Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

OUR R.M. COURTS.

TO THX EDITOR OF THE PRESS. Sir, —We have recently been favored in the Press with some very interesting and profitable remarks upon " our society girls," upon " advertising barristers," and upon "political Bishops," and certainly there is evidence in abundance to show that your salient criticism has been followed by very profitable beneficial results. It has occurred to mc that the application of your mild chastising ro<l could be adva-ntageously applied in another direction. I mean the so-called Department of Justice. I don't mean the high judicial tribunal, and I don't mean the mighty Ministerial Department. The first, as far as my observation goes, does not need the flagellator'a visitation. The second, while it undoubtedly needs scourging, can be left alone for a time and a day. The department I mean is that where justice is supposed to be administered in our small Court across the water in Christchurch, and by gentlemen who revel under the dignity of those all potent letters J. and P.

It has been said over and over again that we are a fairly reverent people, law abiding, and not a very provocative race. If this be so, surely we have a right to respect in our several vocations. Although I may not feel disposed to fall down and worship every professing teacher of what is called Christianity in this model city of ours, I yet do feel it incumbent upon mc to show them all proper respect, and although differing in opinion I feel bound socially to throw the mantle of protection over their shoulders whenever they are unfairly or unjustly attacked. I need scarcely say I allude to the case of the Rev. Mr Hoatson, which was before the public a few days ago. As an inoffensive, amiable and intelligent member of our Christian ministry, he was proceeding along the public street on Sunday evening on his way to the discharge of his clerical duty; he was met by two drunkards and violently assaulted, struck in the mouth, knocked into the gutter, kicked and maltreated, and rendered incapable for his duty. Mark, Sir, two drunken men—on Sunday—an unprovoked assault on the highway, not upon an ordinary wayfarer, such as a common juror, or a grand juror, or the Editor of the "Bulletin," but upon a minister of religion, and these vagabonds being arrested are punished thus—one of them dismissed; the other, the self-con-fessed criminal, was fined in the unheard of sum of twenty shillings. Who by, air ? Aye, well may the question be asked. By two gentlemen of modest experience, who boast of the dignified title of J. P. If you you look at the Act, " Offences against the you will find that the drunken Sunday brawlers were guilty of a misdemeanor, and rendered themselves liable to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years, with or without labor. But, inasmuch as it is too much to expect wisdom to "utter her voice" on a Bench of ordinary Justices, we cannot altogether forget that the State has provided a bigger justice than these, and we are constrained to ask why this highly paid gentleman was not at hand to discharge the duty belonging to his office. He was in his office awaiting the stroke of eleven upon the clock to take him into an adjoining room to hear small debt cases, most of which were settled by default. A case of brutal assault upon one of her Majesty's subjects by Sunday drunkards failed to be of sufficient importance to command his attention. Who so proper to deal with such a case as the Resident Magistrate. What is he paid for ? Is it any wonder that the cry for prohibition is being raised from one end of the city to the other—when such an apparent miscarriage of justice is before us ? It is no answer to the case, that the injured minister pleUded for mercy—what more natural— had he been permanently maimed his natnre would so prompt him. But, sir, this was a case in which example and punishment—not mercy and mawkishness —was pre-eminently called for. If the offender was of the respectable ! ! class, the greater should have been the sentence. One is almost tempted to exclaim with the illustrious bard— " Diseases desperate grown, By desperate appliances are relieved, Or not at all." —Yours, &c, Observes.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP18910516.2.9.2

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume XLVIII, Issue 7865, 16 May 1891, Page 3

Word Count
725

OUR R.M. COURTS. Press, Volume XLVIII, Issue 7865, 16 May 1891, Page 3

OUR R.M. COURTS. Press, Volume XLVIII, Issue 7865, 16 May 1891, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert