RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 137, 22 September 1870, Page 5

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

(Before W. L. vSimp«on, Esq., R.M., J F. Herbert, Es-q., und Alex. Stewart, Esq., J.P.s Monday, September 12. Dale v. Miller. — Mr. Copland appeared on behalf of Mr. Walter Miller to make an application for a rehearing of the late case of Dale v. Miller, in which Mr. Miller was charged with having 2000 sheep affected with scab, contrary to the provisions of the Sheep Ordinance, 1867 ; and after having gone fully into the case, the Bench fined the defendant £100" Mr. Copland, in making his application, divided his argument into two parts, first contending that the above case was one in which evidence could be produced which would enable the Bench to order the defendant to enter into a bond, as provided by the 54th section of the Sheep Ordinance, 1867. In the second part of Mr. Copland's argument, he stated that on the Bth of July last he suffered an accident by a fall from his horse, and that by reason thereof he was unable to attend and conduct the case for the defendant ; that some solicitor did attend on behivlf of the defendant, but by what authority he (Mr. Copland) did not know. He also alluded to some documents which had issued out of the District Court, and stated that His Honour Mr. Wilson Gray had adjourned the case alluded to on account of his (Mr. Copland's) illness. The Bench were unable to follow the learned gentleman in his drawing a comparison between what was, done in the District Court and what might be .done by a bench of magistrates, Mr. Miller having attended on the original hearing of the case without a solicitor. Mr. Copland put in an affidavit as to the fact of having seen the complainant on two occasions, and having conversed with him on the subject of the case in question, and also setting forth that he (Mr. Copland) met with an accident on the Bth day of July last by a fall from j his horse ; and on these grounds he (Mr.

Copland) contended that he had shown sufficient to enable the Magistrates to grant a rehearing. The Magistrates adjourned to consider the case, and after an absence of a few minutes returned into Court, when Mr. Simpson, as chairman, delivered the decision of the Magistrates to the following effect, viz. : — That having heard the arguments of Mr. Copland they were quite satisfied that he had been unable to conduct the original case, on account of his having met with a serious accident, but that he had failed to show that any facts material to the case were within his (Mr. Copland's) knowledge, or beyond the power of Mr. Miller to produce at the time of the original hearing, or that Mr. Miller had been unable to obtain a verdict in his favour by reason of Mr. Cop- j land's absence ; nor had there been shown that fresh evidence material to the case had been discovered since the original hearing of the case, consequently the Magistrates decided to refuse the application. After the Magistrates had delivered their decision, Mr. Gooday wished to make a personal explanation as to the circumstances which led to his conducting the case on behalf of Mr. ililler at the original hearing of the case. He (Mr. Gooday) complained of Mr. Copland stating that the solicitor who conducted the case at the hearing did so without any authority. Mr. Gooday, in support of his statement, produced a letter dated the llth of July last, written by the Rev. Dr. Copland, asking him (Mr. Gooday) to conduct the case for Mr. Miller. Mr. Gooday also stated that Mr. Miller himself waited upon and instructed him (Mr. Gooday) to appear on his behalf.