Reg. v. Aicken.

Auckland Star, Volume XVIII, Issue 167, 18 July 1887, Page 8

Reg. v. Aicken.

(To the Editor.)

Sir, —As you are doubbless, aware the accused was before bhe Courb on Friday on a charge of uttering a fortred cheque, and afber evidence was taken was discharged. I appeared for bhe defence,* and Mr Brookfield, who.., prosecuted for the Bank -of New Zealand, declared his intention to have prisoner rearrested. He was accordingly arrested this morning, and brought before the Court at ten oxlock (half-an-hour before the usual time of sitting), and before he could communicate with me. The case was opened at length by Mr Brookfield, and the evidence of one witness taken. The prisoner was then, in consequence of my absence, remanded for a week. I did not reach my office until 10.20thismorning, andl then for the first time learnt that the arrest had been made, and that the case was proceeding ; and it was so far closed before I reached the Court. I consider, sir, that an imputation of negligence would attach to me were I to allow the matter to pass unchallenged. I cannot see any sufficient reason for the indecent haste indulged in by the prosecution, and will reserve further comment for the proper time and place; —I am, etc., J. O'Meagher. Monday, July 18th, 1886.