SUPREME COURT.

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume V, Issue 645, 11 August 1891, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

The half-yearly sessions of the Supreme Court wore commenced yesterday morning in McFarlane's Hall, before His Honor Mr Justice Conolly. The Court was full. His Honor took his seat at 38 minutes to 11, the Court, having first been formally opened in the R M. Court-room.

The following Grand Jury were empanelled :—Messrs G. R. Moore, J. W. Sunderland, J. W. Bright. W. Maude, G. Scott, H. C. Boylan. A. Kempthorne, W. O Ryan, P. H. Bourke, W. K. Chambers (foreman), F. G, Skipworth, J. Brown, G. F. Butt, C. A. Brown, W, Morgan, James Campbell, G. Matthewson. T. B. Sweet, G< J. Winter. A. McPhail, W. E Akroyd, B, Loudin. and W. Banger. Mr No’nn (Crown Prosecutor) mentioned that one of th? Grand Jury was a witness In a case. His Honor grid that he must take no part in the particular case in which he had to give evidence. Hie Honor, addressing the tjrqnd Jury, said the oases were of about the usual Humber, bqt he thought the oases would not giro them mtioli trouble by any complication. Ha mentioned the different oases, In the ease of horse stealing, and also of falsa pretences, he thought they would have ho difficulty in coming to a decision. In regard to the charge of perjury he said :—There is a very peculiar charge ,of perjury, the first I believe that has occurred in similar oirournstanoes. As you are probably aware an Act was passed about two years ago, giving persons the option of giving evidence in their own behalf. Before that time a person was only entitled to make a statement—he could not be sworn—but for the last two years there has been a law, that if a prisoner choose ha may give evidence an oath in the witness ban, find be iri ail respects id the

same position as any other witness in the case. The man whois now charged with perjury was tried before me, six months ago, on a charge of stealing a horse, and his defence—and his statement on oath—was that he had bought this horse from a Maori named Dick Brown, who was a person in the employment of the gentleman from whom the horse was stolen. The prisoner gave particulars as to where the purchase had taken place, and of having received a receipt, and it then beeama a question for the Jury whether ths prisoner really stole the horse, or whether his statement was true, and the jury acquitted him on the face of his statement. Now Brown comes forward and states there is not a word of truth in the story of the prisoner, and that he was at another place at the time that it is alleged the purchase took place. If this were all, you could not find a bill against the prisoner—it would be only one oath against another, but I think you will find that other witnesses confirm his statement. These witnesses, I may remark, are the relatives of Brown, the mother and sister. That may be the only evidence he can give—it is for you to consider whether it is sufficient to return a true bill. If you give credence to the evidence of Brown and his relatives, you will probably think it proper that the case should be tried in open Court—that of course is entirely a matter within your discretion. His Honor then went on to deal with the charge of rape on a Afaori child of five. He described it as a shocking case, showing a deplorable want of morality among children of [the native race in a certain locality. The most astounding part of this case was that the alleged occurrence was in the presence of other Maori children, who did not give any alarm or make any complaint, though perhaps same of them attempted to interfere. If their statement was believed, there could be no doubt of the offence—that there was no resistance on the part of a child under ten, was no mitigation. Bat there was another matter to consider. A boy under 14, in the eyes of the law, was incapable of committing rape, or of baing charged with an attempt to commit rape. If it was proved that the boy charged was under 14, he could not be convicted, There would be evidence on that point, and they should very carefully consider it, for if they were satisfied that the prisoner was not of age it would be well if they threw out the bill, rather than have the shocking details heard in public, and the prisoner then be acquitted on the ground of bis age—excepting in that respect he thought they would have no difficulty in finding a bill. Hie Honor went into the facts of the alleged forcibly entry against Messrs F. Hall, Ward, and Taylor, saying that the prosecution should have been taken action civilly. In reply to a deputation from the Grand Jury, at a later period. His Honor said that twelve persons must agree in reference to any case. There were twenty on the present jury—sometimes it was less.

ALLEGED PERJURY. A true bill was found in the case against William Capper. He pleaded not guilty. Mr Ohrisp appeared for the Crown, and Mr W. L. Rees (instructed by Mr Jones) appeared for tbe defence, The following jury were sworn :—W. Jennings, S. Caldwell, C. J. Dunlop (foreman), Adam Koox, J. Harrop, L. Mclntosh, Whitfield, F. J. Shaw, J. W. Wade, James Walvogri, W. T. Hill, D. Cameron. The defence challenged Mr A, B. Newman, All witnesses, excepting Mr Greenwood, were ordered out of Court, at the request 0! Mr Rees, Mr Cbrlsp opened the case. He said a good deal of stress would no doubt be laid on the fact that the evidence supporting Brown’s story would be that of his relatives, but if that were believed there could be no doubt that the prisoner had sworn falsely when he said he had sold the horse to Brown. Mr Greenwood, the Registrar of the Court, gave evidence as to the indictment of Capper at the previous sitting of ths Supreme Court, Mr Nolan, Crown Solicitor, also gave formal evidence, and refreshing his memory from his notes, swore that defendant had said " I was coming down the coast, and between Turehau and Pouawa I overtook Brown leading the chestnut mare, and riding a bay horse. Brown said, Well, Bill, where have you come from ? I said, I have come from the Pakarae. I said, What are you doing with the chestnut mare, and he said he had bought her, and bought her cheap. I asked him what he was going to do with her. He said. Sell her if I can, I’ll sell her to you if you like. I said, Howmuch ? He said, Six pounds. I said, Right you are—if you . come to Gisborne I will give you the money, you cannot write a receipt here. We came on together towards Gisborne. When I reached Turehau, I left my own horss there, and rode the mare into Gisborne.’’ It was about 7 o’clock, he said, this occurred. The Park races were on the 6th and 7th of January, and on the 13th and 14th the Turf Club races were held.

By Mr Rees: Was conducting the prosecution. Ha l heard Brown say in the witness box that he could not read or write. That was in relation to a receipt Capper said Brown had given him (prisoner). Heard Mr Hubble, a juryman, ask Brown if he had not written out specifications for work for gome gravestones, Brown then admitted that he had written these specifications.

By Mr Chrisp: Brown said that he had copied some estimates —he could not remember exactly whether it was an inscription for a gravestone. Brown also said he had been to the Gisborne School, Dick Brown was called. He wished to to talk Maori. In reply to Me Rees he said he had been in tbe other room. Mr Rees said he was told that Brown had been in Court part of the time. Mr Chrisp : The order was not given in Maori. Mr Rees : He understands English, His Honor: It can’t be helped now, Mr Rees.

Mr Rees: No, your Honor, Witness deposed : Remembered being at the Perk races on Tuesday and Wednesday, the 6th and 7'h of January. Next day he was at home at Tarere. In the early part of ths day they were stacking grass. At dinner time they left off stacking grass and went to Mr Barker's place, getting there In the evening—he could not saj' at what time. They put up their tent, and he stayed there all night-, his father, mother, sister, and himself sleeping In ths one tent. Had not seen Capper ontbat day, nor had he been between Pouawa and Turehau. He went up the Coast again on the 12th. Bv Mr Rees : Was sitting in Court when called on to give evidence. Constable Farmer tqld him he need not go out. [lt was explained that Constable farmer was under the misapprehension that the informant need not go out.] Remembered going to a room with Mr Seymour and one .of the policemen immediately after the caro against Capper. Witness alone proposed fresh proceedings against Capper—the Ser geant askel him to go into the room. A charge of peijnry had been heard against Capper. The only case ije knew of was this case, There was a case against Capper by someone else before witness’ ease was heard, but he did not know whsiher it was dismissed. He did not know whe'her in the first case be had stated that he was at Tarere all the Thursday. He knew perfectly now what he did on that day. [Tbe question was would he not have been likely to know better on the first day he gave evidence. The witness did not answer the did not know whether the charge was brought within three weeks of the time when the ease was heard in the Supremo Cou>t. Ho knew then what occurred or, January the Bth. Mr Chrisp contended that the whole of the' dejwsiJqns shou'4 he read, but His Honor held that Mr Roos entitled to ask the questions. Cross-examination continued: Did not know whether he Slid he was at Tarere all day. Did not know whether he had said he went to Mr Barker's from Tarere that day. Was not certain whether he had told the police where he was that day—he cou'd not remember. Before the hearing at the Supreme Court he heard that Capper had said he had bought the horse from witness on the Thursday, the Sth. Did not know whether he had said at the Supreme Court that he had remained at Tarere from Christmas to the I2lh, but he JiacJ Said he came from Whangara at Christmas. Would not be certain that he did not say so. Could

not swear whether he had said anything to the Judge about going to Mr Barker’s—did not remember anything about it. His Honor told Mr Brooking to caution the witness about being certain about what bad occurred on the Bth of January, when he could not remember what occurred on February 23rd.

Witness continued : He did not know what he stated at the Supreme Court, but he knew now what had occurred on the Thursday. [His Honor ruled that Mr Bees could not ask why the witness had not called hie friends at the first trial to prove where he was, knowing that Capper had stated he was on the Coast road.] The reason why he had not stated at the trial where he was on the Thursday was because he was not asked. He had no watch, and could not tell what time they had left Tarere for Barker's. It would be about half an hour after dinner. It took them an hour and a half to two hours to go to Barker’s—he did not know the distance. After the trial at tbe Supreme Court he had seen his friends when they returned from inland—he had seen some of them on the same evening. To His Honor : The road took a long time to travel—it was not very long, but yet it was. (Laughter.) The road was taken as being between five and six miles. Witness continued: Had told his friends he intended to lay a charge against against Capper. Ha had told them he would summons them to disprove that he had sold the horse on the B.h of the month. Had no conversation about the evidence they should give in [Court. [The cross examination just took an hour.]

Mere Kingi, mother of Dick Brown, corroborated the latter’s evidence aa to bis going from Tarere to Barker's. By Mr Rees : They trotted the horses on going to Mr Barker’s—it was not far, but she could not say the number of miles. They had stayed two weeks and a-half while Dick was with them, and witness and her husband and daughter stayed four weeks altogether. The time commenced on the Sth. Had not had any conversation with Dick about the prosecution since the trial in the Supreme Court. [His Honor desired the question to be repeated, when the same answer was made.] She knew since then that Dick had lost the case.

By Mr Chrisp: Dick went to Barker’s on a Thursday, and left again three days afterwards. [His Honor said both statements could not be true. On a charge of perjury what wae such evidence as thia ?] Permission was given for tbe witness to tell her own story, She was at first quite conflicting in her statements, and then said Dick came from Whan gar a at Christmas and stayed until the Thursday, His Honor said that was only two weeks.

Witness : I am not quite certain. Mr Chrisp : That is all I will ask. Whelu Brown, Dick's sietsr, corroborated Dick's statement. In cross-examinslion, witness said from Gisborne to Makaraka would ba much farther than from Tarere to Barker's. Ths Bth was not the first day they had gone to Barker's — it might have been two weeks before. Hid not had any conversation with Dick about the case, nor knew if Dick had spoken io her father or mother. Had not had any conversation as to what she was to be asked in the case Dick did not tell her he was going to subpoena her to give evidence. She went because ehe had got a summons, Hemi Ratapu, the father of Dick Brown, corroborated the testimony of Brown as to the races and going to Mr Birker’a. In cross examination by Mr Raes witness swore he had had no conversation with Dick about the oases—all he knew was that he had got the summons, but he had not known he was going to get a summons. Remembered the 6th and 7th because it was published and was raoe time, Could not tell of any rao’B before—he knew of no other races. (Subdued laughter.) There was no cause why he should remember any other raois-he remembered these because they were much spoken of and he was there—no, he was not there. (Laughter ) Is that why you remembered, because you were not there ? Witness : They were published every, where. His Honor: Aren’t they always published ? Witness : Yes. His Honor : Then that can’t be a reason. Witness : I remembered it because of this case. Do you know that either your son or Capper committed a crime by stealing this horse P Witness: I don't know that my son did anything of the sort, or was blamable in any way. Had heard that Capper had stated he bought the horse from witness’ son. Had heard that his son had accused Capper of swearing falsely. He was aware that it was necessary for his son’s sake to prove [that his son was not at Ponawa and Turehau on that evening. That was the reason that made him remember these dates so well. He knew that he should swear that his son was not there on those dates. Did not recollect the date he had given in the lower Court. Richard Barker deposed that he had seen Dick Brown at 6 30 on the morning of the 9th of January, when Brown had gone to his father’s place for some sacks—the natives had a camp in a paddock near the house. Brown’s father had been there about a fortnight before he had seen Brown.

Mr Chrisp, in addressing the jury, contended that it was proved that Dick was at Tarere and at Barker's on the day when Oappir deposed that he had bsen along the Coss’, Hi claimed that the few discrepanciei in evidence were in favor of thi informant’s case. The case was a unique one. The possibility was thst (if Capp-r had not given such evidence he would have been committed for horsestealing, and th retore suspicion was thrown on his evidence by his being an intarasted parly. Though only Brown's relations had given evidence as to where he was on that day, it was usually only relatives that could giva evidence on aueh a subject. He contended (hat Mr Barker’s evidence was corroborative, as if Brown was there at 6.80 in the morning the prob&bili'y was that he was there on the previous evening. Mr Joseph Price eave evidence as to accused’s character, Ha knew Capper from when he was a little lad just from Opotiki, wbeij he b»d worked for wttne’«. Had found accused manly, honest, and truthful. Hie general reputation he believed to be an excellent one, Mr William Law deposed that ’he had known Capper since he was a child at Opotiki—had never known anything wrong against him. Mr Rees said there were other witnesses who could give similar testimony, but it would ba waste of time to call more. Mr Rees made a telling address (a condensation of which is held over), and His Honor's summing up was favorable to the accused. After a retirement of four minutes the jury brought in a verdict of Not Guilty. OTHER OASES. The Grand Jury brought in true bills in the other oases, with the exception of the charge of rape on which a Maori bay was accused, and the case of Arundel against Hall and others, In the latter His Honor said the action should never have been brought criminally, and he would not allow expenses in the case. Shortly before 6 the Court adjourned until 10 thia morning, -