Poverty Bay Standard. Published Every Evening. GISBORNE: THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1882.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume X, Issue 1179, 19 October 1882, Page 2

Poverty Bay Standard. Published Every Evening. GISBORNE: THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1882.

It has often occurred to us that whilst-our Government schoolmasters are compelled to impart to the children under their control knowledge which although useful in one sense of the term is utterly useless in ninetynine cases out of a hundred to the children in after life. Euclid is, of course, a subject calculated to develope a boy’s brain, but how many ever get over the fifth in the first book known as the “Pons Assinorum?” And how many really thoroughly understand the solution of the proposition? To the legal profession our remarks may not be palatable, but we contend that one of the very best studies our youngsters could be taught in school is that of common law. Nothing is more useful to a man in the Colonics than a knowledge of the Master aud Servants’ Act and the Laudlord and Tenants’ Act, as well as a knowledge of the propei" form in which to draw up an agreement. A little of the time wasted in endeavoring to cram geometry Into a boy’s hei 4 ii devoted to teuObing him a

of the law which is so requisite in every day life would often in future years save him many a six and eightpence, and keep him out of the clutches of “ His Satanic Majesty’s own.” The trouble to any intelligent master would be light and the benefit to be derived great. The stale argument that “the man who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client,” is not now accepted as it was formerly, very many persons having discovered that the man who employs a lawyer is a fool for his pains.

A MOST glaring case of conspiracy has just been brought to light in Wellington. The “ Otago Daily Times ” says:—“The two prisoners Adams (father and daughter), at Wellington, have been found guilty by the Supreme Court Jury of the crime imputed to them —viz., of having conspired to falsely accuse a young man named Longhurst of committing rape upon the female prisoner. Longhurst was two years ago found guilty upon their accusation, sentenced to a term of imprisonment, and also to receive two floggings of 25 lashes each ; and he has, prior to this present trial, actually undergone the two floggings. Now the Supreme Court Jury, by convicting the Adamses, have declared him innocent. The whole affair is indeed a most pitiable one. Adams, according to the evidence, had trumped up the charge with the aid of his child in order to obtain money from Longhurst’s mother, a Mrs. Humphreys. ” The question arises as to how the unfortunate man Longhurst is now to be dealt with, as through the action of Adams and his daughter he has not alone been incarcerated for two years, but has had to undergo fifty lashes. Now it seems to us that the conspiracy having been proven the unfortunate victim has been shown to be innocent. It is not enough, however, to merely release the unfortunate man from custody and send him abroad, not alone with the stigma of having been a gaol bird, but also with having had to suffer that most degarding of all punishments—the lash. Nothing the Government can do will ever heal the lasting inward wound to this unhappy young man’s feelings. Money is, we suppose, the only solatium which can be applied, and this should certainly be given with no stinted hand, so that he may be enabled to seek some foreign shore where it is unlikely his misfortune will ever be known of or cast in his teeth. The case is one which clearly proves that jurymen should be most careful m arriving at their verdicts. Every tittle of evidence should be cautiously weighed, and the utmost attention paid to the statements made, in cases of the nature of the charge preferred against Longhurst. Sympathy L but a poor salve for such an injury as this young man received, and we sincerely hope that in addition to a handsome donation from the Government a subscription list, headed by the convicting judge and the jurymen who found him guilty, will be set on foot.