THE HOKIANGA R.M. COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9220, 24 November 1888, Page 3

THE HOKIANGA R.M. COURT.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—Referring to Mr. James Burtt'fc statements in your issue of the >7th instant, having reference to proceedings which were taken against one Stephen S. Mears at the R.M. Court, Hokianga, I beg to make a few remarks. In justice to the Resident Magistrate, Mr. Bishop, whom Mr. Burtt casts his base insinuations against, I may say that persons who attend the R.M. Court at Hokianga have better means of judging the fairness of the Resident Magistrate's decisions than your correspondent, who appears to have taken as gospel all that his litigious write to him. As an impartial witness to the proceedings against Mears, I have had impressed upon my mind that Mears received an undue amount of latitude from Mr. Bishop, whose time has been occupied in the case for about 18 months. Mr. Burtt in his letter dates the shipping transaction in dispute as late back as February 14,1887, and all reasonable persons must admit that! November, ISSS, is not the time to commence discussing the intricacies of the petty £4 lawsuit. If a wrong decision was given last year, why did not Mr. Burtt support his friend by appealing against it in the Supreme Court if he felt himself aggrieved ? That course would hav had a more business-like appearance than . newspaper tirade against our much-respected Magistrate, whose hands are tied by Government against giving explanation in newspapers. In conclusion I may state that I have heard, on good authority, that the Minister of Justice carefully gave Mears's case his attention, and that, after a perusal of all evidence and affidavits bearing on same, he came to the conclusion that there was no ground of complaint against the Hokianga Resident Magistrate. Without troubling your readers with details of Mears* case, I can state emphatically that Mr. Burtt s version of affairs is very different to the impression obtained by uninterested persons who were present at the R.M. Court) hearings. As a set off against Mears' inform-, ing Mr. Burtt that he was absolutely without means to satify the judgment, I can inform him that Mears swore in Court that his income was £100 per annum, and also that he had refused to receive £2000 from England for fear of a portion of it being impounded to meet the amount claimed from him.— am, etc., Fairplay.