WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE

Grey River Argus, 27 November 1920, Page 3

WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE

MAGISTRATE CRITICISED,

BY MR, T. M. WILFORD

A JUDGE'S REJOINDER

APOLOGY. BY COUNSEL [Per Press Association.!

J ' WANGANUT., November 26. During the hearing of the charge o perj ury at 'the Supreme Couth agains F. S. Easton, a : well-known racehorsi owner, this > afternoon counsel for" de fendant (Mr. T. M. Wilford). in liii address vtq the . jury insinuated tha -proceedings should never have beer investigated by the Magistrate (Mr Stout-)j who, Counsel iremaxk'dd was a very young ma-n, and who may hav< been: influenced in his decision by in terested persons outside the Coutr. In summing-up Sir Basset Edwards said he very much regretted that Mr Wlford in -his zeal for his client, hac made reflections \ipon the Magistrate which should not have been made. Mr. Wilford had insinuated thr«'t Mr. Stout had investigated proceedings on account of something he had heard.- outside of court. This was a reflection which should not have been made. The position of a magistrate was a. very onerous one and he was entitled to all respect. Mr. Wilford had. insinuated' that Mr. Stout was a "raw' boy." Mr: Wilford: "No Sir." , His Honoui': "You said the words "very young." Mr. Wilford: "Young, as a magistrate, Your Honour. I myself appointed Mr.' Stout a magistrafe and could not • have . nr.iy reflection to make upon him for that reason." His Honour went on to say that there was not the slightest justiflcai tion for any reflection, upon Mr. j Stout, "who, as all judges at times ' had to do, 'had a painful duty forced" I upon him of ordering a- prosecution for- perjury. Mr. Stput had been a : barrister and solicitor of the Supreme .Court of New Zealand, and as .such, was perfectly qualified to hold the position of magistrate. He at all times carried out his- 'dirties without* any flummery, arid there was not the ' slightest justification for the reflection which had been made upon him. ' At a later stage Mr Wilford ask<-d * ' His Honour's permission to make an. .amende honourable in connection the remarks he had made, concerning Mr ; Stout. On permission being granted, Mr Wilford made the following explanation: "I did not intend in any way to reflect upon the ability, character, or integrity of purpose of Mr Stout. As Minister for Justice in 1918, I.appointed him to the position he now holds. I ascertained, and personally knew, his fitness for the position before I'appointed him. I intended to convey in my remarks to the jury, not that he had done any wrong or had acted in any way except judicially, but, that , young in office, as lie" was he may have been Unconsciously influenced by a certain person at Foxton who had admit-.. , ted he was on~ bad terms with Easton who was an official of the court there." His Honour: "You insinuate the Magistrate was influenced in the action he took by a policeman at the court?" : ' Mr Wilford said it was hard to say how far the Magistrate had been unsconsciously influenced by an official at the Court at Foxton, who had admitted being on bad terms with accused. "In any case" remarked Counsel, "I have taken the very first possible opportunity of .making the. amende honourable to Mr. Stout."

chain., of lining- 'a week for the -post seven- nionths -'would have been completed had normal quantities of cement been, .maintain ed, bui> .'as it is tliei'e is .a; .dead- loss of. fourteen chains directly, attributable- to the cement.-It'-isi further estimated that the total wages account, including staff, tunnel workers, and. outside men, amounts approximately, to £1300 per week, so that it is an easy calculation. Mr. Cliniie says, to- determine what the cement shortage- is- 'costing the country in respect of this work, to say nothing of the interest charges which are accumulating and which', are considered over £100 a week: -Mr. Climie stated" that -these- figures which he had prepared met with the endorsement 'of both. Mr. Cowing and' Mr. Jeff, the two ■ engineers in charge of the ;im-nel.-works. -.■ ■■•• ■