JUSTICES' JUSTICE.
TO THE EDITOR. Sir,— ln your issue of the 31sfc ult, appears a letter on the above subject over the signature of “ Onlooker.” As often happens with amateur newspaper correspondents, “ Onlooker ” has rushed into print without ascertaining the facts of the case which he writes about, and so has deluded himself as well as misled the readers of his statements. “Onlooker” states that after defendant had unsuccessfully (attempted to eject plaintiff from his premises by physical force he gave him a week’s notice. Now, Sir, this is simply a misstatement, as the fact is that the giving of the week’s notice ;was the cause of the disturbance, and drew from the plaintiff the remark that it saved him some trouble as he intended to give defendant a week’s notice, but the abnormally obscene language in which this information wasconveyed caused defendant to remove him from his premises. Under these circumstances I think that every rightthinking person must come to the conclusion that the Justices’ decision as to costs quite met the merits of the case. —I am Sir, yours etc., One who was present,
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TEML18900809.2.17
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Temuka Leader, Issue 2083, 9 August 1890, Page 4
Word count
Tapeke kupu
186JUSTICES' JUSTICE. Temuka Leader, Issue 2083, 9 August 1890, Page 4
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in