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

The Star. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 1881. PROCEEDINGS AGAINST TE WHITI AND TOHU.

It is to be hoped we are not going to have any bungling in connection with the prosecution of Te Whiti and Tohu ; but it seems very much like it, at the present time. At the outset there has evidently been carelessness, for we find Mr. 0. W. Hursthouee, the nominal prosecutor, declaring that he did not know what he was swearing to when he lodged the information. For instance, we find in the Herald's report of the proceedings, the following :: — •' Mr, Samuel : You are the informant in this case, and there are other expressions mentioned in the information. Gau you swear to them? — Mr. Hursthouse : There are expressions in the information which I cannot swear to myself. I got them from other gentlemen who were present at the meeting. Mr. Samuel : You can give us what you remember of the Bpeech, and also the meaning of it. Witness : It would be difficult for me to give the meaning of the sentences. I prefer not to do so *. * * * Mr. Samuel : There are other expressions in the information used by Tohu. — Witness : I cannot swear to them. I cannot swear to expressions I did not hfar. His Worship : You have already sworn to them in the information. Witness : I was not aware that I was responsible for all chat appeared in the information, or I would not hare sworn to it." Now, T»6 &IM* TQOt aware who is fco Uame ior this, but it is perfectly clear that Mr. Hursthouse should not have been called upon to swear an information containing statements which he did not hear. If he was the person selected to become prosecutor, those preparing the information might at least have inquired what he knew about the matter. On the other band, it is not easy to see how Mr. Hursthouse could have sworn the information without taking the pains to discover what were his relations to it. It is anything but satisfactory in an important case of this sort, to find oaths made so lightly. There is one other feature in connection with the matter which calls for remark, and that is the presence on .the Bench of Mr. Parris, particularly, in view of what subsequently occurred. Jb transpired la the course of the evidence of Mr. Wellington Carringfcon, that he had not, as seemed to have been expected of him, shown or

described to Te Whiti, the land which had been set apart f.oy the prophet a'od his natives. Mr. Parris 1 examination of witness, went to show that an instruction to do so had beon given by him, though misunderstood by Mr. Carrington ; but it is to be regretted that Mr. Parris shoiild apparently have endeavored to throw discredit on the evidence because the witness's statements were not exactly such as were expected. It is generally supposed that the only duty of magistrates is to hear the evidence brought before them, and base their decisions on it; and not to come into Court with preconceived notions of what the evidence will be, and then when a witness does not come up to the anticipated point remind him somewhat needlessly that be is on his oath. Mr. Parris Las been so long in the employ of the <iove\'iMttent in Gmnaectioii wik» uakive nmttera on ini9 coast tnafc if he appeared in Court at all, surely bis proper place was the witness box, not the Bench. It would be absurd to insinuate tbat either of the prisoners suffered in consequence of the composition of the Bench, but it is very desirable to avoid the appeai^ance of any departure from the ordinary procedure in dealing with these prisoners now that they are before the CourtsIn connection with the circumstance tbat the reserves were apparently not shown to Te Whiti, it ia not necessary to go into that just now, but we cannot refrain from saying that the people of the colony were led to believe that these matters had all been duly attended to. Probably, looked at from the legal point of view, the lapse does not amount to much, but, nevertheless, the pbiloMaoris will not fail to make the most of it.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HNS18811118.2.6

Bibliographic details

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume II, Issue 174, 18 November 1881, Page 2

Word Count
707

The Star. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 1881. PROCEEDINGS AGAINST TE WHITI AND TOHU. Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume II, Issue 174, 18 November 1881, Page 2

The Star. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 1881. PROCEEDINGS AGAINST TE WHITI AND TOHU. Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume II, Issue 174, 18 November 1881, Page 2

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