NO GROUNDS FOR RETRIAL

Evening Star, Issue 19197, 13 March 1926, Page 23

NO GROUNDS FOR RETRIAL

[Pek [ijiiTED j'uess Association.] RAPIER, March 12. A motion for a new trial of tho case beard . this session in which Eicon a Agnes Christie Bye it, of Manaia, Taranaki, a widow, claimed £5,650 damages from Walter Manson, saw-miller, of Napier, was heard in the Supreme Court before the Chief Justice (Mr Skorrett) to-day. The case was a claim for damages in respect to an alleged assault and tho communication of a disease. Plaintiff moved for a new trial on grounds that tho alleged mitconduct of certain witnesses affeyted the trial. In support of her contention sbo produced two aliidavits—one by Susan Ann jVPKeohnie, widow, of Napier and the second by Sarah Isabella Eumi> ler, of Napier—alleging that Br 11. P. Berman, of Napier, committed perjury. The affidavits stated that the persons named on them were both told by Dr Bcrnau in October, 1825, and in January, 1926, that he had never examined defendant, but merely gave him a certificate on his war records. “I may say, your Honor,’” said Mrsßyeif, in supporting her application, “that it was in my presence on January 17, 1926, that Dr Bornau made that statement.” "In my opinion, it would be improper for mo to give a new trial,” said his Honor. "Your affidavits in no way establish that Dr Bornau committed perjury at tho trial. The statement by the doctor to those named in tho affidavits may have been misunderstood; but in any case you would have to establish that tho alleged false evidence ■would have materially affected tho result of tho trial, which, in my opinion, it would not. The, application,” he concluded, ”is retesert. w tih £lO 10s costs against the mover.” air H. B. Lusk appeared for Walter Manson, but took, no part in the deliberations. His Honor remarking that he thought .it was unnecessary to call on Mr Lusk,