SUPREME COURT.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLI, Issue 8538, 19 March 1908, Page 5

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SESSIONS', PALMERSTON— (Before Mr Justice Cooper.) ALLEGED PERJURY. John Gascoign6 Weightman was charged with having committed perjury by swearing falsely in a case of assault and robbery heard in the Magistrate's Court at Feilding on October Bth, 1907. Accused was undefended, and pleaded not guilty. Mr Loughnan appeared for the Crown. The following jury was empanelled: — A. J. Mahon (toreman), J. H. Watt, A. J. Clareburt, J. Follas, H. Guy, F. E. Ashley. W. Gordon, T. H. Verry, J. G. Bell, A. McConkey, H. Stephenson, and John Davis. Charles Vernon Roberts, clerk- of the Magistrate's Court, Feilding, produced tho evidence given by accused in the case at Feilding, out of which the charge arose. Frederick Hugh Noffke stated that he had been robbed at Feilding on September 28th, 1907. He was the first witness called by the prosecution in the case which subsequently resulted. On the evening that the robbery took place he came into Feilding at about half-past six, Ho and a companion went to Hook's Hotel, whore ho cashed a cheque for £6 10s, receiving three pound notes, three sovereigns and the balance in silver. Robertson, one of those who was accused of having robbed him. was standing in tho bar room. Witness and his companion then visited a fish shop, and when they came out saw Robertson standing outside. They returned to the hotel again, and as they went but witness's companion left, him, saying ho would return in an hour. Witness waited for a time and then decided to go home. He had not seen Weightman that night, and had no transactions with him. To Weightman : The cheque was drawn on the Bank of New Zealand. He was perfectly sober that night. -He had been before the Court previously, but had proved his innocence. Would swear he had not been in questioner's restaurant in Feilding. Ferdinand Creagher gave evidence to tho effect that Nofl'kc had been employed on his farm, and corroborated the former witness's evidence. Anhony Paris stated that ho kept a fish shop in Feilding, which ho took over from Weightman on December 28th. He had not seen Weightman since that day. Sophia Lucy Paris, in giving evidence, stated that she remembered her husband taking over the restaurant on December 28th. In the evening, between 7 and 8 o'clock, Weightman came in and went through tin "dining-room into the back, where her husband was working. She did not see him again, and he did not assist, her to wait at the tables. Sergt. Bowden, of Feilding, stated when accused was about to give evidence at tho Magistrate's Court at Fending he had warned him to be careful as to the nature of his evidence. Ho thought at first that Noffke was drunk when he laid the complaint about the robbery. Accused, before calling evidence lor the defence, stated, that he had not engaged a solicitor te- defend him because ho was convinced of his innocence, and did not wish to go to the expense of paying heavy solicitor's fees. Joseph Oliver was the first witness called, and stated that on the evening in question he had met accused outside his shop, and he (accused) had some money in his hand which he gave witness to understand was some change for i a customer in the shop John Spooner stated that he had been working for accused, and had received 5s from him on the night on which the rebbery wa3 alleged to have taken place. He had told accused there was someone in the dining-room, and accused had gone in and served him with a flounder and taken a shilling in payment at the same time putting a mark on the wall. Mrs Paris was in the shop at the time. To Mr Loughnan: Anthon' Paris was out at that time. Weightman had cooked tho fish which ho served to the customer, and Mrs Paris was present talking to him. Ho was certain that it was Saturday night this had occurred. John C. Thompson. J.P.. identified a tracing made by accused in his presence of marks made on the dining-room wall as to th<» number of customers served. John Gascoigne Weightman, in his evidence, stated ~ that on the morning, of December 28th he had been asked by Paris if he would sell his business, to which he replied "Yes," and completed the sale in the afternoon. He had assisted in the restaurant that evening, and had made a mark on tho wall for ew.ry customer he- had served. One of the customers, whom he took to bo Noffke. handed him a cheque for about £6. which he could not cash. Tho customer then handed him £1. which he took over to a neighbouring hotel to get changed. When he was coming back ho met a late employee of his, who asked him for some money. He told him to wait till he had given the customer his change, and went in and gave the required change, and put. a mark on tho wall. Paris, who had been out, then returned. Accused then went up town to the boardinghouse where he was staying. H> received the balance of the purchase money' on fhe following Monday morning. He wfisS no friend or associate of either Low or Robertson. It was still his opinion that it was Noffke who was in his shop on the- Saturday evening. He had not seen NolTko previous to that

evening. To His Honor: He might .have made a mistake as to Noffke's identity. To Mr Loughnan: He cculd give no reason for the discrepancies between his Statements as to his being in the shop on Saturday evening and Mrs Pans statements. He had mot Paris in the street after the case had been heard in tho Magistrate's Court, and ho (Paris) had told him that if he had known there was going to be trouble he would havo told a different talc to the police. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty, on the ground that they con : side red , theie was a mistake in. the identity of the witness-Noffke. DIVORCE. Louie Maud Vanston (Mr Bcale) applied for a dissolution of marriage from George Vanston on the ground of adultery. No defence was filed, and a decree nisi was granted, to be made absolute in three months.