THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1908. JUSTICES' JUSTICE.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXI, Issue 9033, 26 February 1908, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1908. JUSTICES' JUSTICE.

It is only to be expected that under th« system which governs the appointment of Justices of the Peace in New Zealand remarkable judicial freaks should now and then be found occupying the Ben:h. We have known a J.P., who had never acquired more of the art of caligraphy than was sufficient to enable him to subscribe his name in illegible characters, and who was unable to read. It was not an uncommon thing at one time to find justices who spelt "drunkenness" with one "n" in the last two syllables, and sometimes with two k's; but thesa defects though atrocious in a modern J.P., did not necessarily imply lack of intelligence. More recent instances go to show that a justice may have acquired a creditable knowledge of the three "R's" without being overburdened with—well, wisdom. A case in illustration comes from a Hawke's Bay town. Two chums had exchanged clothes for a specific purpose, but one of them had refused to give up the borrowed suit upon demand. The

lender laid a charge of theft against him, and the case was heard before two Justices of the Peace. The Bench declared that the suit was a loan to the accused, who had therefore committed no theft. Under the circumstances it might be supposed that the case would be dismissed and the informant censured. Nothing of the sort. Replying to the solicitor for accused, the sapient Justices decided that they could not dismiss the rase. They thereupon entered a conviction of theft against the accused, and ordered him to come up for sentence when called upon. A strong protest from the defending, solicitor elicited from the judicial Bumbles the statement that they had decided upon the matter, and that there the matter ended! Then counsel endeavoured to secure a hearing for the defence, which so far had been ignored, but the judicial luminaries said it would make no difference, and the solicitor had better leave the matter as it stcod. The position now is that person accused of theft having been declared by the Bench to be not guilty of the offence, has been convicted on the charge by the same Bench (who declined to hear evidence for the defence), and may be called upon at any time to have sentence passed upon him! This case is on a par with what occurred in another Court when a man who was sued civilly for the value of certain articles obtained from the plaintiff was entered upon the records as being guilty of theft, and sentenced to a term of imprisonment. Surely the time is ripe, even though a general election is approaching, for a revision of the roll of Justices of the Peace.