TE KOOTI'S APPEAL UPHELD.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 8733, 20 February 1890, Page 2

TE KOOTI'S APPEAL UPHELD.

;Fkb Unitbd f kess Asbocjatiuk.) AucKtiND, February 19. The appeal of Te Kooti against the order of Mr Bush, R.M., Opotiki, that he should find sureties to keep the peace, came before Mr Justice Couolly at the Supreme Court to-day-Mr Napier appeared for appellant, and Mr Button for respondent. Inspector Goodall said | the grounds or appeal were chiefly that the I order was uHra vires, that the K.AI. had no I authority to issue suuh au order, that the order did not show on the face of it that Te Kooti had committed any offence, that the facts did not warrant the issue of such an order and did not affirm that the offence was likely to be repeated. His Houor upheld the appeal. He said the case appeared to him to be this: Te Kooti had not been in Gisborne for 20 years, and at that time he committed curtain acts, but six or seven years ago ho received full pardoD, and p.fter that ho continued to act in n peaceable manner. The question was, wa* he entitled to go to Gisborne, nud could there be a doubt that he was perfectly entitled to do so ? He would, it appears, have gone to Gisborne, and that would have been at his personal risk. There was nothing uuusual in his starting with about a dozen people. Then, according to Maori custom wheu a person of note v?aa travelliug, his following greatly increased, but whether that wa3 by his wish or iiot did not appear. His intention was to go to Gisborne, and no doubt his arrest was a very wif.o measure, but the question for the court to decide was, was it lawful? Now, looking at the order itself, he saw that the complaint was laid by the inspector of police alleging that Te Kooti did an offensive act. The first part ot the plaint alleged that Te Kooti did an offensive net, but where wa3 the offensive act ? It was clear that To Kooti never assembled the Natives to disturb the public peace or to alarm her Majesty's subjects. He must have done some offensive act, and the justice must bo of opinion that such an act was likely to be repeated before (in order for sureties should be made. I'or these reasons he considered that the appeal ought to be allowed. As to the form of the order the act was not explicit, but he would order that the appeal bo allowed. He held that the order was bad, and not justified by the act; nnd he considered whatever was dono with Te Kooti, however wiss it might be, was not justified by law.