Wanganui Supreme Court.

Manawatu Herald, 7 October 1893, Page 2

Wanganui Supreme Court.

Tuesday, 3rd October. (Before His Honor the Chief Justice, Sir James Prendergast). The Grand Jury returned a true bill against Charles Bushett for CRIMINAL ASSAULT upon one Elizabeth Bromley, on the 26fch of May last, at Scott's Ferry ; accused pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr Hogg. Mr Pitzherbert conducted the case for the prosecution. The following jurors were empanelled: — S. Oroker, A. Kincade, W. Phillips, W. Montgomerie, T. Mahoney, H. N Harrison, J. Crofts, A. McDuff, James Dempsey, W. Chapman, W. A. Davis, and John Beid. Mr Montgomery was chosen foreman. After a short address to the jury, Mr Fitzherbert called tbe chief witness in this case, Elizabeth Bromley, who, on being sworn, said she lived at Scott's Ferry (Rangitikei). At that time she was staying with Mrs Jessop at Bulls. Left her place (Mrs Jessop's) on May 26 to go home in a trap with Mr Bushett (accused). Had known him from a child. He lived close to witness's house. Left Bulls in the trap at about 8.30 with accused. No one else was there. Had to cross tht

river to get home. On coming to the river, or perhaps a quarter of a mile from Mr Bushett's boat, which was about half-way between accused's house arid Mr Hayinen { s property (off the high road through Mr Haymen'B gate), accused stopped the trap and said, "Get out her^^-' Lizzie.'" He himself got out, and witness was about following when accused caught hold of her and threw her on the ground. (WitHesS here described the assault which was alleged to have been committed at this time and place). After the assault she followed accused to the boat because she did not know her way back to Mr Amon's : Took a kit containing her things and got down the bank into the boat. Accused took the horse and trap to his trap shed. He came back when he had put the trap away, about 7.80 p.m., and pulled down to his own house. He asked witness to come in, but she declined. Mr Hogg's cross-examination was directed to show that* the witness's character was not all that could be desired. In the course of crossexamination witness said she did not want accused's wife to know what he had done. She also said she did not want accused to go to gaol, as his wife and children would have to suffer if he did. She only wanted her character cleared, as accused had made her the talk of everyone ever since she had been brought before Dr Benuett. The matter was not reported to the police until the Sunday, some forty-eight hours after the alleged assault. Mr Fitzherbert briefly re-examined the witness. Eniily Jane Bromley, mother of the last Avitness, said - that Mlf May last she was living near Scott's Ferry. Her daughter Elizabeth was away from home in May, and returned home about 8.80 p.m. on 20th May. (Witness described her daughter's appearance, the conversation that took place between them on that occasion, and also spoke as to her daughter's previous character and health). She corroborated the last witness as to . accused's behaviour on the evening of May 26 th and on subsequent occasions. Mr Hogg cross-examined and suggested that this witness was not quite respectable, and endeavoured to show that accused's wife and witness continued on intimate terms after the alleged assault. Thyrza Jessop knew Elizabeth Bromley. Remembeved r t B||shett calling for the girl on" 26 th. *They left in a buggy. Mr Hogg cross-examined this witness briefly, and' t Mr Fitzherbert < \ then called Thomas Bennett, a duly medical practitioner, residing and practising at Bulls, who said he examined the girl on the 30th of May at her mother's requesji, ' (Examination and inferences therefrom were here detailed by Dr Bennett.) John Coyle, licensed: victualler, in May last was. in the constabulary and stationed at Bulls. Qn,S,unday, the 28th of May, about. .4 .p.ni. he received the first intimation , of, the alleged assault from a man named Bawke. The information was laid on the sth of June, and the accused was arrested on the Bth of June. By Mr Hogg — Had khown'Biishett for fourteen years and always found him a very decent man. He was always willing to assist > the police. Edmund Villars, Sergeant /of the police, also gave evidence. * ; .^ The case for the prqSjechtion closed at 6.40 and the Court adjourned until 6.46. ,;.__? : ... Upon the Court resuming, Mr Hogg opened the case 4q£j the defence, denying that the accused was guilty of the alleged offence^' Dr Bennet (recalled) gave Evidence as to certain indications, : ; The accused was then sworn, and said that, on the day in question he drove the girl home from Bulls, meeting several people^ the road. There was no truth whatever in the girl's statement as to th^ alleged offence. It was not- tfrueithat he hurried away from her home. Cross-examined— Was only told about the charge half-an-hour before being arrested. The only motive assigned for laying such a charge was, that accused had: "chaffed " prosecutriz about something concerning her, and a young man named Hogg. Elizabeth Bushett, wife of accused, -, noticed nothing peculiar ' about the girl on the evening of the* alleged offence. ' •• ■•* ■- - /"*' * Elizabeth Lewis (aunt of the girl) said she had complained to the girl of the late hgurs she kept. Frederick Long, of ScoWsvFerry, said he noticed nothing peculiar about the girl, or to denote that she 3^ had been crying. This evidence was corroborated by Alfred Hogg. Counsel for the defence then addressed the jury, and was followed by the Crown Prosecutor; after which His Honor summed up and the jury retired at 9.15 pm. At'if 11 o'clock the jury came into Court, the foreman asking for the indictment and His Honor asked if they were likely to agree shortly, if so he would remain. The foreman replied that he hoped to give the information shortly The jury again returned to Court at 12.80 a.m., and the foreman asked if they could

bring in a verdict of attempted rapo and whether the verdict must be unanimous. His Honor answered In the affirmative on both questions. The jury again retired, and five minutes later returned stating that ■— ih,ey disagreed on their verdict, with remark that there was no probability of their agreeing. His Honor regretted that according to the law he had no alternative but to order the jury to be locked up until the statutory twelve hours expired, and the Court adjourned until 9.80 in the morning. Wednesday. The jury returned to Court this morning, when the foreman announced to His Honor that they had been unable to agree, and that there was no probability of their agreeing. His Honor said he could not account for it, but it was a fact that there were lately a large number of disagreements amongst juries, and he could not understand it. His Honor then made a few further observations with the effect of producing a verdict principally for the purpose of saving a further trial and avoiding distress to those concerned. It was pointed out that in the event of a verdict of " Not Guilty " being returned that it did not establish the accused's innocence in any case, but rather that the evidence adduced was not strong enough and did not justify a conviction, and therefore that an acquittal had been decided on. These remarks had no reference to the oase under investigation. Tho jury again retired, and returned at 9.55, with a verdict of " Not Guilty," wishing to add that of •• Not Proven." His Honor said that it practically amounted to th 6 same thing. The prisoner was then discharged. — Jlerald.