IMPORTANT LAW CASE.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 6542, 5 April 1882, Page 2

IMPORTANT LAW CASE.

COMMITTAL FOR PERJURY. (united press association.) Westport, April 4. The long pending cases, Welch v. Eugene O'Oonor, John Dick, John Gilmer, and William McLean, on a charge that in September, 1878, by a forged deed of submission to arbitration of a dispute between Johnstonand O’Oonor, defendants conspired to defraud James Johnson of £l5O, has been finished. James Johnson deposed that the deed was a forgery, and his signature, and those of William Pitt, solicitor, and Leonard Reid, solicitor, also upon the deed as attesting witnesses, were also forgeries, and unlike their proper signatures. Sydney Welch, the informant, gave similar evidence. Leonard Greenwell Reid, solicitor, of Timaru, deposed that he prepared the deed, and that Johnson attached his signature in his presence, and that of O'Conor and others, after the contents were properly explained. After several other witnesses were examined, Mr Haselden, solicitor for the accused, stated it was absurd to address the Court in defence, and that he would simply ask Mr Revell, the Magistrate, to dismiss the information, and commit Welch and Johnson for trial for wilful perjury. Mr Revell, the Resident Magistrate, then discharged the accused, and ordered Welch and Johnson into custody for perjury. When discharging the accused, Mr Revell stated that the charge was utterly groundless, and commented on the fact that Johnson had completely altered the signature since the deed was signed. The case of Johnson v. Edward George Britain Moss, solicitor, of Auckland, on a separate charge of forgery in connection with the same deed, was finished to-day. The evidence was similar to that in the above case, excepting that Johnson stated he believed the deed was in Moss’ writing and not Reid’s, and so laid the information against Moss. In dismissing this information, Mr Revell said he regretted, as the law now stood, he could not refuse to take an information without risking mandamus, and he did not at the time know sufficient grounds to justify him in standing the risk. He stated that the evidences iu the cases completely vindicated Mr Moss, whom, he need not say, left the Court without any stain, and it was a matter of great regret that this case should have been the means of dragging a solicitor from so great a distance as Tauranga. The perjury case against Johnson in these matters was finished, and Johnson was committed for trial. Great interest was taken in the cases.