EXTRAORDINARY CASE AT WELLINGTON.

Auckland Star, Volume XV, Issue 3724, 19 July 1882, Page 2

EXTRAORDINARY CASE AT WELLINGTON.

A -Man Alleged to Have Been Imprisoned and Flogged Wrongfully.

(BY TELEGRAPH—OWN CORRESPONDENT.)

WELLINGTON, this day. AN extra»rdinary caso was commented in the E.M. Court yesterday. Jim., Jonathan Adams, Genevievo Adatus, and Elizabeth Adams, were charged with," that they did in or abaut tke months of February, March, and April ISSO, at the city of Wellington, unlawfully, wickedly, falsely, and mali. ciouily conspire, combine, confederate, and aaree to get the latter to charge one George William Lenyhurst, of Wellington, aforesaid, with feloniously, unlawfully, and carnally knowing and abusing the said Ucnevievc Elizabeth Adama, being then a girl under the ago of 10 years, to wit at the age of 10 years."—Mr E. Sbaw and Mr Gaily appeared to support the prosecution, Mr Oliivier being retained fur the defence. In opening the case, Mr Shaw said the pioaecution was fully aware of the gravity of the task they had undertaken, which was practically one to release from gaol and from a long period of penal servitude a young man who they hoped to be able to satisfy His Worship hud been unjusUy accused and convicted on false eviannce. Their case was, that Georgo Looghurst, who was tried for rape on a girl of tender years, in 18S0, was put ou his trial at the instigation of the defendant! and others, who, the prosecution alleged, had sworn falsely concerning the subject matter of the trial, and upon such avidence was convicted and sentenced to 14 } ears' penal servitude with two whippings with the cat-o'-nine-tails. The evidence on which the prosecution relied was lengthy, becanso the subject matter of the case extended over a period from the end of thq year 1879 up to within a month sgo, This evidence might bo sub divided into two heads—first the evidence showing, from the admission of thy two defendants, ths father and the little girl, that Longhurst was falsely accused, and secondly the medical and other evidence to show that Longhurßt could not have committed the crime imputed to him. Upon the first head the prosecution purposed to call Mrs Humphrey, the mother of George Longhurst, who would detail the family history of herself and the Adamses, and of her unfortunate second husband, Humphrey,up to the time of the alleged offence. This witness would show that her husband bad left her, and wan living in the house occupied by Adams aud the litile girl, that he had left her owing to his drunken conduct, and to her refusal to supply him with money for his profligate habits, lhc evidence showed that the little girl had contracted a disease from which Humphrey and Leughurst were also suffering at that time, The evidence would further show that on the day of the alleged offence Humphrey left his wife's house, threatening both herself aad her boh. Tho prisoner Adams, who was a son of her half-sister, had been, brought from Melbourne here on money lent by Mrs Looghurst at Adams's request. She had previonsly treated the Adams's with.'uniform kindness, and assisted them in every way, and they were occupying rent free a house belonging to her and her son George, which would belong to the latter absolutely on hia attaining his majority a month or so afterwards. Her bod, in fact, had recently given Adams notice that he would have to leave tho cottage, as he would want it ou his coming of age. About the 'same time —that is, in the months of December, 1879, and January, 1880—Adams applied to her son to obtain a loan, which was refused. It was material to notice at this time that all these parties were residing in a house in Wellington—the three adults in the house were all embittered, not only at Mrs Longhurst, bat at her sod, who was going to take possession of his cottage. On Sunday afternoon, the sth February, George Longhurßt visiul the house in which prisoners resided, and !f>art of tho time he was in a small back yard, ia the rear of the premises, ia common with the little girl and with other children. On the following day some conversation took place between the little girl and her mother, but no complaint was made till some days after the Sunday afternoon when the .offence was alleged to have taken place. Thtn Mr and Mrs Adams informed, not George, bnt his mother, that her son had been tampering with the girl, and they offered to rquaie the matter and keep it out of the Court for a connideralion. On the Wednesday after the alleged assault, the girl was examined by Dr. Collins, who would swear, arid who had always been ready to swear, that no sach offence as that charged could have been committed on tho girl. Knowing that this evidence would be hostile to the prosecution, the prisoners never mentioned a word about it, and thus an important and material witness was excluded from the hearing of the case. ' He did not implicate blame to the learned gentleman (Mr Izard) who conducted the case for the Crown for not calling this wit. uea.a, as it nevei seemed to have come to his knowledge that Dr. Collins had examined the child. The result of this examination thawed that the girl was suffering from a complaint common to both Humphrey and Longhurst, which, however, iatst have been caught some time previously. The Adam«e3 again went to Mr I Longhurst, and threatened to give information to the police if he still refused to buy them off. They fulfilled their threat, and at au examination by JJrs. Diver and Gillon on the Saturday following, the child was Ehowp to he suffering from iniuries of such a nature that the jury could not ,but find Longhurst guilty of the offence charged. The theory of ihe present prosecution was that these injuries nad been inflicted not by Longbfurst ion Sunday, the evidence of Dr. Collins completely displaying this, but had been manufactured by Adams an,d his wife between Wednesday and the following Saturday for the purpose of deceiving the medical examiners on the last-named day. That was the wretched theory to which the prosedition were driven. It seemed too horrible an idea ever to have crossed a father's or a mother's mind, but unless Vr. Collins was perjuring himself, they could come to no other conclusion. Several witnesses were then called in support of this statement, The case is expected to last two or