RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT.

Westport Times, Volume III, Issue 438, 25 December 1868, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT.

Thuksday, Dec. 24. (Before J. Giles, Esq., E.M.) BREACH OF THE ARMS ACT. John Munro was charged, on the information of the Inspector of Police, with the following offences under the Arms Act: — That he did, on October 17th, "practise and was concerned in a certain contrivance and device with intent and design to trade, and render inoperative the provisions of the Arms Act, 1860, by offering a double barrelled gun at public auction, with a hat on it, and then stating that he would give the said doublebarrelled gun to whatever person bought the said hat, or words having the same effect. That, on the 20th September he did unlawfully dispose of certain arms, to wit: one rifle, without a license in the form of a schedule to the Arms Act, 1860, the same being an indictable offence. Mr Tyler, who appeared for the defendant, applied for a remand of the case. On behalf of the defendant, lie desired to avail himself of the provision of the Act whereby it was implied that a prosecution under the Act could be staid by the Attorney-General. It seemed to him, by the very existence of that provision, that it was contemplated that circumstances might arise where it was not necessary to go on with such a prosecution. Assuming that the defendant were proved to be guilty of the offence with which he was charged, a very serious punishment would be inflicted upon him, and such a punishment as was not necessary either for the ends of justice or for the security of her Majesty on the throne. The circumstances, he thought, were not such as to justify the punishment which the law allowed. Such a punishment would be much more than adequate to the offence committed. The fact of being charged with an indictable offence, the anxiety involved, and the charges he had been put to in defending the case would be sufficient punishment for the defendant. There was no war being carried on in this island, nor was there any clanger whatever likely to arise from the alleged act of the defendant, whose position and conduct alone forbade the conclusion that he would be guilty of anything contrary to the spirit of the Arms Act. He (Mr Tyler) therefore applied for a remand, so that a petition for a stay of proceedings might be forwarded to the Attorney-General. Of course, the applicationwould be made on the assumption that the offence had been committed.

The Magistrate did not know of any objections to the granting of the application. The remand, however, could only be granted for eight days at a time.

Inspector Pranklyn, as the prosecutor, saidhe might state that the prosecution was instituted at the request of the Native Minister. He did not offer any objection to the application made. Individually he was very glad to have an opportunity of stating this, because it had been insinuated that there was a certain amount of malice in the matter—that he was moved by malice in taking these proceedings; but this, the action which he was now taking would entirely disprove. The Magistrate said the Act certainly did not seem to imply the most stringent enforcement in all cases, but it did not provide any particular means of abating it. He would, however, adjourn the case for eight days, in the ordinary way, the defendant finding his own recognisances.

Mr Tyler said that, with respect to the memorial to which he had alluded, his Worship was, of course, aware of the peculiarities of the district, and could no doubt give valuable information as to the necessity of punishing an offence of this description. He therefore asked leave to forward the memorial through his Worship, leaving it for him to comment upon it, as he would also desire the Inspector of Police to do, before it was sent to the Attorney-General. The Magistrate said that, of course, his views with regard to any indictable offence were purely administrative, and he saw no objections to the course proposed. He would forward any memorial, commenting on it as well as he could, consistent v»ith his duty. The caae was remanded until Thursday next.