Correspondence.

Colonist, Issue 89, 27 August 1858, Page 3

Correspondence.

To the Editor of the Colonist.

Sir, —The Assizes are over, sentences passed, and juries dismissed. I will now, with your permission, make a few passing remarks on this, and others which have preceeded it. The Judge's address to the Court on its opening, was a solemn one ; he was sorry to see the heavy calendar of crime brought before him. Now, Sir, some of those cases did not. affeci; the character of the European inhabitants of this province, as they were committed by aborigines, who do not consider the crime for which two of them were; r tried, so. serious a one as it is con-, sidered by Europeans. The other, the crime of murder, the perpetrator of which was likewise a native, was proved to be insane, and of course he was not held responsible for his actions by the laws of England. The next serious case was that of William Harley, for manslaughter ! And here I beg you to notice the remarks made by the Judge, as to the loose, and vague manner Coroner's juries have brought in their verdicts (and well he may pass remarks on them.) The verdicts of Coroner's juries in this province have never been explicit enough, when the life or liberty of the accused has been endangered; for what cause I canuot tell. Had they shewn the same spirit and determination to sift the evidence brought before them as the petty jury did in this case, their verdict, in my opinion, would have been a very different one, and the remarkably lenient sentence of two years' imprisonment with hard labor, would have been more severe. Some three or four years ago, a similar sentence was passed on an individual in Mr. Harley's employ, who was found guilty of stealing two gallons of beer from that person's brewery; which would lead some people to suppose that the stealing of beer and the shedding of blood, are, in the eyes of the law, placed on the same footing, and punished accordingly. I have often heard of the sacredness of property ; but this is the first example in this province of human blood being considered of no more value than two gallons of beer (so far as the punishment of the two offences go.) I well recollect the case (and the Chief Constable being the chief evidence), arid likewise Judge Stephens passing the severe but just sentence on the individual referred to, after the jury had (without retiring) found him guilty. The next case that came on, was an assault committed on an old man (since deceased) by three young men of the town of Nelson. In this case the jury were not so unanimous ; stealing beer and ill-treating an helpless old man, was so very different. So the jury had to retire, and after a little angry talk had passed between them, a compromise was come to—they were to find them guilty, but at the same time recommend them to mercy, which was accordingly done; and the consequence was, the very light sentence of three months' imprisonment was passed on them, and which light sentence was (illegally iv my opinion) further shortened by tlie then Superintendent giving them their liberty some time before the expiration of their sentence. And what were the fruits of such leniency? About a twelvemonth or so afterwards, a most brutal attack was made in the Wairau on an unfortunate individual who was 'in a state of intoxication (by the individual who had supplied him with drink) which ended in death. In any other part of the civilised world (where trial by jury is established) but the province of Nelson, a Coroner's jury would have brought it iv a foul and deliberate murder, instead of manslaughter, and he was ultimately found guilty of an assault. The Judge, to mark his detestation of the crime, passed the sentence of six years' imprisonment, with hard Jabor; but it was subsequently reduced, to three years, as it is said, he (the Judge) had exceeded his powers, which do not allow so much for an assault.

And now comes the case of William Harley, for manslaughter, with its sentence of two years' imprisonment, and hard labor. Had one of the witnesses thought more of the sanctify of an oath, in his evidence as to the character of William Harley, I believe the punishment would have been greater. As it is, the public are not satisfied; neither do they believe the

drown-Prosecutor has been so energetic in this case as he ought to have been, and which the safety of the lives of the inhahitants of this province demands. lam not an advocate for capital punishment, but I do not think the lives of the inhabitants of this province are safe while such light sentences are passed on those who take human life away. Look at the sons of the gentlemen of this province (of course I mean those whose actions entitle them to that appellation), what a contrast to the parvenues sons! You do not see them figuring before Judges 'or Magistrates. No; they have too much self-respect for that. Hoping that their example will be followed by the young men of this province, I beg to remain, Sir, yours, &c, ANOTHER LOVER OF JUSTICE. Waimea, August 23rd.