THE INFAMOUS CHARGE AGAINST CAPTAIN McARTHUR.

New Zealand Herald, 30 March 1876, Page 3

THE INFAMOUS CHARGE AGAINST CAPTAIN McARTHUR.

We mentioned a few days ago -that the young woman "who had brought a very serious charge against Captain' George Mc- • Arthur, ..of the barque Bella . Mary, well known at this port, had been sentenced to ' seven years' penal servitude for perjury. It sometimes happens that similar charges are trumped up "with a view either to extortion or otherwise. The report of the trial in question, extracted from the Hobarfc Town Mercury, should act as a warning to.those who, for wicked purposes of their own, should endeavour to defame the character, and endanger the liberty of their fellow creatures, by such unprincipaled means. The following is the report:— PERJURY. Eliza Arm McKenzie pleaded not guilty to a charge of having committed perjury in the Police Court of Hobart Town on the 20th August last. Mr. Moriarty defended the prisoner. The Attorney-General, in opening the case, said the defendant was charged with having committed perjury, on an information containing three counts ; first, by swearing that George McArthur, captain of the barque Bella Mary, committed a series of rapes upon her on the voyage of that vessel to Auckland in August, 1874, and, also, on the return voyage; second, by swearing that Captain McArtliur forcibly held her down while the chief officer, John Fuge, outraged her; and third, by swearing that Captain McArthur, 1 during the same voyage, committed rape upon another girl, a fellow passenger, named Jane Hammond. The case, the Attorney- ■ General said, was one of the most remarka- , ble, and, in some respects, one of the most > painful that he had ever met with, since he ■ had any knowledge of criminal proceedings, j He then detailed the circumstances of the 1 case, with the main facts of which the public j are already familiar, and dwelt at length on the enormity of the offence of perjury, es- i pecially when, as in this case, the life and - liberty of two men had 4 been placed in < jeopardy. j The evidence wa3 not such as will bear publication. The following witnesses were called for the ] prosecution:—Captain McArthur, John Fuge, j Samuel Weir, Jane Hammond, and Thomas . Large. The depositions of Milford Ale- ] • Arthur and Walter Williams, seamen on | board the Bella Mary were put in. The •. only fresh evidence was that of Jane Ham- ] mond, who had been brought from Auckland . for the purpose. She denied that any out- - rage had been committed upon her by Cap- < tain McArthur, as stated by the defendant, ] and stated that during the voyage she never 1 heard or saw anything that would support the allegations of the defendant with respect 1 to the captain and chief. officer of the < vessel. ] Mr. Moriarty addressed the jury for the j defence, his main point being that the jury £ should look not so much to the evidence < given as to the probabilities, and the proba- j bilitias, he urged, were entirely in favour of \ the truth of the defendant's story. j His Honor summed up with great minute- 1 ness, and from his remarks it appeared that i the tenor of the evidence was decidedly ad- \ yerse to the defendant's case. £ The jury then retired, and after an ( absence of 35 minutes, returned into 1 Court with a verdict of guilty on all three i counts. c The prisoner, in reply to the usual question, ] said she had nothing to say why sentence i should not be passed upon her. c Mr. Sargent (for Mr. Moriarty, who had < been called away to Launceston) asked the J Judge to pass as light a sentence on the \ prisoner as possible on account of her youth j and inexperience. t His to onor, addressing prisoner, said he • ] was afraid she did not understand the posi- ] ; tion in which she had placed herself. < I [Prisoner: Xdo not.] He thought not. ( i Had she konwn it, she would have known j that had her evidence at the Police Court j been believed, Captain McArthur and his < mate might both (and a few years ago ine- j vitably would) have suffered death upon the ( gallows. A man who stabbed another, or* ( took his life by violent means, was much more merciful than one who coolly and deli- j berately swore away his life in a court of \ justice. The defendant was young,-some < one had certainly wronged her, and he felt j the position in which she was placed. At J the same time it was a duty he owed to g society, whatever his own feelings might be, j to mark an offence of this kind very -j severely. He had the power to send her to c gaol for 21 years, but that would be a barba- s rous punishmcut, and he would pass upon her ( the full sentence of only one of the three c counts upon which she had been foundguilty. r It was a heavy penalty, but it was neces- a sary to inllict a heavy peaalty upon a wo- t man who, having arrived at years of c discretion, had deliberately, by a wilfully v false statement, jeopardised the life of a fel- j low-creature. The sentence of the Court a would, therefore, be that the defendant be t imprisoned for seven years. j The prisoner did not seem to feel her posi- _ tion. very acutely. _ st ■t