TOAPEKA JUSTICE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume V, Issue 224, 16 May 1872, Page 8

TOAPEKA JUSTICE.

(To the Editor.) «

Sir, — In your last issue I observe that the case of Tully v. Juin, Kin, and others, heard in the Warden's Cou?t, resulted in judgment being given forHihe plaintiff for the sum of j£s and costs, which wilL at least ;. amount to £5 more. This judgment fwill scarcely impress the barbarian with a respect for British justice ; and any one studying the matter carefully and impartially cannot fail to consider that the law was unduly strained. The facts of the case are briefly these: — Some time ago Mr. Tully sold Jum, Kin, and Co, the right to mine on his ground for the sum of £-10 — more, by the way, than the whole holding was worth. The Chinese entered into an -agreement to replace the surface soil and"lo leave the ground in the same state as they got it. Now, it does seem somewhat singular that action should, be taken before the term of the agreement js completed — it looks very much like "jumping on" the unfortunate Chinese. r*Tn a y state that an experienced miner, brought down to look at the ground by plaintiff, told him the Chinese were working tbe ground in a most careful manner — in fact, took more trouble to observe their agreement than most Europeans would do. This individual was not called by plaintiff to give evidence. And it is admitted by the miners in the vicinity that these Chinese worked the ground fairly and with great care. It is a pity the Warden did not visit the ground, as he ought to have done, lie would then have ascertained by his own personal observation the merits of the case. ; jQn what grounds the de-« cision Y&oms is based I confess my inability to see. The fact that the Chinamen are making only 9s. per ■week per mau out of the ground makes their case additionally hard. — I, am, &c. } Fiat Justitia.