SECOND EDITION. Wairarapa Daily Times. [ESTABLISHED 1878] THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1893.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XV, Issue 4346, 16 February 1893, Page 2

SECOND EDITION. Wairarapa Daily Times. [ESTABLISHED 1878]

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1893.

Being the extended tixle or tiie Wairarafa Daily, with which h is IDENTICAL

We regret that in the case of Bunny v. Terry, reported in oar lest issuo, Mr Pownall should have considered it hia province to censure the Bench. No doubt, the course lie adopted will tie moro or less popular, because, on the face of it, the public are apt to object to a severe penalty being meted out for a comparatively trivial offencß. Mr Bunny performed a duty to society, which few men have the courage to discharge, when he decided to proaeoute the offender who pilfered Itis ferns. Whether this duty could have been equally well executed by merely suing the offender for trespass, was a mattor for Mr Bunny to determine, At any rate, the prosecutor intended, in the first instance, to display leniency towards the accused, and it was only when a plea of not guilty was set up that he pressed the charge. It would have been a grave error on the part of Mr Bunny if he had pressed a criminal charge against a person of irreproachable antecedents, but as far as we have been able to ascertain, this was not the case, The decision of the Bench was undoubtedly an exemplary one, There isagood deal of petty pilfering about the district and it is rarely that a conviction can be obtained. Justices have a right to teach the publio a lesson as to the respeot which should he paid to the rights of others, and, if it be called for, they are justified in making an example of an offender. In this instance we consider the penalty was sopewhat severe, but we see no reason to doubt that it was diotatedby a sense of duty to the public. We are pretty well satisfied that the offender is not a person to be made a hero of, and we regret that his counsel should have imparted to an otherwise able defence an undue warmth. It is for the benefit of society that Justices should rule high and it has been a reproach to many Masterton J.P.'s that they have habitually ruled low. Still the common sense view was tho one first entertained by Mr Banny viz., to vindicate tho law bflt pt the same time to ask the Bench to deal leniently with thecharge,which we presumo meant to dismiss it with a reprimand. We aro sorry Mr Bunny considered it necessary to abandon his first intontion and we are disposed to consider that the ends of justice would have been sufficiently met if the Justices had inflicted a lighter penalty.