NEW PLYMOUTH.

Thames Star, Volume XI, Issue XI, 24 September 1880, Page 2

NEW PLYMOUTH.

This day. Trial of the Native Prisoners. The trial of the native prisoners was resumed. Mr Halse, counsel for the prisoners, took exception to the indictment as it stated that the offences of which the prisoners were charged with were committed within the boundaries of the confiscated land as defined by the schedule of the Act. (There is no fourth boundary given in the description—only three sides are defined.) He said it was of the utmost importance in a case of this kind, where the liberty of the individual is at stake, that the indictment should be strictly correct, and as the indictment was not it should be quashed on the ground of uncertainty. Mr Samuel replied, contending that it was essential to take notice of the preemble of the West Coast Settlements Act in order to answer the objection raised by Mr Halse. It was clear from the preamble of that Act that the land mentioned in the fourth schedule of the Act was the same as that mentioned in the Act for appointing a JBoyal Commission to enquire into native affairs on the West Coast. The description in that Act supplied the deficiency in the fourth schedule of West Coast Settlemen L Act, 1880. In support of his argument that the preamble of the Act should be considered he cited several cases. Mr Halse replied that nothing had been advancrd on behalf of the Crown to meet the .objection be had raised. They had nothing to do with the intention of the Legislature ; it was "not a question for the Court to consider whether the provisions of the Act would be inoperative on account of the omission of the fourth boundary line. The Court must consider whether it is sufficiently definite to convict the prisoners of an offence. It was the description of the land given in the act itself that the Court would have to go upon. The land described in the schedule was wanting in its proper boundary, and though it might be said that the intended boundary was the sea coast, that boundary was not mentioned in the Act, and that omission rendered the indictment untenable. He therefore asked his Honor to quash the indictment. His Honor said he could not at that stage say the boundaries were incomplete, as it was quite possible for three lines to form a complete boundary. He would, however, take note of the objection after evidence had been taken defining the boundaries of the confiscated land, and also the nature of the offences committed by the natives. His Honor, summed up, and the jury retired to consider their verdict, and after remaining absent about three quarters of an hour, returned into Court with a verdict of guilty. His Honor, in sentencing the prisoners to two years' imprisonment in Lyttelton gaol and to fiod security iv the amouut of £50 each to keep the peace for six months after the expiration of their sentence, also told the interpreter to tell the prisoners that the length of their sentence would depend on how the natives they left behind behaved themselves,