THE Inangahua Times, PUBLISHED TRI-WEEKLY MONDAY, APRIL 10, 1882.

Inangahua Times, Volume VII, Issue 1072, 10 April 1882, Page 2

THE Inangahua Times, PUBLISHED TRI- WEEKLY MONDAY, APRIL 10, 1882.

As most of our readers, who have resided in Reefton know, there has been a bitter fued between James Johnston, a cattle dealer and settler, and Eugene O'Conor, formerly member of the House of Representatives for the Bul- | ler district. The quarrel arose out of the disputed ownership of two or thrte head of cattle, and war has been waged in different forms between the parties fqr some years. An arbitration was Stranged, «tHtte ,pff, ... ra.d was -dy^e.t|L j Mstorfpbut he was not &sj^p|ftn&" the result, and has carried on a continuous campaign from its date till the present time. He has charged O'Conor with perjury, and obtained a committal, but through some cause or other, probably owing to the weakness of the . the evidence, the Grown Prosecutor, in the District Court, (the late Mr South), did not proceed. Johnston then petitioned the House, and last session his case was investigated, and he had £50 given him, for what special reason we do not know. Lately he and Sydney Welsh laid informations for conspiracy against Eugene O'Conor, John Gilmer, John Dick, and W. M'Lean. in connection with the case and the arbitration. The case was heard on Monday last, and the Magistrate in dismissing it said, according to the Westport Times report, that "he had not the slightest hesitation in discharging the accused, and no doubt Welsh and Johnston had committed perjury. He would direct them to be detained in custody and a prosecution entered against them for perjury." An information laid against Mr. E. G. B. Moss then came on for hearing, which substantially charged the defendant with forging the late Mr Wm. Pitt's signature to the deed of submission, but Johnston, who was the informant, subsequently declined to go on. On Tuesday, Johnston was brought up charged with perjury, and committed' for trif^'and on Wednesday, Welsh was similarly dealt' with. Whether the two defencf_.nts were or were, not guilty of peit'jtn^'is^ncJt for us to ex- x press cmr opinion on. They will be tried at . the^Wtitport District Court, when a j turf will determine their guilt or otherwise, and the circumstance of their cases being subjudice prevents any comment. . The same, however, does pot apply to the cases that have been disposed of, in which it was shown beyond all possibility of doubt that a number of respectable men have been criminally charged, and that at the greatest inconvenience, as well as at great expense, have been compelled to appear on the informations of Welsh and Johnston to answer what has proved to be a thoroughly groundless accusation. Mr. E. G. B. Moss was charged with no less than forgery, the other defendants were brought up at great loss to themselves to defend themselves against a shadow, Mr. L. G. Reid had to come to Westport from Timaru, and none of the accused, though the charges against them had no basis whatever, will ever be recouped a single shilling of the heavy expenses to which they must , have been put. The miserable cattle vendetta between O'Conor and Johnston, which has thus culminated, is not worth a word, but the consequences arising ■ show very distinctly what, under the present administration ofthe law, may happen to honorable men in New Zealand on the motion of any malicious or deluded person. They show that, however basely unfounded a charge may be, persons of every degree are at the mercy of the unscrupulous. No matter how ridiculous any accusation may be, if an informant applies for an informatien, and swears to its truth, a magistrate, unless he believes the informant to be of unsound mind, m\ist issue a summons or warrant as the case may be. It is equally bounden on those summoned, even when no warrant is issued, to attend the Court from which the summons is issued, or allow judgment to go by default and the case to be hoard in their absence, or else stand the risk of having a warrant issued for apprehension, Thus a vindictive and rascally individual in Dunedin may summon a resident in Auckland on any alleged matter that arose in Dunedin, and though there may not be the ghost of suhstance in the allegations contained, the victim must attend at whatever expense and loss. It is true that he may try for costs, but the class of persons likely to prefer unfounded charges are not generally in possesion of funds, and it would not only be ' throwing good money after bad, but it ■ would, as tho old phrase has it, be suing i a beggar to catch an unpleasant insect. Surely some great reform is needed in : tliis direction. Either, power should be I ,'iven, as in civil cases, for the local t magistrate to take evidenco in defence, I md forward it to the Bench frotn (

whence the summons was issued, or else to compel the complainant to find security for payment of costs, in case of the charge breaking down before any summons was sent. It may be said tnat the , latter course would deny justice to the poor man ' who had not the means or power to give the required security, but, in such cases, it would be easy for the police to thoroughly investigate the matter alleged, and if they found that there was reason in the complaint, let the Government assist complainants in any manner required. As the law stands, gentlemen may be dragged from their homes at a moment's warning from one end of the colony to the other, and, after being dismissed, find they have to pay all costs themselves in additiion to the losses and, disgrace that even unmerited charges fix upon them. It is to be hoped that the late Westport cases will attract the attention of the Legislature, and that such an amendment in administration of the law will take place during the coming session as will render their repetition a matter of impossibility.