THE WAIKOMITI MURDER.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 9715, 18 April 1893, Page 2

THE WAIKOMITI MURDER.

UNSEEMLY PROCEEDINGS,

(Fbom Oun Own Coukespokdent.)

Auckland, April 17,

A public meeting was held in the City Hall yesterday afternoon for the purpose of hearing a lecture by Mr James Beard entitled, "Would we be Justified in Executing the Convict Scott.". There was a large attendance. The proceedings were of a somewhat unsettled character, and not at all in keeping with the serious nature of the question or tne critical and solemn position ot the condemned man. The lecture was interspersed with applause, laughter, cries of "Humbug,"aud interjections of a jocular and unbecoming description on more than one occasion. During the lecture a number of ladies and gentlemen rose from their seats and left the building. Mr Beard contended that it was not right that Scott should bs executed, as he was not a sane man, and therefore not accountable for his actions. The very fact that he had committed the crime was sufficient proof of this. The lecturer then went into the insolvable question of man's freewill, and urged that criminals should and could ba treated in a manner which would make them good citizens once more—that they should be treated as lunatics and sick people. The following is a selection from the dialogue which took place between the lecturer and the audience: —

"What shall we do with the unfortunate man Scott?— Hang him. Will you take his life ?—Cries of " Yes" and "No," and one individual created some amusement by suggesting the infliction of a fine. The lecturer went on to state that people did not know the power of letting loose disembodied spirits upon the world. He had personal experience of their power. Many people said that the devil caused all the evil in the world, and therefore the devil should be punished.— (Hear, hear, and laughter.) He did not think Scott was a sane man. There were men who could not help doing wrong, and there were others who could not do wrong.—(Cries of "Oh" and laughter.) Mr Jsmes Adams, of Ponsonby, in a very warm speech, moved —"That this meeting of citizens having heard the address of the convener of the meeting, expresses its approval of the verdict of the judge and jury who tried the case, and has fcue utmost confidence in the common sense and impartiality of tho executive Government, and believe thai they will give a righteous decision in the case." He said that the lecturer had drawn a pitiful picture of Scott, but had said nothing about the murdered man, who had been shown to be a good husband and a reliable friend. — (Loud applause.) They all knew the" lecturer was simply advertising himself as a phrenologist.— (Laughter.) Mr Joseph Beecroft seconded the motion. He thought that the action of the judge and jury would be upheld in the interests of law and order. A Voice : Will you hang him ? Mr Adams : Yes, if no one else will. I stand here, and I say I will hang him. Not for money. I will give the fees, if any, to the Blind Institute.—(Uproar.) Mr Adams then put his motion to the meeting, about an equal number of hands being held up for and against. Mr Beard, before closing the meeting, said there were always some people in every community prepared to kill and slaughter.— (Applause.) The Herald says: "The absurdity of encouraging an appeal in capital cases from the verdict of the jury to the irresponsible judgment of a noisy section of the community was very strongly manifested by the meeting which was held yesterday to consider the Scott case. Tho proceedings were of an altogether unseemly character. The audience behaved as though they were taking part in a political gathering. AH this shows the mischief of endeavouring to thwarb the ends of justice by popular clamour. The only possible result is to bring the regular constituted procedure of law coutts into contempt. If the man in the street is to be the final court of appeal in a case, the sooner capital punishment is abolished the better.7'