R.M. COURT DECISIONS.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume V, Issue 766, 5 April 1884, Page 3

R.M. COURT DECISIONS.

To the Editor qfthc Star. Sir, — I do not often run to newspapers to annoy people with what does not concern me, but, as I am one of the sufferers in this case, I think it is only right to straighten up " Onlooker." I must tell him that, as regards the Act, any baby lawyer can read it, bnt they may not be able to interpret it : that is where the whole mistake was made. I think that the discretionary power given to magistrates was in this case fairly used ; seeing that the storekeepers took no steps to recover their money from the one that was entitled to pay, merely because Henwood conld at all times be made to pay. I would like to see " Oa-looker" making me, as mate, settle up with a storekeeper if I did not wish to. Although we sympathise with Blennerhasset Brothers, we cannot help thinking that they were the only men that had the power to stop Earner, and should have done so ; and then we all might have been paid. " Such, sir, is the manner in which our statutes are interpreted," says "Onlooker." One would suppose he assisted in framing those laws, which no one but himself can interpret. My advice to " On-lookor " is not to air his knowledge of law and justice, but go take advice, and pay for it like anybody else ; above all things, don't rave. — I am, &c, Suffebee. To the Editor of the Star. Sir, — In your issue of last evening I noticed a letter from •• On-looker " about that case of Blennerhasset Brothers v. Henwood. He seenia a little indignant at the decision of the Justices ; bnt when he is made aware of the fact that one of the Justices who sat on the case that day was Henwood's brother-in-law, he will be none the less indignant that a nonsuit was refused, and that he was so deprived of the right to appeal. — I am, &c, Taranaki Man.