RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Wairarapa Standard, Volume I, Issue 51, 23 December 1867, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Feathbeston, December 17. (Before H. S. Wardell, Esq., R.M.) COUNTER ACTIONS. The cases of Yile v. Grant for assault, and of Grant v. Yile for damages laid at £2O, were both adjourned to 14th January. DEBT CASES. Cameron, v. Davies—Claim for £2O and accumulating interest. Judgment for plaintiff for the amount claimed,with costs, and 16s 8d interest. 'Caselberg v. Humphrey—Debt £l3. Judgment for amount and costs. Cox v. Stafford—Debt £3 14s 4d. Amount and costs paid into Court. Cox v. Gwyne—Debt £2 3s 3d. Judgment for amount and costa. There were some further cases on the paper which did not come on for hearing. ‘ Greytown, December 20. Before H. S. Wardell Esq., R. M. J. Fuller v.|T. Hawke—Debt £7los. Judgment for £3 18s 6d and 11s costs. POUND BREAKING. This was a case arising from facts already detailed in our issue of the 23rd inst., namely, from the defendant, a native, breaking open the Pound at Greytown, and releasing two horses whichhad been there impounded by Mr Yarnham of PapawaijWho had placed damages on each horse to the amount of £4 4s. J. E. I. Boys on being sworn stated—l am poundkeeper at Greytown. The claim £8 12 s is the amount of damage placed by the party impounding, including 4s as poundage fees. One horse was branded JP on near shoulder, and JP on near hip; the other a light hay mare, branded WB on near shoulder. The pound rails were destroyed by defendant, and the horses taken away. I know this from he evidence Mr Maunsell had gave in a previous case. I produce the hook j they were impounded by Mr Varnham on the 15th November. There were five horses impounded, the others were leleased by the parties producing an authority from Mr Varnham, and paying the poundage. The Magistrate—The Poundkeeper has no right to receive the damage money when disputed, it must be paid to a Justice of the Peace. ’

Mr Boys continued—That he would prove were it required that the defendant had let the horses out of the Pound.

Piriki, the defendant in this case acknowledged to have let the horses out of, the Pound, because Mr Yarnham neither gave him or any other native notice that these horses were on his land. When he heard these horses were impounded he went to Mr Yarnham and asked him who did it. He replied, “the Maori, Mahihera’s boy.” Mr Yarnham told him that to release the horses, he would have to pay off the run, Is; and if eating oats,. &c., 2s. After the horses had been, one uight in the Pound he gave his boy 2s 6d as sent him to release them. The boy returned without them, and told him that it was £4 4s he had tb : pay for one night. Mr Boys—l referred him to Mr Yarnham. Piriki saw he then weut to the Pound, and after waiting two hours, his brother came alohg, they got an axe and broke down the rails, and got the horses out Some Pakehas followed, and got two horses back. • , Mr Boys—T wish it to be understood tljat I was notone of the Btiropeaiis. "If I has ; perhaps they would not have been let off so easily. Mr Wardell': It was then lucky for yop that you were hot there,'' You had' no fight : or power to interfere. V Mr Boys: If I’happened to be outside the fence I could not then have prevented it. The Magistrate Said that as the Maori had taken the lawinto hiSown hands to release them, he Was liable to the whole amount, Had the Impounding Act been printed in Maori probably this WQvdd B9t hay? pccwed. But be

doubted whether Mr Varnham was right in claiming such a large amount for tresspass. At the last sitting in Grey town he had lined, Piriki £l for .damage done or two month s imprisonment, this money had not been paid, and if not paid before the 28th, he would have to go to prison. [Piriki; Is Mr Wardell ■ angry ?] No, he was not angry, but. that was his word, It would have to he attended to. hor letting.ont those horses he would have to pay. £4 4s for each, and 4s poundage and costs. His Worship then added that he would make a few remarks in reference to a statement recently published in the “ Wellington Independent” 'reflecting upon the Government as rence to the course pursued in this case. He referred to some few persons in the community had attributed to him a desire to shield native offenders from the punishment of their crimes and remarked his conscience didnotaccuse himofhaving at any time during the 12yearshehas heldhisofiice,allowed the interest he has felt in the native race to warp his judgment as to the right and wrong of any case that came before him; that as to the question of punishment, he had endeavoured to regulate it so as to secure a good result, and that he was quite satisfied he had adopted the best course for the interests of justice and for the good of the two races. That for whatever course he had pursued in this respect he was individually responsible, as no government had ever attempted to control him in his action as a judicial officer. The Court adjourned for haif-an-hour, and on resuming, Piriki paid in the whole amount, His Worship stated that he would enquire relative to the damage, and if the charge was too much, Piriki would have the residue returned to him.