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

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5406, 25 July 1878, Page 2

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

It appears that the members of the Wellington Education Board are not inclined to submit to the verdict, of the jury, by which Mr. Doherty was awarded £SO and costs, for wrongful dismissal. One would have thought that the opinions of the Press, followed by the very pointed advice which the. Minister! of Education gave to a deputation of the Board, would have had. the effect of' making them content to settle matters by paying the damages and costs. It was stated that no action would be taken until the next meeting of the Board, and it is quite possible that the application made in Court yesterday was consequent upon instructions given by the Chairman, who holds very positive views upon tins question ; indeed, it is currently rumored that he has oxpresed a determination to resign if the verdict of the jury should not be upset. Possibly, being desirous to continue tile chief executive officer of the Board, he is anxious to try all steps to defeat Mr. Doherty. As the matter now stands, the application to have the verdict entered for the defendants, on the ground ol misdirection,; is postponed to Wednesday next, and as that is the day on which the Board will meet, it is quite possible that members will exercise their authority and stop litigation. There is no ground for supposing that the verdict of the jury will be set aside, and the present proceedings seem rather like the action of a man who having been beaten at a game on which he has staked money, continues to play, even at a disadvantage, in the hope that chance may enable him to retrieve his loss. This is not a dignified position for a public body to take up, and indeed, even if the Board had a bare , legal right, it would be questionable whether it would be a fair thing, and sound policy to exercise it. The intentionof those whohad the words “gross misbehavior.” inserted in the clause was to provide a means for meeting extreme oases, and it was never contemplated that a master should be ignominibiisly dismissed for offences such as those which it is alleged Mr.' Doherty committed. In determining upon future action this should be borne in mind, and it should also be recollected that a public body should not lay itself open to a charge of being actuated by the petty motive of striving to beat an opponent by prolonging a law suit, just as a private person too often does out of pique at being beaten. Yesterday Mr. Gordon Allan, counsel for the defendant,' objected to the Press commenting on the case; but we cannot discover any reason for keeping silence. It is a good rule to refrain from discussing an action prior to trial, and the reason for this is to prevent either judge or jury being unduly influenced ; but when . the matter to be decided is merely a dry point of law which will be settled by judges in banco, there can be no possible ground for the Press abstaining from commenting upon the conduct of a public body which happens to be a party to a suit. If the application made to the Court is. to be taken as an evidence of an intention to fight the matter at all stages, it is to be hoped that there will be at the next meeting of the Board a considerable majority opposed to such a course being followed. Public opinion-is very strong upon this subject, and in such an instance as this representative men would do well to pay some deference to the wishes of those by whom they were elected.