THE BOURKE TRAGEDY.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIX, Issue 182, 31 July 1908, Page 5

THE BOURKE TRAGEDY.

• » CHARGE OF PERJURY. CONNELLY UNDER EXAMINATION. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) J WESTPORT, this day. I In the perjury charge against Con- j nelly, accused gave evidence, and re- : peated his former statements with some additions. Under cross-examination, he said he had not told a lie yet in this case. Before he came into Court he told a good many, lies about Bourke's j death. He told them in the Q.C.E. Hotel that he intended to take Bourke to' I lodgings. That was a lie. It was also, a lie when he told Miss Bowring that he had left Bourke opposite the theatre. j When he told Murray that he had fallen j over with Bourke at the corner, that was a lie. When he told the Sergeant he had left Bourke opposite Hardley's I shop, that was another lie. Where he . said he had taken Bourke up the street as far as Hardley's shop and given : him over to two men but only got his eye on one fellow, and that he could not recognise the other fellow, as he had his back to him —that was a lie. When! he told Black and Mcllvcney he was ( the only man who had anything to do with Bourke's death, that was a lie. Mr. Bowling, clerk of the Court, was' lying when he said witness swore in the : Magistrate's Court that Hallinen's words 'to witness were, "Mind you don't let out who killed the man, who kicked the man, or something like that." He did not remember saying at Nelson these j same words. Mrs. Phillips and Mrs. Pearce were lying when they said only two men crossed the street to the shed.! Mrs. Tom Pearce and Lily Pearce were j lying when they said witness was in I j their kitchen at about 8.20 that night. If Murray had sworn these men did not ! come into Qualter's he was lying. Haakonson, Halinen, and Andersen were lying when they said Halinen and AnderI sen were not at Qualter's. Tottenham ! and Fraser were lying when they stated that witness said to them, after the i body was taken to the morgue, that the wounds were caused by a knife. His I only explanation of positive denial of , knowledge of Bourke was that he did j not know the man's name. He did notj know whether he gave a false name I (King) when arrested for window-break-' j ing. He might have made a mistake I I when he marked the spot on the plan j | where the prisoners had met him. He I had given a reason for the various lies, j He was afraid Halinen was going to I take his life. He did not complain to the I gaoler, but told the inspector at that! ; time that the men were under lock and i key. He was at the police station, but i ! never . mentioned a word about these I threats until he had done his eight days, j He did not speak about Bourke's death in gaol. It was Halinen who spoke. He would not swear he was five minutes away at the shed; it might have been five minutes, ten minutes, or a quarter of an hour. He had said he could not write—only his name. He did not write a letter produced, and did not burn a letter written to his mother. Questioned by his Worship as to a 1 letter produced, the signature on the letter being shown to him, accused again said it was not bis. He compared the signature with the signature to his deposition, and then said he wrote his name but not the letter. Counsel's address opened this morning, but Mr. Hannan was overtaken by Dlness, and the Court adjourned till the afternoon. The hearing has lasted twelve days.