A case of improper handling of blasting powder destined for the Barrier mine.RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Tuesday, January 5, 1858. John Watson Bain, of the firm of Bain, Grahame, and Co., appealed this day, before Thomas Beckham, Esq., to answer to the information of Sergeant Major Brown, of the Auckland Armed Police Force, charging him with a breach of the Ordinance relating to Arms and Gunpowder, in having at one time, to wit on the 24th November, 1857, more than 50 lbs. of gunpowder on certain premises, in Fort-street, in their occupation, without a license for that purpose, contrary to the provisions of the ordinance. Mr. Merriman appeared for the prosecution. From the evidence it appeared that the powder described was blasting powder, and the application for removal was for blasting powder and not gunpowder. That the blasting powder was in transit from the Magazine to the Great Barrier Island Mine. When the powder was brought from the Magazine the water was too deep to permit the carts to reach the boat, and the powder was placed in a brick water closet in a corner Messrs. Bain, Grahame, and Co.'s yard, and remained there only two hours or thereabouts, and was then placed on board the Midge. The powder was not dealt with by the Defendants. They were merely agents for the shipment of it. The Powder Magazine closes at 12 o'clock a.m. and the powder could not be returned to it until next day. It was shipped the same day. Mr. Russell, who appeared for the defendant, took an objection to the information, that the powder in question was not gun-powder but blasting powder. The Bench considered that the ordinance was by no means explicit on that point. The ordinance was by no means publicly known, and he thought the Press would render service by giving publicity to the following clauses : — " 1. It shall not be lawful for any person to remove, or cause to be removed, from any one part of the Colony of New Zealand to any other part of the said Colony, either by inland carriage or coastways, any Arms," or other Warlike Stores, or any Gunpowder exceeding the weight of two pounds, without a License for removing and carrying the same" granted by some Justice of the Peace, Provided always, that nothing herein contained shall affect or be construed to extend to prevent any person, from carrying arms for the defence of bis person, or for sporting, as by Law he might before the passing of this Ordinance. '• Be it enacted by the Lieutenant Governor of New Zealand, with the advice and consent of the Legislative Council thereof. That no person being a Dealer in Gunpowder shall have or keep at any one time more than Fifty Founds weight of Gunpowder, and not in any home, store- room, warehouse, shop, collar, yard, wharf, building, or place other than some Public Powder Magazine, except by license granted to him for that purpose under the authority of his Excellency the Governor. | The Court reserved judgment until the following Saturday. Matthew Henry Roe pleaded guilty to an information charging him with having on the 2nd October, 1857, more than 15 lbs. gunpowder on his premise*. C A. Harris, having been sworn, deposed that the powder belonged to him. He purchased 5 quarter kegs of gunpowder, containing in all 126 lbs. of gunpowder, the previous day from Bain, Grahame and Co. Only two kegs were to have been sent at that time, but, by some mistake, 5 kegs were sent a few minutes after 12 o'clock. He refused to take them in, and went to Bain, Grahame and Co , and Mr. Bain promised to send him an authority for the removal of two of the kegs to the premises of Roe, Street and Co., and of 1 to Coulihan's. Copy of the authority was here put in. It was after 12 o'clock, when the powder came, and it could not be returned to the Magazine He had led Mr. Roe into a mistake, and he was anxious to exonerate him from blame. When the powder was taken to Mr. Roe's premises he was not aware that he was committing any breach of the law. Hugh Coolihan appeared to a similar information. The case was precisely similar to that of the previous one. The Bench said there was nothing at all of an aggravated character in the cases before the Court, but an infraction of the law had taken place, and penalties must be indicted. Ignorance of the law could not be admitted as a plea. If the premises had been blown up and the city fired, ignorance would be but a sorry plea. The Bench animadverted strongly on the grave and dangerous defects of the Ordinance. 15 lbs. of gunpowder would be found as effectual in blowing up a house as 50 lbs , and a revision of the Act might be attended with great advantage in a wooden built town so readily and dangerously inflammable. Judgment in both cases reserved until Saturday.
On Saturday the Bench delivered judgment as follows :—: — "The first question for the Court to decide is whether Blasting Powder is Gunpowder within the meaning of the Gunpowder Ordinance. The Court was of opinion from the commencement that Blasting Powder did come within the meaning of the Act. and its opinion has been strengthened by reference to several authorities on the subject. It therefore only remains for the Court to decide whether the law has been broken, and if so what amount of penalty should be inflicted. There is no doubt in the mind of the Court that a breach of the law has been committed ; but at the same time the Court is of opinion that the defendants acted in the most judicious manner in their power, viz., in placing the powder where they did, not being able to return it to the Magazine. The Court feels that this case is very different from any one of the kind that has been previously brought before it, and taking into consideration the fact that the defendants were convicted upon their own testimony, the Court feels that the ends of justice would be met by ordering them to pay a fine of 20s. and costs." Remarks of a somewhat similar nature were made in the cases against Roe and Coolihan, who were ordered to pay a like fine of 20s. in each case. Daily Southern Cross, Volume XV, Issue 1100, 12 January 1858, Page 3 (Papers Past) |
 The authoritative site about the human and natural history of Aotea Great Barrier Island. |
Courtcase- misuse of blasting powder for the mine Nov 1857 |