AUCKLAND.

New Zealand Spectator and Cook's Strait Guardian, Volume I, Issue 24, 22 March 1845, Page 3

AUCKLAND.

The following is a splendid instance of the present futile system of preserving respect for justice : — A young native Chief of a Manakau tribe was brought before the Police on Thursday last, under the following circumstances — His name is William — Mr. Mitchell, of the , firm of Gibson and Mitchell, Shortland Crescent, in the course of that morning, missed a parcel containing twelve gross of screws, which he supposed had been misplaced by his shopman, — but in the course of the day Mr. Mitchell received information from Mr. Watson, a carpenter, that two maories were hawking screws about the town, which it was hardly likely they would be able to do, honestly ! — Upon this information a search was made for the offenders, and the prisoner was apprehended in High Street, by the prosecutor. William was instantly recognized as having been a lounger in the shop that morning, — the greater part of the property was found beneath his blanket, although some of it had been already disposed of ; a great out cry and a struggle now ensued — the prisoner attempting to escape, and surrounded as he was by his own people, and having the advantage of being able instantly to throw off his blanket, and leave no hold for his captors, it was no easy matter to secure him, for he is an athletic young man of twenty or thereabouts. Now arose a great disturbance among the friends of the chicf — who threatened all sorts of violence, such as pulling down the jail, and firing the Supreme" Court. In this emergency a file of thirty soldiers were sent for to protect the sacred precincts of the Law Court, and his Excellency the Governor made his appearance, on horseback, among them, exhorting the maories to peace, and promising them protection. In the meantime the prisoner was put to the bar before the Police Magistrate, and the modern Oliver Cromwell, — (who rejoices in the name of " Protector.") The possession of the stolen goods was proved upon poor William, but he called a younger brother to show, that they had been given to him by another maoii boy, for six-pence, and that that innocent individual, whom he did not know, had picked them up in the street ! After this pretty Old Bailey defence, which of course is illustrative of the simplicity of maori character, and its necessary demand upon instruction and forbearance — the magistrate acquitted the prisoner on his trial, and convicted the uitness his brother against whom no charge whatever was laid. This has been altogether a most anomalous proceeding. — It is the first conviction of a maori under what is called the Native Exemption Act — by which a native may plunder to any amount and get off by the payment of Twenty Pounds at the most ! The act declares also, that jour times the amount stolen should be the penalty, provided always the penally upon a native, should not be more than twenty pounds. In this case twice the penalty only is imposed, for Mr. Mitchell after swearing to the property, proved its value, at twenty-four shillings, and the fine was only made forty -eight ! But we have yet to speak of the strangest part of the proceeding. The injudicious interference of his Excellency the Governor must appear most obvious *o all — when before, in the history of any part of the world, did the Governor of a colony, in a case of mere petty larceny, take this prominent and persevering part ? Is it not the business of the Magistracy to administer the Law without interference ? Again ! — The Protector made wry faces (as his namesake was wont to do,) upon the conviction of the maori chief, and either paid the fine or promised to be security for it ! ! and so ended this transaction ! — anothei link in the chain of Exeter Hall fatuity. A practical man would have said to Mr. Mitchell, " take back the remainder of your property, and take compensation for what is missing, — at present the power of the law is inefficient for its own most sacred purposes ;" — but in this case we see every possible demonstration made, without any purpose of fulfillment, and the culprit after all let loose to encourage others to do the same or worse ! We should like to know from what source this fine was paid, or to what channel of public service it is phargeable ? If his Excellency disembursed it irom his private pocket, he will sooh under the " Native Exemption Act " require all the revenues of the Graftons', and the Stuarts' ,tQ boot. — Auckland Times,