POLICE COURT.—Tuesday.

Auckland Star, Volume II, Issue 540, 3 October 1871, Page 2

POLICE COURT.—Tuesday.

[Before His Worship the Major and J. M, Dargaville, Esq., J.P.]

DnmncEXKESP.; — Two "drunkards were disposed of in tlie usual manner. Pehjukv.—Robert Humphrey Stephenson was charged, by Solomon Fernandez, with committing wilful and;jCorropt perjury, in the: trial of the cause of ''"Fernandez .v. Crosbie and othera," at the: Supremo Court, on the 21st June, IS?! —Mr.~ Hesketh appeared for the defendant, and applied.for an amendment of the information, inasmuch as the trial had occupied three days, and it had not been shown oh which the alleged perjury had been [committed. Neither did defendaut know in \vhat the perjury consisted. Moreover, as the mat ter stood, it would be necessity to productl cTulcnce to prove the truth of every word uttered by defendant during the trial ; and in that case he might" 'have to hunt all through the province tofind witnesses. In any case ho was unable to go on with the matter, defendant being totally unprepared, inasmuch as he was unaware of the details of what was charged against him.—Mr. Sheehan replied, .on behalf of fheprdseculioh, and consented to the requisite alterations in the information.— Counsel having conferred in the matter, the case was ndjourned until this day fortnight, the iflh instant* expenses of witnesses being allowe I.—John Crosbie was then charged with a similar offence. —Mr. Hesketh stated that Crosbie was under subpoena a^t a trial at the Supreme Court.—Mr. BrootfieH/for prosecution, appUedfor a warrant to compel bis attendance, as the subpoena was no excuse for not appearing on an indictable offence when that for which he was subpeeued was only a civil -one.—Mr.' J. B. Russell (with* Mr. Brookfield) pointed out that as the do^ fendant had only been' summoned to the Supreme Court on a civil matter, he would hot have -been held in any -respect ac.'buntabio for non-appearance, and therefore should have attended to answer the criminal charge against him. Nothing could excuse him for non-Utendauce, andawarrant blight to issue.—At'this jUnctUr^, info_*matton reached their Worships that the Supreme Court hail adjourned Until next day ; and shortly aftorwards Mr. Crosbie appeared.— •Mr. Hesketh, on bis" behalf, .then raised the same objections as in the preceding case.— Mr. Brookfield thought that counsel for defendant had fallen into error ; —this was not a trial, but -Bimply a..preliminary investigation. For various reasons, he objected to the alterations in the information. He thought:that nothing was to be done but,for their Worships to ascertain -whether-'the'defendant had in their opinion perjured himself; and, if so, to send the case up to the Supreme Court for trial.—A discussion then ensued between counsel as to the proper form of information, and many quotations were made. The Bsnch were of-opinion that although the information in its present form was valid, yet more definite particulars should Imyejbeeugiven, so that defendant might havebeen prepared tocoinbat tho bharge brought against him.^The information jwas then amended in sUch" manner as to give definite particulars, and Crosbie was. t hep jch&rged'in the ustfil form Y.-*-Mr. HesWth theft leaid that under the amended T he' could no -longer appear' as counsel, as his testimony would be required. Other- witnesses also were ia.t Grahamstown, and therefore he, could npfc. igo on with t'he^ matter.—Mr. Russell replied; •urging the Bench to proceed with the iuvestf-; iga(,ioh,;and^ if ntfebssary, 'send the case to the ;Supremo Court for trial. jTlie -object of,thiß, l-preliiinn'di'y'investigation' was sioiply to ensure' trie retention of defendant j.n the,country.p- j ■Tlie Bench thought;it would be a 'harsh imatter to go on with thepi'Oi^edingSja^,.Ui}«|er ■existing" ciiThm9tahce's'"-'defendrtht had "no 'counsel, a^d .his .wi^csses^were.. absent, : Mi\^ jHe-keth -liaving ' beeii conVpelled" to withdraw" 'from his adyocauy.—After a long discussion*., •oii'tlie1 point' of ■'aliowi__g r cob'ts, and as to trie adjournment of the ca.se—to which Mr. Brook-. field and Mi-. Russell objected,'and'for which Mr. Hesketh applied—tho Bench adjourned the hearing of the charge until this day week, counsel for the prosecution still objecting to the postponement. —No costs were ordered, and defendants were admitted to bail.