Wairarapa Daily Times. [ESTABLISHED 1878] WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 30,1892.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XIII, Issue 4288, 30 November 1892, Page 2

Wairarapa Daily Times. [ESTABLISHED 1878]

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 30,1892.

second edition

Being the extended title of the Wairabapa Daily, with which it is identical

When Mr Broadbent was committed for trial by two Masterton Justices of tho Peace, we gave some slight expression to the sentiment of surprise with whioh most people regarded the action of the Bench, but we reserved all comment till such time as the Grand Jury threw out the indictment. That the oase would be dismissed by the Grand Jury was almost a matter of certainty, as there was no evidence produced in the lower Court to establish even a prima facie case, It has tome to this pass in Masterton that, when it is known who sits on the Bench, people accurately forecast the result of a case, In saying this, we do not desire to intimate that Justices are actuated by improper motives, simply that (hey aro not in some instances competent {or the duties which they undertake, When lawyerß and expert Resident Magistrates find a difficulty in correctly interpreting New Zealand law, what chance has Dick, Tom, or Harry to expound it ? The Government lightly and gaily pitchfork Diok, Tom, and Harry on to the Bench, because they are men of the right colour, and worked on their side at tho General Election utterly regardless of their fitness or unfitness for occupying a judicial position. Tom, Diok and Harry are perhaps good' fellows, but their knowledgeof law is simply nil, and with a sublime unconsciousness of their own deficiency, they will take their seats on the Bench and cheerfully deprive an innocent man of his liberty, simply because they don't understand evidence. We believe some of the new Justices of the Peace whom Mr Ballance has appointed would unhesitatingly preside on_ the Supreme Court Bench, if permitted to do so, aud lay down the law for the most eminent legal practitioners in New Zealand, They simply do not know any better, and are altogether unaware of tho grave responsibilities wbicb devolve upon them, and of tho knowledge and experience requisite for their adequate discharge, The Justices are not altogether to blame, but the Government is very muoh to be censured: By whatright dare it appoint men to a judicial position who are notoriously unqualii

I fied for tbo office. On ministers falls the responsibility of the committal of an, innocent man, ns in the case of Mr Broadbent; on them rests the blamo of putting the country to an unnecessary pxppnse in prosecuting in the Supreme Court a man against whom there was literally no evidence.

The committal of Mr Broadbent was undoubtedly a miscarriage of justice for which tho Government must be held to be responsible. We cannot blame the justices for they no doubt acted in good faith and to the best of their judgment. That they did not posseaa the knowledge and experience nec-ssary for interpreting I correctly uriminal law, is fairly evidentfrom the action of the Grand Jury, but this does not imply that they were actuated by prejudice in the course which they adopted. We trust for the future inexperienced justices will think twice before committing an accused person to the Supreme Court, when the evidence does not sustain such a course. The old English plnu of justices consulting tho clerk to the tench on points of law, before coming to a decision, is one that might be adopted with advantage by newlyfledged magistrates in this Colony. Public opinion will not tolerate" a frequent repetition of mistakes like the one to which we have referred.