THE LOCAL COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 928, 16 March 1882, Page 3

THE LOCAL COURT.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir. —What is the Magisterial Bench of New Zealand coining to? Those who were witness to the way some of the cases were tried in the Temnka Court on Monday last, could not but be struck by the impulsive and jaunty manner in which some of the gravest cases that could come before any bench were disposed of, and could not but call to mind the times of the bush lawyer by the pedantry of Mr Mendelson who told us that he was sitting “ Ministerially.” Mr M, clearly has all the accomplishments which in the primitive times of the colony characterised that worthy. Possessing a smattering of knowledge of everything, with no firm hold of anything, he puts himself forward as unmatchable. Mr M., J. P. of Temnka. seems to me to be quite devoid of that gravity or depth of thought so necessary to enable a magistrate to calmly consider a case, but as full of conceit as a German Lairdie. Solomon says a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. This is exactly why Mr M. is so unfit for the responsible office that he takes upon himself to discharge. He has a smattering of law, and conceit enough to believe heis a match for the most profound student of it. One case in particular I would call your readers attention to. That of the young man committed for embezzlement. It is not necessary to comment upon it. Your readers can judge for themselves. Another case is Mackay versus Wilson. That case involves a principle of vast importance to this district. A man engages as a harvest hand, a farmer puls his trust in him’ to sssist him to secure the fruits of a whole year’s labor, but all a( once, through some whim or fancy this man gives notice that he will leave in a week, and, regardless of the consequences to his employer, he leaves and sues for his full wages up to the day he leaves and a verdict is given in bis favor. Common sense should show that no farmer would engage a harvest hand on these conditions ; yet a precedent is set, and doubtless will be acted upon by others, who regard not the interest of tho employers. What 1 wish, however, to point out is the absurdity of the Hall Government placing in such

positions of trust, men who are evidently strangers to calm reasoning, prudence, or good manners. If the case referred to was not proved on the one side it certainly was not on the other. The proper course therefore was to dismiss the case altogether. In Mr Woollcombe's time a similar case is on record, and the "judgment given against the plaintiff. Most certainly the sitting Magistrate would have given the case greater consideration before he would have come to a decision. Mr Barker, the other J.P. is a young man, 1 but a young man of promise, honest, and single minded. If better mated he would bic me an acquisition to the but in such bad company, being under the advice and guidance of a man evidently full to the brim with his high opinion of his own abilities, it is plain he is in a bad school. The Hall Government economy in lopping off useful Magistrates and flooding the country with men dubbed J.F.’s who have no ballast or steadiness to enable them to give important cases like these referred to due consideration will be found in the long run to be a poor economy indeed. Ob, Ternuka,Temuka,how sorry thy sons must be to see the depth to which thou hast fallen. Surely the day has come upon us predicted by the prophet when thy rulers devoid of wisdom pervert the law.—l am etc. Observer. Temuka, March 14., 1882.