DOG POISONING At KIHI KIHI.

Waikato Times, Volume VIII, Issue 498, 29 July 1875, Page 2

DOG POISONING At KIHI KIHI.

Sib, — The chroniclers of passing events on the cause ef public servants should " epeak the whole truth, aud nothing but the truth. As your Kihi Kihi correspondent, in your issue of the 18th inst, states that in case 3 between the two raCt'S the Maori is always favorei, the pabhc should know the truth of this part cular case. Bewin, an old Muori, sued Hastie, a" settler, for damages, f»r having caus-ed the death ot his doij, by clelib -T&tely feeding it with p dsonedf »ieatwkif&plaintiff"io*s leading it past defendant's house, liastie'u defence wan, that iv August, 1574, some Ma.ori-*dog-j hunted I ' some of his cattle into;- a swamp where one of them^died, and that in Marc i last a^dog, "something like tbjone poisoned, ",liad beea seen two or throe niglits in succession tuinting^his sheep. This v>Hs tantamount to a plea oT -justification, but the Magistral* held that it was a most arbitrury and uujustitiable act, which no settler would have dared to perpetrate except in the case of a Maori, and. gave judgment for pLinifffor £5 and costs. All impartial men will hold that he dii not give a wrong judgment. The set-off was for two bullocks which died in a swiiup, and for injury sustained by sheep from being raced about j no attempt wa* made to connect the plaintiff with either of these acts. When defendant wished to appeal to a higher Court and produca more evidence, he was informed that lie might have asked for an adjournment for production of f urfcher cvi lence tohile the case was proceeding, but could not do so now that judgment had passed, and further that he could not appeal upon evidence, but only upon a point oonf n law. With leference to the " bare courtesy " shown to Mr Goodfellow. it is true that he, without stating, who, or what, he was, manifested some interest iv the case, and was' invited to take a seat j but ha was an absolute stranger to Major Mair, and was, perhaps, ignorant of the fact that J IVs Have uo ju isdiction in civil actions where Maoris are concerued. "Correspondent" s tates that it is customary for defendants iv certain cases to implore J.P'a to sitvvit'i theK.M. Quite true, for when an ignorant, unprincipled man knows that he 13 in the wrong he will go to the nearest Magistrate, with whom he i6,acquaiuted, and ask him to sit on tiio case and take' his part. Maoris are " the best lawyers " for tjhe auuais of our Courts, will shew tint they seldom bring forward a bad case. Mr Kay stated that he personally managed to get on very well with hie Maori neighbours, pity tliat other settlers cannot. With regard to Mr Corboy's horses, they are simply missing; it is not known t at they are m the hands oi the natives ; though they have some cattle in their possession, and so long as the frontier settlers in ike a convenience of the native lauds by drivii q their-Bt Jck on to them, when feed is short in their own paddocks, they need not be surprised at an occasional act of reprisal. Government officers have recovered them ou, several occasions, and, no doubt, are weary of the subject. Government will not plunge the colouy into wir for fciie sake of even many cattle Captain Norfchcrof t contradicted Mr Hay when ho stated that he had told the natives that cattle stealing was apolitical offence. — 1 am, &0., July loth, 1875, Vikdex.