THE O’MALLEY MANSLAUGHTER CASE.

Patea Mail, Volume IX, Issue 1137, 11 January 1884, Page 2

THE O’MALLEY MANSLAUGHTER CASE.

A Wellington jury has just distinguished itself. Some time ago, it will be remembered, a man named O’Malley was killed while working in a tunnel at the Kniwara railway works. A» inquest was held, and a verdict of manslaughter was returned against Edward O’M'dloy, the foreman of the contract. Edward O’Malley, who was the uncle of the deceased, did not make any attempt at defence. In fact he admitted his negligence and freely blamed hims lf as being the eauso of his nephew’s death. In due course he, was committed (or trial at the Supreme Court at Wellington on a charge of manslaughter, At Monday’s sitting of the (Jouil the Grand Jury tluew out the hill against O'Malley, and accordingly he was not even asked to surrender to his hail. Now docs not this S'-em an extraordinary proceeding. Leaving out all question of sympathy with O’Malley, who has no doubt suffered anguish through his own neglect, {hero is the fact that he was committed to trial upon a certain charge which ho oven admits ho is guilty of, and yet the Grand Jury say there is no true bill, no charge to answer. Young O’Malley was killed like, a rat in a hole ami the fault was admitted ; an intelligent Grand Jury say there is no fault to answer for. The wonder is that they did not say as well that O’Malley had not been killed at all. Truly (ho ways of juries are past comprehension.