THE GREAT BULL CASE.

Auckland Star, Volume X, Issue 2845, 10 June 1879, Page 3

THE GREAT BULL CASE.

, r . [To th^ Editor]. SIR,—In your leader of last night you refer to the conclusion, arrived at by the jury injwhat yoirterm the "Great Mercer BUII case," and you'state that this coacllision touches aquestion of great public moment, and deWanda'serious consideration. Any person being ignorant of the facts, ■would, after reading yovir article, come to the conclusion that the statements made by 'tile four' Native -witnesses (plaintiffs) wero altogether disbelieved by the jury because they were contradicted by the defendant, Hawke. In other ■words, that the jury accepted the statement of one European in preference to tlje statements of four natives. ■Now I am as anvious as the writer of your article, that the question which demands serious consideration should be considered in Reference to the true facts, and' with'yonr permission I will shortly point out how the case went to the jury so far as this " business conversation " was concerned. All the four natives swore to their having, gone to Knwke's resilience with a letter.from Te Wheoio, 6i widen the following ia a copy :— " The Kohekohe, March 14th, 1879. To, Thomas Hawke. Sir, —I have heard that* our cow has been taken by you from Kukikawa, and the bull. The bull is red with white face, his hind feet are scabby, his two ears are cut straight across and split at the tops. You bring him quietly back when you are coming here, because he is an extremly quiet bull, he is very good to the rope to lead. You only must bring back to the place you took from,it you do not,l will work. That|isall. From Wi 4 Te Wheoro."

The natives swore that after Hawke had read this letter, a conversation ensued,' in which Hawke admitted that he had their animal, showed the natives Where it was, that they went for if, and brought it to Hawke's place where the latter said it was their bull, and to take if away, that it was only when they asked for payment that he resisted them and tried to prevent them taking away the animal, and told them to go for a policeman, and on their pointing out that one of their number, Manahi, was' a policeman, Hawke allowed him to take the animal up<ra his promising to hand it over to Constable Walker at Mercer, which the natives admitted Manahi promised to do. _~ I Now, not-4jnJy. did Hawke deny.,these statements, but" he claimed-that lie resisted their taking away the animal before they said anything about payment. ■So far, then, the evidence of the four natives was only opposed by the statement of one European ; but it transpired that on this occasion Hawke answered 'fe Wheoro's letter—that ho wrote the answer first in Maori and,rea£ it to the natives, who said they did hot'understand itj and requested him to write it in English* which he did ; that he sealed it up and gavo.jt fo Manahi, who had given him the letter from Te Wheoro. The f6ll6wing is a1 eopyfbf that lettffiJfjji; ,< / ■)■■ ;-,,;, -.'■■■..- ,y ~.,.,| ,v " Onewliero, March 14th, 1870. —Tq Win. Te Wheoro, Esq. : Sir,—l dm sorry to receive a note from you accusing me of taking your cattle. I had hoped that you know me better by this time. I have not bad cattle near your lands for a year and a half, and so have not driven any from Pukekawa. It is a serious matter to make such a charge as you have made, and so I trust you will give, me your informant. I have not seen any of your cattle this side of Pukekawa.—Yours, respectfully Thos. Hawkk."

Now, one native said this letter was given by Hawke after they had been told by Hawke that he had their arrimal, and another said it was given after they had' made Hawke aware of their business, but, be that as it may, the letter does not contain'a single admission by Hawke. The question therefore which this evidence raised -wasl' this : Were the natives speaking the truth when they said Hawke made the fullest admissions of having their animal, when ■at the same time he wrote and handed to them thjs letter, he had', any knowledge oT'ffie animal rctorredto? Mr Tyler/rested his case upon what occurred at this iwferview. I, too, for the defendant (Hawke), claimed that this letter altogether supported Hawke where he said that he hadnevir made any admissions. It will be seen, therefore, that the matter was not left to the jury simply as to whether the statement of one European, without more, should be taken in preference to the evidence of the four natives. —I am, &c

Edwin Hesksth Epsom, Jane 10, 1879.