NEW TRIAL REFUSED

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 19532, 13 March 1926, Page 7

NEW TRIAL REFUSED

SENSATIONAL NAPIER CASE PERJURY ALLEGATION. [Per Prers ABsocfatfonJ NAPIER, March If. A motion for a new trial of the eaao herd this session, in which. Alcena Agnes Christie Dyett, of Manaia, Tara, naki, a widow, claimed £5650 damages from Walter Manson, sawmiller, of Napier, was heard in the Supreme Court before the Chief Justice to-day. The case was a claim for damages in respect to alleged assault and communication of disease. Plaintiff moved for a new trial on the grounds of alleged misconduct of a witness affecting the trial. In support she produced two affidavits, one by Susan Ann MeKeehnie, widow, of Napier, and the second by Sarah Isabella Rumplcr, of Napier, alleging that Dr. 11. F. Bernau, of Napier, committed perjury. Tho affidavits stated that persons named on them were both told by Dr. Bernau in October 1925, and in January 1926, that he never examined defendant, but gave merely a certificate ou his war records. “I may say, your Honour,’’ said Mrs Dyett in supporting her application, “that it was in my presence, on January 17, 1926, that Dr. Bernau made that statement. ” “In my opinion it would be improper for mo to give a new trial,’’ said His Honour. “Your affidavits in no way establish that Dr. Bernau committed perjury at the trial. The statement by the doctor to those, named in the affidavits may have been misunderstood, but in any case you would have to establish that alleged false evidence would have materially affected the result of the trial, which in my opinion it would not. The applicaton,” he concluded, “is refused, with. £lO 10s cost® against the mover.’’ Mr H. B. Lusk appeared for Walter Manson, but took no part in the deliberations, His Honour remarking that ho thought it was unnecessary to eaU on Mr _ Lusk.