SUPREME COURT.

Wellington Independent, Volume XXII, Issue 2653, 26 March 1868, Page 4

SUPREME COURT.

4, SPECIAL JUEY SITTINGS. Wednesday, 25th March, 1868. (Before Mr Justice Johnston.) The Court opened at 10 o'clock, when Edward Evans Morton was placed in the dock, charged with having, in September, committed perjury at tho hearing of a civil action to recover the sum of £250 from Joseph Browno. Mr Izard, with him Mr Nelson, conducted tho case for the Crown, and Mr Travers appeared for tho defendant. Tho following gentlemen were called to servo as a special jury : — Messrs E. Owen, W. Hickson, J. Bridges, A. Braithwaite, John Plimmer, W. Turnbull, W. Fitzherbert, D. Eiddiford, W. Beetham, J. Dransfield, F. A. Krull, J. F. E. Wright, J. Yule, J. Martin, W. Young, D. M'lntyre, D. Anderson. The first six gentlemen being challenged, Mr Izard prayed a tales. The doors were closed, and after several persons had been objected to, Mr Henry Kitchen passed unchallenged. The following jury waß then sworn : — Messrs J. Dransfield, foreman ; W. Fitzherbert, jun., D. Eiddiford, W. Beetham, F. A. Krull, J. F. E. Wright, J. Yule, J. Martin, W. Young, D. Anderson, D. Mclntyre, and H. Kitchen. The Crown Prosecutor having opened the case, His Honor stated that it would be pure affectation for him to pretend to know nothing about tho previous cases, and enquired if tho prosecution had auy evidence other than fchafc adduced afc the trials of Eogers and Browne, and if not, whether it; were worth while going on with the case. Mr Izard replied that ho was not very sanguine of obtaining a verdict after what had passed at the previous trials, and that tho only fresh evidence he had to bring forward was that of a perBon named Smale. His Honor said that of courso if it was thought the fresh witness was of such a pure irreproachable character that his testimony would be credited, the case, in the interests of society and for tho sake of justice should be proceeded with, but if, on the other hand, it was thought that there was not the shadow of a chance of obtaining a conviction, the jury might bo ordered to return a formal verdict of " Not Guilty." Mr Izard, after somo deliberation, said he did not think he could obtain a conviction. The jury then, under tho direction of his Honor, returned a verdict of " Not Guilty." His Honor hoped fchafc there would be no misunderstanding. Knowing the facts of tho case, as the jury did, and from what had taken placo before, ifc could hardly be expected that a conviction could bo obtained. The cases were of that kind that whether from the want of the proper machinery, or from some causes or ofcher, ifc was almost impossible at present to arrive at the truth. The verdicts of acquittal thafc had beon returned, by no means sent any of the prisoners away cleared from the foul disgrace attaching to them, and did nofc in any way establish thoir characters. SENTENCE. His Honor then proceeded to pass sentence for the assault; committed on the constables in the execution of their duty, and in doing so said that he would not directly or indirectly express any opinion on the matters at issue between tho prisoner and Browne. If the former was an innocent man, the beßt course for him to adopt would bo by his future lifo to show that his character had been aspersed and himself badly treated. The prisoner was a person of considerable intelligence, and must have known ho was doing wrong in assaulting peace officers in the execution of their duty. No actual violence had been used, and therefore he was not disposed to deal as severely as assaults on the police should be treated. A long term of imprisonment would neither do good to tho prisoner or to society, and it was probable that the infliction of a fine and a short imprisonment would meet fche ends of justice. The sentence of the Courfc was that the prisoner bo kept in imprisonment for the space of ono calendar month ; fche incarceration he had already undergone to be regarded aB a portion of the time. As the expiration of his sentence he would also pay a fine to her Majesty of £20, or remain in prison till he did so. The prisoner was then removed from the dock and conveyed back to gaol, the jury were discharged from further attendance, and tho Court roso.