A QUERY?

Patea Mail, Volume IV, Issue 312, 13 April 1878, Page 2

A QUERY?

(To the Editor of the Patea Mail.)

Sir, —I am of opinion that a little more consistency in the decisions in the R.M. Court, would be somewhat more satisfactory. Two persons were summoned for aiding and abetting in the Patea Handicap Sweep. One Was interested in the result, the other w r as not—having no ticket in it. Both performed precisely similar offices on the night of the drawing. The hearing of the one, who was not interested in the result, came off on Thursday,- the 4th day of April,, and he denied the charge, or rather, left it for the prosecution to prove him guilty. Nevertheless, a fine of os and costs was inflicted, inasmuch as said party was there ‘‘ countenancing” the drawing. The precisely similar case came off on Thursday, 11th instant, which latter was dismissed !

• To what is this strange ‘and contradictory judgment attributable ? Is it to the Courtly eloquence of the “profession,” or arc we to suppose that the R.M.’s opinions have undergone a change during the interval between the hearing of the cases. If so, it would not be amiss if steps were taken to recoup the fines. Certainly, the one point blank denied the charge, and was let off. The other left it to be proved against him, and was fined for “ countenancing” the drawing. Why was not the other also fined for “ countenancing?”—l am, &c., AVICTIM.