PERJURY CHARGE.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 18906, 22 January 1927, Page 14

PERJURY CHARGE.

AGAINST CONSTABLE. CASE AT DUNEDIN. [THE TKESS Special Service: DUNEDIN, January 21. After several adjournments, the perjury charges against Constable George Macartney were proceeded with to-day at tho City Police Court. This was tho sequel to the action in the Supremo Court in November last when John "William Lockctt was awarded substantial damages against the constable for assault and hilse arrest. Macartney has been in tho police force for 28 years, it is about 20years ago since a Dunedin police constable has been charged with perjury, and in that case the information was dismissed. In tho Police Court accused was represented by Mr A. C. Hanlon, who nad defended him in the civil action. Tho Crown Solicitor (Mr F. 13. Adams) conducted the prosecution. The charges were:—(l) That George Macartney, of. Dunedin, police constable, did on November 3rd, 1926, at Dunedin commit perjury on the hearing of an action brought in the Supreme Court at Dunedin by John "William Lockett against George ' Macartney by swearing, firstly, that at about half-past 11 on the night of Julv 23rd, 1926, in Kenmuir road, Mornington, John William Lockett was very drunk, and that he then and there arrested John William Lockett for drunkenness in a public place; and, secondly, that when coming along the road John William Lockett was staggering all over the road and smelt very strongly of liquor; and, thirdly, that John William Lockett was then staggering all over tho road and was drunk and thoroughly drunk; and, fourthly, that when he had John William Lockett in the. watch-house and put him in the cell ho was stilL drunk. (2) That George Macartney did on November 3rd, 1926, at Dunedin commit perjury on the hearing of an action brought in the Supreme Court at Dunedin by John Wi'liam Lockett against George Macartney by swearing that ho never at any time struck John William Lockett a blow of any description, either with his clenched fist or otherwise during the whole of the struggle between himself and John William Lockett on the night of July 23rd, 1926.

Mr Adams, after outlining the two charges, said that in view or the verdict of the jury in the case in -which Lockett was-awarded damages against the constable the police considered it to be their duty to proceed against Macartney for perjury. The evidence would be the same as given in the Supreme Court, except that Mr Gave, the registrar of the, Supreme Court, would he called. It was considered that the Judge's associate should be called, but he was now residing permanently in Auckland, and counsel and Mr Hanlon would decide whether it would be considered necessary to call him. * Ernest White Caye, registrar of the Supreme- Court at Dunedin, gave, evidence Jo the effect that Macartney had made the statements mentioned in the charge'.' . The case is proceeding.