in the village when he left ; as he was returning home, he met the prisoner coming to Auckland ; and when he arrived at home, he found that his box had been broken open, fend his money taken away. Witness charged the prisoner with having taken his money, which he did not deny. The prisoner had bought articles of clothing with thejnoney from Mr. Asher, which he gave up to the prosecutor ? and the articles, consisting of a pair of blankets, shirt, trousers, cap, braces, and a piece of soap, were produced in Court Mr. Asher gave evidence that the prisoner came to his house on Monday, between 12 and 1 o'clock, and purchased the articles produced in Court, for the sum sum of 355. The prisoner voluntarily confessed that he stole the money from the chest of Poa Poa; and he was sentenced by the Court to two month's imprisonment, and to be kept at hard labor, in Auckland Gaol.

Thursday, January 2\st. Taipari v. Still. The complainant, a Native Chief of Tauranga, claimed the price of 100 pigs and 400 baskets of potatoes, delivered by him to the defendant, in part payment of the cutter Kokopu, which he (the complainant) agreed to purchase from tho defendant. Some time after the delivery of the pigs and potatoes, the cutter came into the possession of Taipari, who was permitted by Still to retain her for about two months. At the end of that time, Still borrowed the vessel from Taipari, for the purpose of taking her on a trading trip to Whitianga, and thence to Auckland, assuring Taipari that he would repair her, and then restore her to him. Taipari gent a European, named Jones, and some natives in the vessel, for the purpose of bringing her back ; but, when the vessel reached Whitianga, Mill told Jones that he was determined to keep the vessel. Still subsequently sold the vessel, to another native chief, and never paid anything to Taipara for the pigs and potatoes actually delivered. It appeared in evidence that the greater part of the pigx delivered were bush pigs, and the testimony was extremely conflicting as to the wholesale value of potatoes and bush pigs at Tauranga. In several matters, too, of minor importance, relating to the details of the agreement, and the conduct of the parties under it, the evidence was conflicting, though the principal parts of the case were fully made out. Tlifi Resident Magistrate, in delivering judgment, said that from the evidence adduced by the defendant himself, it appeared that he had sold the vessel to the Native, iVom whom he received in part payment £37 12s. worth of pork and potatoes, and in retaining her afterwards he merely acted as trustee for the Native owner. The defendant subsequently, however, sold the cutter, for JC7S, to another party. He had thus received in all the sum of £112 12s. for the vessel. From the evidence of one of his own witnesses it appeared that the vessel, at the time the plaintiff bought her, was not worth more than £60. So that this amount, being the vajuc of the vessel, when deducted from the entire sum 4j|ceived by the defendant, left a balance to be paid to two plaintiff of £52 12s. Judgment for the plaintiff accordingly, with costs. Mr. Donnelly appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Bartley for the defendant. [Before the proceedings, Mr. Donnelly asked the bench whether he would be permitted to state the case of the native, prior to the examination of the witnesses. The Resident Magistrate replied, that he would make it a fixed rule in his Court, in all civil cases, to limit the interference of counsel on both sides to the examination of the witnesses, and that he would not permit them either to state a case formally, or to speak to evidence ; and, we believe, that there is not an individual in the community, with tho exception of the lawyers, who will dispute the wisdom of this excellent regulation. For,

in a Court in which the Judge is bound to decide by the equity and conscience of the case, and in whioh any testimony is admissible, provided only it be relevant, the speeches of counsel could have no other effect than the injurious one of taking np time, and disturbing the judgment of the Magistrate. A well chosen Resident Magistrate is the real security to the public for the efficient administration of justice in these Courts. ; and we think that the experience of Mr. Beckham, and his natural good sense, are likely to give satisfaction to the public in the discharge of his neW, and sometimes critical duties.— Ed. N. Z.]