An Impudent Witness.

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume IV, Issue 520, 18 October 1890, Page 2

An Impudent Witness.

Atrthoß.M. Court on Thursday morning, before Mr Booth, 8.M., and Mr Hapi Kiniha, Native Assessor, Mr R. N. J(ones, solicitor, conducted his first ease in Court, when he was congratulated by Mr Booth, and at the conclusion of the case complimented on the way he had conducted it. Hemi Kepa sued a Wairoa native named Te Oti te Rua, for the return of a watch, valued at £3. Mr Lincoln Rees appeared for the defendant. The evidence Of plaintiff was that a number of them had a bushfalling contract, and he had paid each man his share, including the defendant, whose .wife he still owed about £2 on a separate account. Finding that he had taken so much liquor, that further indulgence would -make him unfitted to protect his own property, the plaintiff wisely—or unwisely, it seems—handed defendant his Watch to care for until he would be again sober enough to assume its guardianship But when he applied for the watch, defendant refused to give it up. Mr .Tones said the debt to the wife was admitted, but the law provided against the action taken by defendant. When the latter got in the box he began with a plausible enough story, that the watch had been given him as a pledge until the money was paid, but on being oross-oxamined, he made so many contradictory statements that His Worship repeatedly warned him. There were other witnesses for the defence, but the defendant—a strapping, intelligent looking young fellow—had become, so reckless in his assertions and contradiction’s, that His Worship siid : " We mav say this, the evidence of this witness is entirely untrustworthy—that is the opinion of myself and the Assessor. Whether you think it worth while to go on after the expression is for you to judge. If it were not so trifling a matter, £3. I should certainty give him in charge ot the police.” Mrßeeseald that hewould oall no further evidence after the expression of opinion from the Bench. A last ohance was given the prisoner to say which of his conflicting sta'ementfl he would adhere to. and then he acknowledged that the plaintiff had spoken the truth about how the transfer of the watch took place, but he (defendant) had said he would keep it until the amount he said was owing was paid. He w s then ordered to hand over the watch and pay 13s coats of Court, and 10a lid interpreter’s fee. Mr Booth mentioned that it waa very difficult to get at the bottom of su ’h a case when a lying witness got in the box. Mr Rees said of course he could only go by what he was instruoted were the facte, which he was Informed were as he had opened the case, and ♦here were witnesses who wou’d substantiate them. Mr Booth said ha knew that Mr Rees cou’d not help it—a counsel was p'aced- in a very difficult position when ho hid to deal with such an untrustworthy witness.