The Temuka Leader. TUESDAY. JUNE 22, 1886. THE NATIONAL BANK.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1522, 22 June 1886, Page 2

The Temuka Leader. TUESDAY. JUNE 22, 1886. THE NATIONAL BANK.

Patient and persevering effort most eventually succeed. The Hon. John Bathgate has bj indomitable perseverance, allied with apiendid abilities, succeeded in carrying a resolution in the Legislative Council affirming the principle of a National Bank. On last Friday Mr Bathgate moved a resolution to the effect thst the Council advise the Government to takeaway from the Banks the privilege of issuing paper currency, and to establish a State Bank of Issue. Mr Bathgate spoke at great length, and used generally the same arguments employed by him last session when he brought in his Bill for the establishment of a State Bank of Issue. The whole system, he remarked, of permitting Banks to issue paper currency is pernicious, and if a panic occurred the holders of notes would suffer. Shares in the Banks of the colony were held principally by capitalists in England, who cared not a jot for the colony. He hoped the Council would agree with his motion, and, if the Government were advised to bring in a Bill having for its object the issue of paper currency, commercial, pastoral, and agricultural pursuits would flourish, and the people generally would be gainers. The motion was put without discussion and carried—l2 voting for and 11 against it. Sir Robert Stout may say it ia alt nonsense j Mr Rolleaton in his own drowsy way may tell us that there are great difficulties in the way ; other wiseacres, influenced by self-interest, may condemn it, but despite their opposition it will come. The proposal bears the stamp of honor, honesty, justice, and charity on it, and freedom demands it as her safeguard, We want to pay our debts, bnt we cannot do it without a National Bank ; we want to be free, bnt we cannot be so while accursed monopolists hold the nation’s pursestrings, and merciless mortgagees suck the country’s life-blood as relentlessly' as Irish landlords. There is one danger in its way, and it , is the apathy and senselessness of the people themselves. Nothing else can defeat it, but wo trust tbs fact that the principle has been confirmed by so conservative a body as the Legislative Council, and that it has met with the approval of Mr Gladstone, the greatest living statesman, will open people’s eyes and they will insist upon legal sffect being given to it, TONER F. HERRING. The plaintiff in the Toner v. Herring case heard last week in the Supreme had a most extraordinary story to tell. The plaintiff, according to the evidence, was, and is, a farmer living at . Alford Fprest, near Ashburton. About the end of March last he wanted some pieces of timber technically known as “ rickers,” and on making inquiries, be was directed by a neighbor to s place supposed to have been a deserted bush that-belonged to a Mrs Pye. Here be was told he could gel what he wanted, and taking with him another man in the broad daylight, thither he went and cut down the rickers, As be was coming away he was met by a man who told him be had taken the rickers from the Company’s bush, the manager of which was Mr Herring. Toner expressed doubt as to the accuracy of this statement, and said that even if be had Mr Herring would not say anything about it, as the timber was not of much value. A few days after he was surprised by a visit from Mr Herring accompanied by Constable Burke who, there and then, without a warrant or any other authority, took him into custody, and dragged him away to a lock-up some six or eight miles distant. He was brought before Mr Baddeley, convicted of larceny, and fined 40s and costs. This was bad enough, but Herring does not appear to have been satisfied with having thus branded the man as a felon. He wanted evidently to crush him altogether, and in furtherance of this neighborly intention bo wrote a grossly libellous letter to the Christchurch Press in which be pictured Toner as the vilest of the vile. Throughout Herring appears to bare acted with overbearing arrogance prompted by personal malice. Be is evidently one of those who caanot live happily unless they are riding roughshod over their neighbors. His conduct was certainly bad, but there was some excuse for him. He was under the impression the timber had been taken oat of bis bush, and be wauted to make an example of the man who he thought had taken it. As regards the Constable and Mr Baddeley, ignorance of their duty can be their only excuse. It was really a monstrous thing for a Constable to arrest a man without a warrant or authority for such a trivial offence. The part the Resident Magistrate played in this curious comedy was certainly the least excusable of any. He, at any rate, ought to know the law. He ought to have known that to constitute larceny, secrecy and felonious intent must be shown. In this case the “ rickers ” were taken in broad daylight, and in the presence of many witnesses, and Toner could have had no felonious intentions of stealing them because he thought the bush deserted, and did not belong to Herring at all. If Toner was guilty of any rffenceit wnof having wrongfully taken the timber. He was not guilty of larceny ; he only took timber out of, as he believed, a deserted bush. It was shown that many of his neighbors were in the habit of doing the same thing, and that it

was not looked upon as wrong. He made no secrecy of what be wag doing, he looked upon it as no offence, and consequently there wss no evidence of felonious intent oh his part. Never have we come across such evidence of incompetency on (be part of a Resident Magistrate. Tbs latest addition to the Commission of the Peace—even be who could neither read nor write—could not do worse than Mr Raddeley did in this case. But it is useless to pursue the subject further. The Supreme Court bss cleared the stain put on Toner’s character by Mr Baddeley’s mcompetency, and given substantial solace for bis wounded feelings besides.