South Canterbury Times. SATURDAY, DEC. 6, 1879.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2093, 6 December 1879, Page 2

South Canterbury Times. SATURDAY, DEC. 6, 1879.

A Case of assault which was heard before the Resident Magistrate yesterday ernated no small interest m Timaru and it affords, we think, material for scriousreflcctionrather than amusement. A stalwart farmer encounters a commission agent in the public street, and without any apparent provocation, subjects the latter to a somewhat ignominious punishment, the weapon used being his foot. The charming effrontery of the offender is materially aggravated by the circumstance that the punishment is administered in a public place, aud in the presence of numerous spectators, including a constable. The assault is promptly followed by the arrest of the perpetrator, and the demands of the outraged law arc satisfied by the infliction of a moderate fine. In the meantime, however, an inquisitive public have been investigating cause and effect, certain transactions that preceded the assault, are related in and outside the courthouse, and sympathy is elicited, not for the kicked, but for the kicker. The result is that instead of the breach of the peacebeingjscvcrcly discountenanced as one might expect from a law-abiding community, the law-breaker becomes the hero of the hour, a subscription is raised in his behalf, and the amount he has been out of pocket is refunded to him in the shape of a public testimonial. The amount is not very large, and the presentation would have but little significance, were it not that it is presented, not because the defendant in the case really wanted it, but as a mark of widespread approbation. It is true that demonstrations of this kind are very rare in New Zealand — and that in Timaru such a thing as rewarding a transgressor of the law is almost unprecedented. This very circumstance, however, renders the outburst of public feeling in a direction antagonistic to law, order, and public propriety, a subject of uneasiness. It is impossible to look serenely on the prospect of farmers with standing grievances taking the law into theirjown hands, and kicking their agents in broad daylight in the public streets. We do not suppose that such a practice is at all likely to become prevalent, but we submit that the manifestations arc dangerous. Public sympathy, in this instance, has inserted the thin end of a wedge, which driven home, would result in the Americanising of our social system, and the introduction, as a weapon in disputes, of the bowieknife and revolver. We do not suppose that anyone in this part of New Zealand would like to sec Lynch law in full swing, taking the place of a halting or imperfect administration of justice. Yet this is what public sympathy with an exhibition of physical force, such as was witnessed yesterday, when a gentleman well-known in commercial circles, was treated as if he had been a football, must inevitably lead to. It is true that there may have been provocation, and the loss of a year’s crops, comprising £4OO worth of grain at the hands of an impecunious agent who sticks to principal as well as commission is undoubtedly strong provocation, but that does not justify the modus operandi. If a fraud has been committed the statutes of the colony should afford adequate redress, and in that case sympathy with physical aggression would be inexcusable. But we believe that the punishment provided for palpable frauds that every day arc mildly designated business debts is miserably inadequate, otherwise the disposition that is growing upon the honest portion of the community to subject the commercial vultures by whom they have been victimised to a disagreeable illustration of physical force, would not exist.

But if the laws of debtor and credi-tor-principal and agent—arc miserably inadequate, that scarcely can justify a resort to physical violence. If every farmer that has suffered a cruel wrong were to imitate the example of the gentleman from Mount Horrible who was lionised yesterday, the prospects of white-washed agents would be something very deplorable. They would be compelled, in self-defence, to adopt the device of certain low comedians, and wear pantaloons stuffed with sawdust, or their bruised lives would übe nondurable. For if one creditor is applauded because'he kicks a bankrupt by whom he has suffered, are not other creditors justified in assuming that if they make use of their revengeful extremities in a similar way they will also realise the public approbation ? This is the serious aspect of the case. If the example of the Mount Horrible farmer were to be followed by other creditors where would the victim be landed P Is it not to bo feared that he would bo kicked out of the colony altogether? And if this new species of football practice became fashionable what would become of some of the leading business men of Hew Zealand ? The bank screw and severe depression has made the name of the whitewashed ones legion, and some of our most active, enterprising, useful colonists, however reluctant they may have been, have had to under-

go the cleansing refreshing process of bankruptcy. We are sure that no true New Zealander who has at. heart the welfare of his native or adopted colony desires to see the fradulent chaff winnowed from the insolvent wheat,and reduced to the dire extremity of having to choose between a negro minstrel costume, the interior of an hospital, or a flight to Callao. For the various reasons we have set forth, we trust that exhibitions of public sympathy With physical punishment will not become frequent, and that, if such demoralising displays of sentiment arise from defects in the civil or criminal laws, no time will be lost in having these laws amended.