A FINGER-PRINT CASE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 13453, 1 June 1907, Page 6

A FINGER-PRINT CASE.

PROOF OF PERJURY.

[BY TELEGRAPH.—OWN CORRESPONDENT.]

GiSBORNE, Friday. William James Lyons was charged at the Magistrate's Court this afternoon with having, on May 22, at the Magistrate's Court, Gisborne, while answering to a charge of vagrancy, committed perjury by swearing that he had never had his fingerprint taken prior to it being taken at Gisborne, that he had hot been convicted as a stowaway at Lyttelton in January, 1906, under the name of Win. Clark or William James Lyons, nor. of assault and wilful damage at ChristchUrch in July, 1903. •;■;': „

John Joyce, sheepfarmer, Canterbury, clerk at Lyttelton prison on January 21 -, 1906, said he' took the; finger-prints produced, which were those of a prisoner named on the ' record as Wm. Clark, serving a, sentence of 14 days in Lyttelton prison,, as a stowaway. The prisoner's - signature appeared under, the last \ impression. The description of /the prisoner was a copy o:f the register, and he believed it to be correct: - .-: '*. ■ ' - ■■■" ■. . ■• '

Constable Davey, gaoler, Gisborne, said that accused was in his custody on the Bth. inst., when he took his finger-prints (produced), and accused attached hjs signature. The description of accused given on the form was correct.

Detective Quartermain, expert of the police finger-print department, deposed that he had compared the finger-prints produced by the last witness and those sworn to be those of Wm. Clark,' convicted at Lyttelton :as a stowaway in 1906. He was satisfied beyond all doubt that they were the finger-prints of one and the same person. They were identical in every respect. He had had 150,000 finger-prints through his hands, and he had never yet found-two of different fingers alike. -:,.., The I description of Wm. Clark, convicted at Lyttelton, and that of the accused was the same. ~.:. The signature was also very similar in each case. In, the course of conversation with the accused that morning, \he had,admitted being Wm.. Clark, who was. convicted, at Lyttelton in 1906, and whose finger-prints were produced.

Accused made no statement, but pleadod guilty. He was committed to the Supreme Court at Auckland for sentence.