Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SUPREME COURT.

SITTING AT WIASTERTON

ALLEGED PERJURY CASE.

The sitting of the Supremo Court was resumed this morning, before His Honour Mr Justice Edwards, when the charge of alleged perjury against A. W. Petherick was continued.. For the Prosecution. Sergeant Miller stated the charge against accused in the lower Court of having kept liquor for sale was dismissed, am! witness handed over .the liquor which had been seized to accused, the latter subsequently driving away with it in a. nrator car. On December .12th accused was charged at the S.M. Court, with having kept that liquor for sale. Accused gave evidence that he had delivered the liquor,"according to orders which-he produced, on the day on which he had received the liquor at the court-house. The orders were all written on the sanie kind of paper. Accused stated that he had taken the liquor in Holland's motor car, and delivered a quantity Jirst to Taplin's, then to Pang's, and then to Boyle's. Accused staVed that I\. J. Dagg, his man and some ladies were, present Avhen the liquor was delivered at Dagg's. \n reply to a statement made by witness that Dairg did not come home till the night on which the liquor was alleged to have Veen delivered, accused said: "Dagg did not. come home that night; he came home the night before, and I took him home." Accused stated that he had left the liquor in a trap shed at Pagg's. Cross-examined by !M r Petherick: Witness stated that ho ascertained from the Misses Dagg that the liquor hud never been delivered at Mr

. 1 c Mr Petherick cross-examined Serjeant Miller as to the methods adopted by him in making enquiries.

".His Honour stated that he could not sco the- object of the cross-examination, "You have not shaken the credibility of the Serjeant, Mr Petheriek," sakl His Honour. "I am not liere as a commission to enquire into the manner in •which the Serjeant conducts his business. .It , he is not. doing his duty properly you should bring the matter under the notice of the Police Commissioner, Minister of .lustice, or someone else. You have not shaken the statement of the Sergeant, and all that is material in the Sergeant's, evidence is the reference as to what accused had stated in the. lower Court.'-'

When Mr Bunny commenced the reexamination of witness. His Honour reiterated what he had already said about the material part of the Serjeant's evidence, and said that he had allowed irrelevant matter to be brought in because no objection had been made. Already forty minutes had been wasted over matters not bearing on the case.

Constable Dunphy μ-ave similar evidence to Serjeant .Miller Witness said that he saw Mr R. -I. Dagg arrive in Masterton by the train from Wellington on the night of November 14th, and was driven away in a. buggy by his daughters.

Constable J'enson also gave evidence of the statements made by accused in Court.

Prank Clancy stated that Mr Dagg had been away for a holklay in November last, and returned on a Friday night, but lie could not state the date.'

In cross-examination: On November Hth witness was breaking in a horse some distance from the house, if accused stated that he had seen witness breaking in a horse on that day it would be correct. Mr J. Dagg wr.s assisting him to break in trie hornc.

Mr Bunny was re-examining witness, when Mr Hollings asked His Honour whether Mr Bunny had a right to crossexamine his own witness.

His Honour: "' Willi, it is getting that way. The evidence of the witness is to the effect that he could not :=ee through a house. '-■' (Laughter). Mr Bunny conlinuod to re-examine witness, mid endeavoured to got him to make a statement as to whether it was not possible for witness to see a motor car if it came to Mr Dagg's place. Witness slated that he was not interested in anything but his work of breaking in the horse. A motor car might come into the yard, and he would not see it. "But you were aide to see the ladies there," coiiiinued Mr Bunny. Witness: "I could not but help seeing them, as they were in front of

Mr Bunny again put the question relative to .seeing a motor car to witness, and received an answer similar to the

previous one given. Mr Bunny: ''Yon were not interested in anything but the ladies.'"'' As "-witness stepped down from the box, His Honour said to witness: "You retire with the honours or" war. "

Robert •>. Dugg stated that he had returned from a. visit to the South Island on a Friday. He knew that the day was November 14th by the newspapers. The liquor ordered was not delivered to him by accused. Witness had to go to Eagle's for the liquor, accused having told him that it was there. Thomas Holland stated that he had, at accused's request, taken the liquor from the Courthouse to W. Eagle's place on Upper Plain. Accused was with him. They did not call at any place on the way to Eagle's. At a later date witness, together with accused, delivered some liquor obtained from Eagle's at Taplin's and Boyle's. Mrs Tap!in, junr., stated that she did not receive any liquor at her house. In cross-examination, witness stated that her mother's name was the same as her own. There was liquor at the house when Avitness returned from the hospital, where she was undergoing treatment. This completed the evidence for the prosecution. Case for the Defence. Mr Hollings contended that there was no corroboration of the evidence of any one witness as to the perjury, and was about to quote authorities, when His Honour .said that no person could be convicted for perjury on the uncorroborated statement of one witness. The evidence as to Dagg not being home on the day in question had been corroborated . After Mr Hollings had. briefly addressed the jury, the first witness for the defence, Hugh Boyle, was called. Witness stated in the course of evidence that lie had'ordered liquor in November last a,nd had received it on November 14th. The liquor was delivered in Holland's motor car, there being present Holland, Petherick and Eagle. . W. Eagle stated that ,on November 14th. Holland and accused, came to:his house and asked him., to come for a ride, as they were going further up the Plain.: The party, first visited Taplin's, then Dagg's, and subsequently Boyle's, delivering liquor at these places.]

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WDT19140324.2.17

Bibliographic details

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume LXVI, Issue 11935, 24 March 1914, Page 5

Word Count
1,088

SUPREME COURT. Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume LXVI, Issue 11935, 24 March 1914, Page 5

SUPREME COURT. Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume LXVI, Issue 11935, 24 March 1914, Page 5