SUPREME COURT

Marlborough Express, Volume LIV, Issue 134, 9 June 1920, Page 5

SUPREME COURT

POUP^MONTHLY SESSIONS^

(Before His Honor Sir ■ John ' ' ' - Salmond). . - - The four-monthly sessions of 'the? 'bupreni© Court were1 continued ■ this. I'.ormng. His Honor, Sir John Salmond, took his seat at 10.30 o'clock.. ~ ;pHARGE-:OP;PERJURY. v THo'Court entered on the lieqi-ing,: of the third, charge of .perjury arising from-the case heard in the Magistr,a,te',s ..Court'/. dn'. October 3Qth,: 1910,,, when three ",,-. young ['. mon—William Rees, Clarence * Day, ;and Francis Dwyer—we).e charged with that 'they, were found bit licensed. premises during tho. evening oi October Stli wjiliout_ la,.v;ful .excuse,' TBe. information against Rees ". was' dismissed by the* Magistrate; :xtid, i lie evidence- of. Sergeant jSnallcrass having been added to that' of Constable Crowe '""'ixi- ' their eases-^Day Arid' Dwyei* were■••■ convicted: and fined. In the Supreme Court yesterday: Rees and' Day were separately charged with having sworn falsely in denying that they. were in' the jard of the ■ Grosyeiior Hotel on tho occasion in question, and in each case the jury returned.'a .verdict of'npt guilty.. '■'■ To-day Fraineis. Dwyer was similar^' ly diarged and pleaded not guilty. .Mr T. F. RfelMg' appeared f oi the., defence.; ' v ; ' , . = The following .jury was empannelled:—John Morion (fdremaii),' 'Albert. S. Mason,; >: James ;Neal, Roy Sissons, Fred. C. Ha.ll, John Fawcett, jnr.j James, Dain,es, i:;i Thomas Halligan,,. Herberfc .BvHayT^ Cecil 'J. Adams,. JTames H. , Woolley, Timothy p., O'Connor. ■ - ■ >> Tito* Crown Prosecutor asked the*jury to,^as far as possible, dissociate this case ini'their minds. from 'the' cases heard yesterday, and to deal' with it: entirely* oil its ■'■■ dwn merits. '■ 'In', this \ ease, he .remarked, the element of ■coiToboffttforr^r^qtrired -By tierule of law relating to. trials for per-r jury, was stronger than' it was iiirth©---previous;- 'cases/'-I'''' - •■■ .>■,>.;;.'!•••"•■." .■; •The evidence^>>brM^it r by Mr, ;R.. yiepalluin ..(€*owh Prose<7utdr); aotul' V) Mr Relluig. was prM^fcaUy .ideiitical'1. with;: -that' addifaett. laincl"., „ ; Hiis^bnbj«;)direeteci '. thai), ,£et*6"ut thiaivtli^-a4o«sedi-|\TOr,e^f : ■Withy tliei'intent to,. asf«ist Rees (npt.af^. in its original'foiTO, Thyyer) to^ escApdi runishment. ■ >The "6vidi?iice 4hr q[tie^-.-Itibirf&ui..^t;^v^ ca&e.''•:■:: ,r - ~: Summing up. His :Hpnor, said ther^;:. were two distinct": questions—fi^stJyV ' the oiie as to ' ■iylether tile '^.cou&^d^ \r«sdn the.hoi^el.'^ard; at^d, secojfciidiyji. twhethei'; he.^wora :befoi-e tlie\ Magistrate: that he drd-:;:no6:''';16 ujihtpjItli^r yard. ! Referringv>to the-first quesr *'-tion, His Honor .remarked thait the»witnesses ;for; the :<?fo\vh' told' as '-.toi;';' JTyel-,,; "±life- same ' sto.i*y,;; wLieli, iiK/ 'true, was;f bonfelusive.' ■ What" - was .tb©--1 .e\idetice a(gainst it? There was' only; evidence pf Day Rees; iintf' ?piey: *cSttd;"'iio!t' "say"' 'whether'''Dwyer^'"' vjyent. iqR the yard or notv Theevi^ ; dence Jg!pqn^table". CroAVfe :, Serjieantr; Sna.ftcrass w'asi Hmdispfuiedv'^lnt : that respect the ease was' entifeJyt different ifo; the previous case^; ' :: regard ;to the secbncl question, ' thav jedge reriundecl the " jury -of- r th<? e^i-*----de- given:by Mr —that'Dwyer said'in , dhiejF,,''J was not jn- : the "tha.t j m ; crpss^ejiaminatioii: hevV^J^^4 > the stat'emeiit .in i; diffei*ent foripijj' saying, "we wero^ not in the y_ard..'" Against; ,tke. .•.^jigiSirfcf^'s. ,',:.evidebee»'.! there was liotKihg ai all. * IS'eithe^ of. witnesses for the. defence i; (R^e^;' arid Day) had a. .-word to; isay': labbjit-. it. There' :Was ■': hbtMrig: !:sci; ; agdi3tt^ r/: the evidence df the ! M,agisfcl'ate '^t' cept the ■ remarjks ■■ made by couaaeJ,! Mio askeclvthe jurj' to disregard, it.^stv. Dwyerrc-buld. not possibly have, biwl;! any reason, (or .motive, for^.'ijayingvsb,si.ytfr> he not; mv, the,..yfjrd i^,'he ; ..ditj'ygbin •iiito'', ife. ;V...',Biit an ; <information 4,a<i:: been kid; against each of .the^.thireeu men, aindj^t: :^as relevant to,find otitr t m hethejr., Cpne of: them,; or .. ally. ■ lweritf into tlie yard. It had beeMi said by. counsel that the juyy ; haid itw» acicfept: ijhej." w"j,iple,;qf; tli^,.eyicj^nc^: -oi^i,' the Cix>wn- iis rtriie, or not. accept M, r a^.: ajl^^liui- ji*3id ;l ,not idlpw^ha^ jp: ■J'Be^lp-rr:D^'; ; TCas;.l\pt'':feui i l|y th'e;.';tftbjefc ipf i;;ite;,^i3rt4;.': '^B^ei^i^^;,, VKnowle tdge;^ifelPPjsse-!'fi;(^i *o% '■ lb.efff\'<itJiei!r/.: •Day/^o^.-R^^was^ni'itheijJTlrd ■ oß ; ;npfeiv,' ;jDwyer's presenco . >i:as r sworn;, to: h byf; ti^o-^itnesGes.- |I£. tli&.'jtiry lradHoaiy^''; ■reaemiable doubt as 'to 'the story"plj 'the- .jprpsej&utipii-it; would,. :pf; 'counseijir ocqxiii! i]o,e,. accused,,., ..'■.',',",- ~ • The jury1 retired abput noon,i :>ai*d hack'vnq'fcivrettfrhed'f'vvhen thef H^iehepnj'iad|ourj].m.?nt,H w,9Sr.taken at.• rorie;:o'clbc]cr , ~ ■.'. ;^'x^;G}DAlMlitoß';i>iMA^ES. "" '■''. '-^.jeW^' tih^^r^beeded 'the?" Rearing of the case of Eugene Joiai'' ;K^li^rti^:i/v; v Fred Jone,s AJicec;' iJ^neSs,; a.,'suit' for' : £1jQ2,l Js,. as. /dam.- • ages eaujsM'"by. the Negligent,/diiving: • jijof a motoi v car. The case rtetated' xbt.' an accident o'eeair^ed' in RigJil' : Streetr on May, Bth, .1919. :The..,eaE^ . was heaa ld' at a preyioii^ sittings, thei -jury disagreeing; and-it'was mentioned againri- at the' ' last sittings^, when it was adjourned. ■ Mr T.,F. Rolling .appeared for.^heiplaintiff'"' arid'.''Mr':R^ McCallum foit' the dejfeivaant^.'i,: ■ • ..■....: ;.?-.•• The; fo;Uo-wing jury ; was empnnnel-*-'; lod:—Fi-ed H. (foremajp)i, Fi^edei'ick'Brfidley, Charles J, Fair--ftalU" Jbhh' -G.'^Mdse'ley,' Jame^^'Mu Wiright.' John ■."■Sim,: Lennox Gibson^' ■ John' Hislpp, , Thomas :'T. • Royden,. John W.". Gosling, ; W^Uia'm Fulton^ . Josepli '/L. Tlibmjteori; 'Charles ''N^' FiskV '-' ■;-''' r' y ■■-.-,.•■>'■■' ■'••' '■•■■[ ■" '■' ■'•;■■■•