At the City Police Court this morning, before Messrs J. B. Thomson and J. P. Jones, J.P.s, George Wallace was charged by Alexander Campbell with having, on April 30 and May 9, 1889, committed wilful and corrupt perjury in statements made in his examinations before John Logan and William Langlands, Justices of the Peace, during tho hearing of a charge of cattlestealing preferred against Alexander Campbell. The statements alleged to have been falsel) made by accused were (1) that it was not a common thing for the said Alexander Campbell and himself to have cattle in the saleyards, and when they were sold for him (Wallace) to get the money; (2) that he never had partnership dealings in dairy cattle witli the said Alexander Campbell; and (3) that he never had any joint transactions with the said Alexander Campbell. Mr Solomon appeared on behalf of the prosecutor; Mr Macdonald for accused. Mr Solomon said that he did not intend to go fully into the case at present, but would merely call the evidence of the justices, Messrs Logan and Langlands, who, with others, occupied the Bench during the hearing of tho previous case, when tho perjury by accused occurred. He would then ask for an adjournment. It would merely be the preliminary examination of the hearing of a case which would ultimately be heard at the Supreme Court. The facts were : Accused had recently appeared as prosecutor in a charge of cattle-stealing preferred against the present prosecutor, and on the days mentioned had given utterance (while on oath) to the sentences contained in the indictment. The case was heard at the City Police Court, and after three adjournments and hearings Campbell was committed for trial at the Supreme Court sessions. Accused had then stated that Campbell had stolen a cow belonging to him, which was placed in a paddock, and he (learned counsel) would prove that the defence then raised—viz., that the parties concerned were partners in dealings with dairy cattle was a statement of fact, and that accuaad had told a deliberate falsehood. He had during the ooursc of his cross-examination by him (Mr Solomon) reiterated the statement mentioned, which counsel would prove waß a deliberate lie. He was aware that perjury was not an uncommon circumstance in the hearing of cases at the lower Courts of summary jurisdiction. Day after day persons swore and perjured themselves, knowing their statements to be untrue ; but where a man made a statement—a statement that he knew to be utterly untrue—in a case where the liberty of another was at stake, it was cowardly, treacherous, and "' Mr Mapdonald: I decidedly object to the manner in which my friend is stating the case aud in making jsuch remarks. We don't want to hear a Jeoture on the" evils pf peljury,
Mr Solomon would simply remind their Worships that if they considered a prima facie ease were established they would send the case to the Supreme Court, He called Willi in) Lauglauds, a Justice of the Peace, who said he remembered sitting, in conjunction with Mr Logan and other Justices, hearing a chargo of larceny preferred against Alexander Campbell. Accused was the prosecutor, aud Campbell was committed for trial to the Supreme Court. Wallace gave evidence in the case, being, to the best of witness's belief, sworn in the usual manner. Witness recollected Mr Solomon asking accused whether it was a common thing for him and Campbell to have dealings with cattle in partnership, and remembered that accused had denied that statement.
John Logan, Justice of the Peace, said he also occupied the bench in conjunction with other Justices during the hearing of the case against Campbell. Wallace was sworn in that case, and when accused was giving evidence witness remembered that the question usked by counsel re dealings with cattle between accused and Campbell was denied by the former, who repeated his denial more than once.
Mr Solomon said that was as far as he intended to proceed with the case at present, and he would now apply for an adjournment. Could their Worships sit earlier than usual, because he had a largo number of witnesses to call.
Mr Thomson replied that tho Bench would adjourn the case for a week. Mr Solomon then asked that bail be fixed for one surety and accused'a own recognisance. If it bad been a charge of a trifling description he would not have asked for bail to be fixed, but it was a serious matter. Accused was ordered to find one surety of L 25, and to enter into his own recognisance for a similar amount.
Permanent link to this item
ALLEGED PERJURY., Evening Star, Issue 7963, 19 July 1889
ALLEGED PERJURY. Evening Star, Issue 7963, 19 July 1889
Using This Item
Allied Press Ltd is the copyright owner for the Evening Star. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons New Zealand BY-NC-SA licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Allied Press Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.