The Timaru Herald. FRIDAY, JUNE 8, 1866.

Timaru Herald, Volume IV, Issue 108, 8 June 1866, Page 2

The Timaru Herald. FRIDAY, JUNE 8, 1866.

We confess to be somewhat astonished at the unusual, and to our minds not verj r satisfactory termination of the great libel case. As the whole matter m the preliminary examination before the Bench of Magistrates was brought so recently before the public, it is needless to refer to it beyond mentioning* that Mr. Robert DOyly, a solicitor of this town, thought fit to write certain letters to the SolicitorGeneral, containing* serious and grave charges against Mr. Uelfield Woollcombe, the Resident Magistrate. The charges were of such a nature that, if true, Mr. Wocllcombe would be unfit to hold the position he occupies, and not only was that position attacked, but his character as a privato gentleman was likewise im-J pugned. Under these circumstances Mri Woollcombe took the only course open to\ him, by applying to the Government for an immediate and searching investigation. T lie Government, no doubt acting under the advice of the law officers of the Crown, indirectly acceded to Mr. Woollcombe's request, not though by appointing a court of enquiry, but by directing Mr. Woollcombe to prefer a criminal information m the Supreme Court against Mr. D'Oyly. To our minds there is but little doubt that this action on the part of the Government was taken as being the inevitable result of a cotxrt of enquiry, thereby wisely saving the country useless expense m the ordering of such a court. It appeared then, that obeying the instructions of the Government, Mr. Woollcombe laid a criminal information against Mr. DOyly, and the case was brought before a bench of magistrates as a stepping stone for further proceedings m the Supreme Court ; and alter a long and patient investigation the bench fully committed Mr. DOyly for trial. The case involved the examination of a good many witnesses who had to appear at the Supreme Court, Christchurch, on the Ist instant, the opening day of the Court; thus putting tho country to considerable expense. At the last moment we hear that Mr. DOyly has apologised, and the case has been withdrawn. We are at a loss to understand what legal machinery has been put into force, so that an apology can be accepted. A criminal matter cannot be compounded, but as there must be a definite law allowing a composition m case of "Criminal Libel" the sooner it is abolished the better. As a precedent it will act most injuriously j for evil disposed persons not having the salutory dread of tho law before their ej'es, or rather knowing there is a loophole through which they may escape punishment apologising as a dernier ressort — will certainly not be deterred from committing the crime, but rather the reverse. The Government of course have the option of accepting an apology or not, but it is not just that any government officer should have the onus thrown on him of settling such a matter especially as it must be done more or less through private information. In the casein point,private information,and private reasons, were evidently employed. The public mind will clenrly not be satisfied at this termination; for such grave and sweeping charges made against a public servant ought to have been thoroughly sifted by a trial by jury; if found true, Mr. Woollcombe would of course be dismissed, if false, tho caluminator deserves punishment. After trial, the Crown can then step m and mitigate, or entirely abrogate the sentence, but certainly it seems out of place, and by no means consonant with justice, to put aside the law m the first instance.