The Temuka Leader TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 1882. THE RESIDENT MAGISTRATE.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1033, 21 November 1882, Page 2

The Temuka Leader TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 1882. THE RESIDENT MAGISTRATE.

It is most unfortunate that the Resident Magistrate can scarcely ever come to Temuka without giving room for complaint of the slipshod way in which he administers justice, lime after time have litigants and their lawyers come from Timaru, Geraldine, and all parts of the districts, expecting to get their cases heard, but have had to go away again as they came, through the Magistrate not 1 having either attended nor thought it worth while to announce that he would not be able to do so. It is not long since we pointed out that at the hour on which the Court is usually opened there was no appearance of the Resident Magistrate, and that though the Clerk of the Court telegraphed to him he sent no answer. Those who had business at the Court had to go away without getting their cases heard, and no one knows to this day why the Resident Magistrate was not in his place as he had a right to be. This sort of thing has occurred more than once, in fact it is becoming of frequent occurrence, and the expense and inconvenience many have been put to in consequence cannot be very easily estimated. During the months of July, August, and September Mr Beswick sat only seven times in Temuka. That fact we have ascertained from the records of the Court, and we firmly believe that he has not sat here three times since. On the occasions that he has sat he has frequently left the business unfinished in order to get off by the express train at 12 o’clock. On one occasion a man died suddenly at Rangitata, and ho neglected to hold an inquest on him, but for what reason nobody can understand. Yesterday he presided ever the Court hero, and during the hearing "if the Twenty man and Cousin v. Creamer case exhibited an indecent baste to get the case over so that he might get away. He first told the. Clerk that ho took too much time to write down (he evidence ; he next undertook to take down the evidence himself, and let the Clerk copy, and the first little objection that was raised be, j jumped at the. conclusion of adjourning 1 (he case. He was quite right in not,

entertaining the objection, which was that the plaintiffs refused to produce a document, as they had received no specific notice to produce it. Mr Aspinali, who ably conducted the case on behalf of Mr Creamer, pointed out that the subpoena served upon the witness under examination required of him to produce all documents, etc., and that this was sufficient. There can be no doubt but it was, and that the Magistrate was quite right in insisting on the production of the document, but the way he did it betrayed his extraordinary desire to adjourn the case. Mr Beswick is going away on leave of absence,and will not return to his duties for six weeks, and if the ease had been adjourned atthat stage it could not have been heard until he came back again, unless it was brought de novo before whatever Magistrate will act as his substitute in the meantime. Mr Reid, who appeared for Twentyman and Cousin, said that sooner than die case for six weeks he would waive the objection and produce the document, but of this the Magistrate took no notice, but still showed his determination to adjourn it, until he was asked to put a note on the evidence to the effect that Mr Reid had waived his objection . in fact, Mr Red had to repeat three or four times that he would waive Ids objection, and produce the necessary document, before he Magistrate could be got to refrain from adjourning the case. The document was at last procured, and the last of the evidence taken about 12 o’clock, but the Clerk of the Court had not finished copying the evidence taken by the Magistrate. His Worship accordingly adjourned the Court for a quartei of an hour, so as to give the Clerk time to make a copy of the evidence for the purpose of getting the witnesses to sign the depositions. As soon as Mr Bsswick came out of the Court he learned that he would be in time to catch the express train, and so he at once made straight for it, and went away, leaving the Court adjourned for a quarter of an hour. When the quarter of an hour was over there was no Magistrate to finish the business of the Court, aid the question now is whether this does not invalidate the proceedings of the Court. The evidence was taken for the purpose of having it forwarded to Christchurch, and we fancy that to make it perfectly legal it ought to have been signed in the presence of the Magistrate by the various witnesses, But it has not been ; neither was it copied in his presence < lie left it in the hands of the Clerk, and ran away to catch the train, and the Clerk had afterwards to obtain the signatures of the witnesses. Whether this proceeding is legal or not is a question which we cannot at present answer, but even if it were there can be no doubt that the action of the Magistrate is calculated to bring his Court into contempt, and lower him in the estimation of the public. A Magistrate should never show impatience during the hearing ot a case, neither should he rush away leaving his work unfinished. What can people think but that it is not of the merits nr demerits of the case lie is thinking, but of whether he can get over it in time to catch the train. During the time that Messrs Beethara and Wood administered justice in this district nobody ever found fault with them. They were punctual in their attendance, and they never showed any impatience during the hearing of a case. Since Mr Beswick came to the district he has been the subject of public and private comment, and doubtless will be while he is in it.