MR. WARDEN SCHAW AND FAIR PLAY.

West Coast Times, Issue 308, 18 September 1866, Page 3

MR. WARDEN SCHAW AND FAIR PLAY.

(TO Tire EDITOR OF THE WEST COAST .TIMES.)

Sift — It seldom happens that a leader is Written by a journalist, unless ho is master of the case about which he writes. I freely forv give you for having committed the "offence to which my opening paragraph alludes, because I am sure such an article would never have emanated from your- pen, had you, as T had, the opportunity of hearing both sides of the question. I take up the cudgels in defence of a gentleman whose decisions may be, as many of them must have been, distasteful to one or other of the suitors in his Court. Mr Warden Schaw's position precludes him from replying to the attacks of public writers, as you well know; and"! assure you that I am personally unknown to him, and it is only to set the public right that I say a word in defence of a man whom I believe to bo an honorable Judge. In the case of Clark v. Turner, to which your leader of yesterday refers, the Warden was quite right in the decision which he gave, inasmuch as so far back as November, 1865, the same ca?o was brought before him, by the same parties, and after Warden Schaw hod inspected the piece of groundthen, as now, in disputo, he gave judgment in favor of Turner. Doubtless it is impossible for him (the Warden) to bear in mind every action he has to adjudicate upon ; and this" happens to be one ; for during the absence of tbo four gentlemen appointed as assessors, it came to his knowledge as to what he had done in November last, and also that there had been no appeal made, as required by law; consequently his decision could not bo revoked ' by the verdict ' of the assessors. Hence lie was compelled to refuse to receive that verdict. He was acting in strict conformity with the law, and I am sure had you known this simple statement, or even if the respectable and learned counsel for Clark had known it, he would, not have advised proceedings, neither would you have penned your article. I am, &c, >SCBFTATOR. Sept. 17, 1866. [Our correspondent's' statements do not in any sense alter the material facts of the case, upon which we^coimnented. If Mr Warden Schaw has so little knowledge of the proceedings and records of his own court, as -to einpaunel and swear a jury to try an issue upon which he has himself previously decided, he may 1 involve himself in*a legal dilemma, but he certainly does not absolve himself of the responsibility of receiving and entering up the verdict of the assessors whom he has formally put in" possession of the issue to be tried. Wo do not see that the defence set up on his behalf at all improves his case, although it certainly adds some new and singular features to it.— Ed. W.C.T.]