Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SEQUEL TO APPEAL.

PROSECUTION ORDERED FOR PERJURY. ALLEGED FALSE STATEMENTS. At Rangiora yesterday the First Canterbury Military Service Board dismissed the appeal of Ernest Frederic! Ward, farmer, Waipara, and the chairman (Mr J. S. Evans, S.M.) ordered that he be prosecuted on a charge oi perjury. The appeal had been before the Board j on a previous occasion, when it was ad- | journed for a report. At yesterday's I hearing, the father of appellant stated that hi 3 son was not aware of the fact that he had disposed of his interest in an hotel at Dunedin. Witness said he had been staying with his son at various times, and was now managing an hotel for his brother at Riverton. Htnry Alexander Blyth stated that ho knew appellant and his father. He had seen Mr Ward, sen., about appellant's place on and off for the last six months. It was common knowledge about the district that Ward, sen., had sold out of his hotel and was about to settle on the farm. He was about witness's place in February and March, assisting in dipping sheep. He had heard that Ernest Ward had been asked to assist neighbours, but had not done. so. To Mr van Asch: Appellant had assisted neighbours in return for assisttance, but had not given them full time. David John Doak, chairman of the Advisory Committee, corroborated the statement that' it was common knowledge in the district that Ward, sen., lind sold his interest in his hotel in Dunedin, and would settle on the farm in Waipara. •Addressing the, appellant, the chairman said he had deliberately misled the Board. He had stated that iris father had an hotel in Dunedin, that he did not have a motor-car, and that his father was not on the place when he was before the Board on a previous occasion. He was going to instruct the police, on the evidence before him, to lay a charge of perjury. The appellant had doliberatelv lied to mislead the Board. The appeal would.be dismissed. The police were open to lay a charge of perjury, and the evidence before him would be available to them.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19180713.2.45

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Press, Volume LIV, Issue 16263, 13 July 1918, Page 8

Word count
Tapeke kupu
360

SEQUEL TO APPEAL. Press, Volume LIV, Issue 16263, 13 July 1918, Page 8

SEQUEL TO APPEAL. Press, Volume LIV, Issue 16263, 13 July 1918, Page 8

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert