Poverty Bay Standard. Published Every Wednesday & Saturday SATURDAY JANUARY 15, 1881.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume IX, Issue 909, 15 January 1881, Page 3

Poverty Bay Standard.

Published Every Wednesday & Saturday SATURDAY JANUARY 15, 1881.

“ JFe shall sell to no man Justice or Right; We shdlt ding ~fd noman Justice or Right; “ We shall defer to no man Justice or Right."

Wi wonder "if North’s abscondment, with his unlawfully gotten gains of near £5OOO, will teach any of his victims wisdom ? Will the credulous, and over-confiding votaries of illegal speculation, cease to place faith in men who yearly amass thousands of pounds of the Colony’s earnings for their own benefit ? Yes. Even now we can hear the banging to of the proverbial stable doors. The lesson taught to the Colony by this man, will serve its purpose if it be profited by. But will it produce any lasting good effect ? There is a 1 chapter of the profouridest philosophic teaching in this latest of gigantic frauds; blit it is one that has been read of, annually, for years past, but never taken to heart with that seriousness, which has laid hold of the memory with a tenacity of purpose causing dupes to decrease instead of multiply. Instances of a kindred nature, but of less magnitude, have periodically come to view; where, absconders, or defaulters in some shape or other, have openly evaded theft obligations, because they knew they incurred no legal responsibility, the perpetrators have added impunity to dishonesty, because they were conscious of the law not being willing to touch them. But —even allowing that the law does say, “If “ you will enter into gambling transac- “ tions, you do so at your own risk, “ and you must take consequences “ without redress ” —this is a somewhat anomalous state of things. Suppose a man had stolen this money from North ; or had entered North’s house, at dead of night, and knocked him on the head; or had forged North’s name to get possession of it; assuredly that man would have to answer for his criminal act, either as a thief, a burglar, or a forger. Indeed we may go a bit further, and hazard the opinion that if any section of the public press, had warned people against North’s dishonesty; and advised them not to trust their money to a man who would probably make away with it, the writer would have rendered himself liable to an action for libel; and yet,, according to the law, as we believe, has often been laid down, North himself may steal that very money and go on his road rejoicing—possibly, too, after receiving damages, at the hands of a jury, for defamation of character !

We do not enquire thus, for the purpose of solely defending the principle of these monster “ congratulations ” “ consultations,” “ sweeps,” or by what name, soever, they may be called—although, if in the hands of honest men, we do not see anything wrong in them—but, chiefly that public attention may be directed to the advisability of petitioning the Colonial Legislature to amend the statute Taw in such a manner as will make this class of crime, crime, and nothing else; and, as such, punishable. Or if the common law of England allows such villains to go free, then let ',‘ r sweeps,” and the like be “ legalised ” in the same way as the “ totalisator” has been in some places. Political, and ethical sages tell us that for the law to take cognizance of any turpitude in connection with these matters, would be to indirectly sanction the vice of gambling; and that to punish a rascal who steals the accumulated cash of thousands would be construed into an oblique approval of the purpose for which it was to be applied. But surely we, the public, not savants in legal lore, can express a doubt, void of tu quoque quibble, whether the withholding of the strong arm of the law from its operation on such villains, is not a direct method of offering a premium to dishonesty, and the chaining of Nemesis an Unequivocal assurance to the wrong-doer, that this kind of crime will not be punished, nor overtaken.

But to return to the question more immediately affecting the present circumstance. North’s default will deal a blow, inferentially, at the integrity of others, who, like North, have established themselves in public confidence. Nqw let us reason the thing out. And to help to do which, we would ask, without the slightest implied, or suggested imputation on existing “ Consultees,” is it not unreasonable ; is it not unbusiness-like, to place sums of money varying from £l,OOO to £6,000 or £B,OOO, in any man’s hands, even under ordinary circumstances, without any security whatever, and for a period extending over some six months ? The best of men are mortal, and open to temptation ; and, unfortunately, it is these “ best of men ” —men on whom the voice of calumny has never breathed—men whose known circumstances, and tried integrity pl ace them above suspicion—that often succumb either to sudden necessity, or the preying allurements of a possession they cannot withstand. The initial error is the first step taken —the ill-advised consent of an honorable man (and the more honorable he is, the greater the error) to place himself in such an equivocal position before the public ; and the second, the subscribers who help him to do it. Not to mention names, we believe some of these “ Consultees ” do not place .these monies to their own credit, out appoint two or more trustees, in whose names a bank account is opened, and whose signatures are necessary to its being operated on. True, this is only a lessening of the evil, and not a removal of it. But it is far less likely that, say, three trustworthy members of a community will act in such amiable collusion, as to defraud the public once in a decade, than that one such rascal as North will crop up annually, if left to his own devices. In fact, some guarantee of that kind, will, in future, have to be part and parcel of the conditions under which sweeps will be supported. And it is pretty certain that, as possibilities cannot be set aside, and people are grinding and gnashing their teeth, if owners of existing svteeps have not their patrons’ money so guarded, they may, look for no further support.