Please wait. Contacting image service... loading

Article text

To the EDITORof the COLONIST.
? Sir, — In perusing an old Sydnoy Paper, I per
ceived that a settler named Macpherson had com
menced a civil action against Mr. Hely, the Su
perintendant of Convicts, for trespass, in taking
away the plaintiff's assigned servant — not be
cause the' master had behaved cruelly or tyran
ically, or starved or otherwise ill-used his ser
vant, but because it was the pleasure of this
Government officer to deprive the master of his
man's services. No one will deny that i f a mas
ter acts with cruelty towards his assigned ser
vant, it is a duty to cominon humanity to reliere
the suflerer; but this should only be done by a
proper investigation before the Magistrates. It
is equally clear, that to deprive any master of the
services of his assigned servants, at ariioment's no
tice without a trial, or without acause, would work
a_ wanton and malicious injury against the as
signee ; who, whether a farmer, a manufacterer,
or a trader, might be ruined and reduced- to
beggary, by the momentary obstruction of con
vict labour. Indeed, few persons would be
found to emigrate to these Colonies, if they thought
they would 'or ever could be deprived in an in
stant of their assigned servants, without a just
cause. If such a stretch of powerwere practised,
it would affect thousands. Farmers, at seed or
harvest time, or any other critical period, might,
be reduced to indigence. The three Judges of
the Sister Colony, about four, years ago, gave
an opinion that the Act of Parliament does
not give to the Governors. of these Colonies, the
power to revoke an assignment sarc for the benefit
of a deserving prisoner. Notwithstanding this,
1 however, find, ' that on the 1st of- September
following, the Attorney General of New South
Wales moved, in comformity with his instruction
from the Local Executive Government, that the
Judges would be pleased to revise their decision
respecting the meaning of sec. 9, Geo; IV., with
reference to the extent of the Governors' power
to revoke the assignment of convict servants, as
mooted in the case of Messrs. Hall and Hayes,
Editors and Proprietors of the Sydney Monitor
and Australian Newspapers, v. Mr. Hely, tho
Superintendant of Convicts, the: subject being
one of vital importance to the interests of the
Colony, as a difference of opinion prevailed on
the subjnet, with the Law Authorities in Eng
land, to whom the matter had been referred, and
as it was a matter of importance in every view,
that all doubts on the -subject should be set at'
rest.' ?'.'?'??'.?' '
'The three Judges unceremoniously refused to
entertain the learned Crown Officer's motion ;
Mr. Justice Stephen saying, ' he knew of no pre
cedent for such a motion in modern times, there
being no record of Ihe Court upon which to pro
ceed ;' and the learned Chief Justice, with Mr.
Justice Dowling, concurred with their learned
colleague in* dismissing the motion as highly ir
regiilar!' :
Now, Mr. Editor, I trust you will agree with
me, that these opinions are of sufficient import
ance to the best interests of the Colony to bo
widely circulated, that they may reach the ears
of every settler in tho Island. With this feeling,
then,- I have to beg you will be pleased to in
sert them in your Journal.— I am, Sir, your
humble servant, OBSERVER.
April 25, 1834. '
[We readily give insertion to the above, al
though we have seen it in print some years ago.
Itis nevertheless a good letter.-— Ed. Col.'] . ?
$