THE Wellington Independent. Tuesday, December 24,1861. ATCHESON v. FERARD.

Wellington Independent, Volume XVI, Issue 1696, 24 December 1861, Page 5

T HE Wellington Independent. Tuesday, December 24, 1861. ATCHESON v. FERARD.

It is with very great reluctauce that we allude to the squabbling that has been taking place between the Resident Magistrate and the Inspector of Police. The late action of Atcheson v. Ferard exhibits a state of things in the Resident Magistrate's department, which, if Gontiuued ; must prove very detrimental to the public interests. The want of personal re« speot and cordial obedience to the Magistrate so evidently feft by the Inspector, and the undignified conduct of the Magistrate as instanced by his keeping watch over the actions of a corporal over while visiting. the water closet, are not calculated to promote the public good Whatever may have been the original cause of the ill-feeling whioh exists between these two officers— neither ol whose duty can be efficiently performed without the cordial help of the other,— it is very desjrable that it should cease : and if it should not do so before the now daily expected return of Mr. St, Hill tc assume the Magistracy, we presume il certainly will then.

In contemplation of the speedy restoration of harmony by Mr. St. Hill's expiration of leave of absence, we should not have noticed tho subject were we not assured that the impression is likely to be created, elsewhere, that this case of Atcheson v Ferard has something to do with the Superintendent, and that the j decision of the Supreme Court the other ' day was a sort of back handed slap for ! His Honor. We' can sco scarcely any- i thing in the proceedings to warrant connecting the Superintendent with this case ; — it was not a re -trial of the cause Newry v. Atcheson, relative to which tbe Superintendent remitted a fine, and the decision in no way impugns the Superintendent's conduct ou that occasion ; but j it was simply 'an attempt of the Inspeo- J tor to prove that in being arrested in the way he had been, the Magistrate was actuated by feelings other than a regard to justice. According to the forms of law, ' this attempt of the Inspector to prove malice* failed, inasmuch as he was nonsuited. The only portion ofthe proceedings which was calculated to connect Dr. Featherston's remitting a trumpery,4os. fine, with the present case, was>an observation made by the Judge about the Superintendent j having arrogated to himself an inter--7 ference with the course of Justice; an observation, which we were glad to see that the Judge sometime afterwards tookoccasiouto explain away — and explain away also^ in such terms as left upon most persons the impression that he was extremely sorry for having allowed such a totally irrelevant expression to have escaped , him. ' Having reported the action at considerable length we have now to say that at the subsequent sittings in banco Mr. • Kiilg very wisely declined to move for a new trial ; after which the Judge read the police a lecture, assuring them that in the ' apprehe«sion of Newry (out of which all this undignified squabbling has arisen) they had acted illegally, • Even admitting that they did so, we still contend that the ends of justice would have beeu better served had the Magistrate inflicted on Atcheson merely nominal damages. Supposing that Newry was the tenant of the house, an illegality was oertainly-com-mitted by turning him out; but when the landlord stands by, and over and over again calls upon fhe police to turn out a man who hud beeu seeking admission surreptitiously through the window, and repeatedly assures them that he is not the tenant, the police aro not to hold an investigation into the case before complying with the landlords request. They have a right to look for protection from, the Magistrate in the bona fide discharge of their duly, and if Mr. Ferard felt bound to give Newry damages, the smallest coin of the realm would have amply vindicated the law. and better^s„uit£d_wbaLthe_Resident Magistrate's Court is intended to be— a court not so much of law' as of justice. And it is a matter, therefore, for congratulation that when one Head of Department is at cross purposes with another, a power is at hand to step in and see that tbe law is not made ameans of deterring the police when they strive to act justly. , Judge Johnston having explained away the use of his inappropriate expression in reference to the Superintendent, we bow to that custom amongst us which recognises an explanation as an ample antonement, otherwise we would have poiuted ; out how impossible it was for the Super-. \ inteudent to arrogate to himself an inter- ' ference in the original oase, inasmuch as 1 the express power^to interfere had been delegated to him by successive Governors , — a man cannot be said to arrogate to - himself that which a superior "anthority • has delegated to him. We have alluded to this subjeot, not so 1 much by reason of our own inclination- or sense of its importance, but because some whose opinion we value, have urged us to put the bearings of the late trial in their ' proper aspect. i „ ■■ — -