The Wairarapa Daily SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 1891.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3736, 14 February 1891, Page 2

The Wairarapa Daily SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 1891.

The Hon John Ballance has spoken I And what he has said let no man dispute ! He has unfurled his banner to the breeze. A Governor whose action was severely criticised by the Liberal party has been nobly vindicated. The parental control possessed by the Legislative Council has been indisputably acknowledged. The members of the House have been congratulated upon having so faithfully carried out the duties they were commissioned by the people during laßi session to perform, and for having received full payment in consideration for the same. A proposal for a radical change in the incidence of taxation has been mpe-ied,wbereby the artizan and the labourer will haye the pleasure of seeing the burden of taxation —which will be enormouslyincreased in view of the absolute cessation of borrowing— placed upon broader shoulders. A reconciliation between capital and labour has been predes- \ ," "*»'! there shall be no necessity ' tmed, u*. • And for " labour ' rc t —nfcition of a in conclusion the pret>v... -, flUfl j defined policy for raising the rev... and conducting the financial business of the Colony generally has been carefully withheld. Such is the text of the after-dinner speech delivered by our esteemed Prime Minister, before whom die masses bow their heads in humility and cry, " This is our King !"

The editor of our local contemporary has assumed the jurisdiction of a Resident Magistrate, He has given his judgment in almost every case heard by Colonel Bobertd, and, singular enough, the decisions of the j twohave been t Erectly opposed to each other. Now, whose judgment is. to be accepted? For ourselves we prefer to accept that of Colonel Boberts. It was only yesterday that the dismissal of a charge of assault by His Worship was referred to as " a flagrant premium to unprovoked outrage and brutality," {Such a

criticism as this from one who is totally unacquainted with the facts of the case, displays an amount" of courtesy, the absence of which would not be keenly felt by a community. In the case in question it was alleged by the defendant that he was first assaulted by the informant, and in self-defence struck his adversary on the eye, and this was not disputed by outside evidence. Furthermore, the evidence given in support of the charge was on many points contradictory, and His Worship, however much he may have sympathised with the informant, had no alternative but to dismiss the charge. Had the editor of our contemporary been in Court at the time, be would probably have arrived at the decision that His Worship was thoroughly justified in the course he adopted, and would have refrained from making charges so absolutely without foundation against an official who has been selected by the Crown to administer justice with integrity.