A WITNESS' EXPERIENCE.

Press, Volume XLVII, Issue 7529, 19 April 1890, Page 3

A WITNESS' EXPERIENCE.

TO THX KDITOR OB* THE PRESS. Sro,—l had the misfortune to be calle_ by the police as a witness in a case heard ou the 20th ot March before Caleb Whltfoord, Esq., in the R.M. Court, Amberley, agaiust John Bowie for maliciously destroying a memorial .wreath placed on a grave in the cemetery at WalkarL All that I had to do with the matter was to prove its value, that it belonged to mc, and that I had placed it on the grave. Well, sir, though I was only a witness the defendant Bowie was allowed by the Bench to put—and though I protested repeatedly—l was commanded by the Bench to answer—all sorts of abominable and outrageous questions—questions quit* irrelevant, and put evidently with the sole intention of annoying mc. Indeed, so outrageous and scandalous were they, that Inspector Pender, who is well known to permit every latitude to defendants in the cases he conducts, stood up and protested against the Magistrate allowing the questions being put to mc, but without effect, as the defendant was permitted to carry on the same course of procedure through his sister, whom he called for the defence. The following are some of the questions put to mc, and a sample of the others not) recorded:—

" Did not a man in Christchurch of the name of McLeod get twenty years through you?— No. You swear he did not get twenty years for stabbing his wife, through your carrying on with hert—l swear he did not. Now, didn't yon at* tempt to poisonjyour wife with belladonna I —No. Did your wife ever say to yon, ' Now, Barton, I know you are poisoning mc T —Certainly not. You positively swear that t— Yes. Didn't she say, 'Mind too, if you are, I have left a letter behind ma that will pat a rope round your neck B'— No, never." Now, Sir, I make no apology for asking you to insert this, my protest against such proceedings being permitted, as I submit they cannot be made too public; and it la simply intolerable that such conduct should be perpetrated in any Court of Justice, and against a witness who has no chance of defending himself. Such proceedings are in my opinion a menace and a danger to every member of the community who is equally liable to be subjected to the same experience that I have had to undergo, as the only conditions necessary to subject them to the same scandalous and intolerable abase would be getting them into the witness-box by serving a subpcena and paying their expenses, it not being ayall necessary that the witness should havQ any knowledge of the case under Investigation. (See Miss . Bowie's evidence as reported in the Christchurch P-Osss of March 21st.) In conclusion, I contend that If the foregoing proceedings are sanctioned by law, the sooner our Legislature has it altered, the better for the peace and welfare of the country,—-Tours, I &C« . __ " il _,JW. Ui B-*BTO».