The New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 1878.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5328, 25 April 1878, Page 2

The New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 1878.

The irrepressible Mr. Barton and his charges against-the administrators of the law, from the Chief‘Justice to the police, still form the subject matter of a good deal of discussion, both in the columns of the Press and amongst the public. If Mr. Barton gain nothing more, he will, at all events, add to his notoriety. In reference to certain charges which he has made of misconduct of the police, some additional correspondence will be found in another portion of our columns today, As is usually the case, the learned counsel having made his accusations, when called upon to furnish proof, backs out of the'difficulty, and declines to go on with his case, whilst he by no means retracts what he has said. We presume that Mr. Barton believes the statements made to him about the alleged ill-treat-ment of prisoners in the lock-up are true; but unless he can produce some evidence beyond mere heresay, and that at secondhand, he must be lawyer enough to know that a good many people will not give credence to it. Nor would it be right that they should. Mr. Barton has made ,a very grave charge indeed, and he certainly should give some fuller explanation of the matter than he has hitherto condescended to do. A man who publicly makes charges of the kind is usually considered bound either to prove what he says or to retract it. Mr. Barton adopts neither alternative. His Worship the Mayor, as chief magistrate of the. borough, has adopted a very right and proper course in bringing officially under the notice of the Minister of Justice the statements Mr. Barton has made in reference to the police, with a view to their being inquired into. Inquiries have been made by the Inspector of Police, which have not tended to throw very much light on the matter. But if the offences alleged to have been committed did actually occur, Mr. Barton, we apprehend, could, if he would, produce satisfactory evidence of the fact, and it certainly does seem to us that it rests with M r - Barton to take the necessary steps to have the matter thoroughly sifted. He says that disclosing, the name of his informant would have the effect of thoroughly smothering the matter, and as his custom is he has another fling at the Supreme Court. But notwithstanding his insinuations and charges against that and other legal tribunals, we believe that every moans would he accorded to him-of proving his case if he would only lay the matter properly before the authorities. If it is true that “ a certain'policeman who possessed authority had, in cases where prisoners had been locked up in a cell, gone -in and handcuffed, them, and then struck them with his fists and kicked them in a brutal

manner ;” and “ that other members of the force stood by afraid -to interfere, because the officer so; aoting'-was in authority it is monstrous- that the offender should be allowed!© go unpunished. And if .such an occurrence never look place the author of the statement made by Mr. Barton should undoubtedly be exposed. As we observed in a recent article, Mr. Barton’s repeated attacks on the mode in which justice is administrated here, and his battles in court, are calculated to do a great deal of injury. If Mr. Barton knows of abuses and will seek to rectify them, he may do good, but making all sorts of charges and refusing to substantiate them is a mode of conduct quite at variance with ideas of fair play. We hope that the authorities will see their way to compel Mr. Barton to prove the grave charges he has made or els© acknowledge that ho is unable to produce any evidence in support of them.