THE CAMBRIDGE CASE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 12929, 27 July 1905, Page 7

THE CAMBRIDGE CASE.

THE fourth trial of Herbert Pearson, livery stable employee, for criminal assault upon a married woman named L. A. Beuthat Cambridge, in October last, entered''on the 11 fd 7 at the Supremo Court yesterday before the Chief Justioe- (Sir Robert Stout) Ibe Ifon. J. A . Tole (Crown solicitor) con - ducted the case for the Crown, and Mr J R. Lundon was retained for the defence. Tie clay was occupied in taking, evidence •for tie defence, most of the material facts of which were given at the three previous trials. ';■;■ ;t; j- ., The accused, in giving evidence on his own behalf, was asked by. the.Crown solicitor, if at a former trial he told a friend that he had attempted to commit an assault on a girl in Cambridge Domain, and that in doing so he had torn.'her clothes. Prisoner denied saying this. The Crown solicitor pressed; the question, adding, '-'Did you not remark to this same friend of yours that ' such things often happen to young men, you know?'" , Pearson protested against tip's matter be-' ing referred to at all. . His Honor said the question need not be answered, if the accused did not care, to do so. ■ ■ . ~iii Pearson' said he would refuse, but?added that "such a thing might have ( happened. His 1 Honor: That is a very stupid answer ;' you must know" whether 'it,' happened]

or 5 not. '.'<■'■ ■•' „<■„'■:■ Pearson said the incident did not happen in the way stated. " There was' no struggling, nor'did he say to the girl, "You re not so strong as I am." He had never interfered with the little girls Gallagher and Beuth. ■ . , , . ."■ . The continuation of the defence having extended to six o'clock, His HOnor, in accordance with. the wish of the jury, said the Court would sit that night. Accordingly the Court resumed' at half-past seven. . Evidence was 'given, by witnesses called for the defence as to Mrs. Benth's relations with the accused. , . _ One witness, Mrs. Rolfe, Drury, who did not give evidence at the former trials, said she was a voluntary witness. She came to the .Court because ate found that Pearson was " being ■ persecuted : through the • treachery of a woman," and she added, " I decided to do justice to a fellow creature," Witness, in reply to Mr. Lundon, said she made the remark, during the first trial, that she believed "Mrs. Beuth was-a treacherous woman; but. Pearson was a perfect blackguard,, too." That- was why she did riot offer to 'give evidence before. While' A. Beuth, husband of the complainant, was being cross-examined on oeriain entries in his ledger, His Honor wished Mr Lundon to inform linn what, was the effect of referring to the entries in question. , , . , ~ "I say the accounts have been 'cooked,' Your- Honor," replied Mr. Lundon. < . His Honor: You have ho right to say that. You are not giving evidence. The jury and myself can read the book as well

as you can. ' .•-,.'' .' .... ~ , „ "Detective Mcllvoney (Invercargill), ? who made sound tests at the house next the Boutin) said noises were made in the latter's house by his instructions, but they could not be heard at the house where it was'said no screams were, heard on-.the night that Mrs.'Beuth said she screamed. In connection with this it should be explained that Mrs. Beuth said she screamed loudly when the alleged assault took place, although some witnesses for the defence said they had made sound tests in the same way, and sounds made in the Beuth's house wore clearly audible in the house on the adconcluded, His Honor held that it would take too, long- that night o ear counsel's addresses. Accordingly he adjourned the Court until ten a.m. to-day.