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
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

ALLEGED PERJURY.

, FxJITARGE AGAINST E. S. EASTON

'ACCUSED COMMITTED 'FOR

TRIAL,

The charges of alleged perjury against F. S. Easton, of Eoxton, were brought on for hearing at the Magistrate's Court, Palmerston X., yesterday afternoon, before Air Wyvorn Wilson, S.M., of Wanganui. The charge was as follows: That in a judicial proceeding at the hearing of the civil action Easton v. Wright, .Frederick Spencer Easton, in support, ot the action, did falsely assert as part of his evidence on oath: — (1) That he had not taken the racehorse Stevens back from (lie defendant Wright after he had sold the racehorse to him. (2) That lie had not leased the racehorse”" to William George Trask, either ( verbally or in writing. 1 (3) That ho bad.not subsequently made a present of Slovens

to Trask. (4). That Elevens had never been on Easton's place since lie had been sold lo Wright. That such assertions were known to he false.by Easton, and had been intended to mislead the Stipendiary Magistrate before whom the ease was heard. Detective Quirke conducted the ease on behalf of the police, and accused was represented by Mr I • M. Wilford, of W ellington. Mr Wilford asked that all witnesses he ordered out of Court. Detective Quirke briefly outlined ■y r -jbp euse, and called the following evidence: — Constable (VDonoghuo, of I oxton, stuted that on September .Dili be was present at the Magistrates Court. Eoxton, when the .civil action, Easton v. Wright, was heard before Mr Stout, S.M. Accused gave evidence in that ease on his own liehalf, ami had been put on his oath

■ by willies*. Allred Frederick "Watkins. City Canned employee, of Christchurch, said that on March 17th he had received a bap' of papers from Cooke, another Conned employee, and had placed them in the destructor fire. Charles Foster Cooke, City Council employee, of Christchurch, said he had -received half a dozen baps of papers from Mr Sellars, secretary of the Facing’ Conference. He had taken them to the destructor, and they were handed to Walkin- who had burnt them. W'~ Hartley Sellars, secretary of the Racing’ Conference at Christchurch. " said he had sent some sacks of racing papers to the destructor, llieio laid been a paper dealing with the racehorse Stevens in one ot the hags, which was a registration form of lease of joint interest of the racehorse Stevens. It contained the name of the racehorse, colour, and pedigree. The horse was leased on May 7th, 1913, for two years. The termination of the registration of the lease of the horse Stevens had been published in the New Zealand Referee on May 1-th, 191 b. the pa pels had been Jest roved by witness because he had just moved from old to new offices, and did not wish to he lumbered up with old

papers, 4 Mr Wilford admitted the publication in (lie New Zealand b’eferee and the Monthly Racing Calender of the termination of lease. To Mr Wilford: The registration document was such as,-supplied to all racing clubs and racehorse owners, and 1 it .was easy for ant racing mail to get one. and signatures on same did not require to be witnessed. Where he did not know the sign'll tares he had to rely on ihe Fact that they were genuine. He could not swear*that the signatures on the registration of lease ot Steremwere genuine. Witness produced a telegram received from Ea>tou on September* 17th last. 9be lelogram asked whether a lease bad been registered of the horse Stevens to Trask from Easton, When the te-

, legrnm had been sent no judgment t j n the case Easton v. Wright had been given, and there was no threat for perjury at that lime. Constable Woods stated he was clerk of ihe Court at Foxton when the ease Easton v. Wright wa.s heard, and was present at the hearing of the case on September 17th/ Decision had been reserved, and had .subsequently been given m -Palmers top North, when judgment was for defendant. Easton’s claim had been for £209 on a dishonoured cheque drawn in Easton’s favour by Wright. The amount was for purchase of the horse Stevens. Although Easton had received the cheque in 1911 he had not presented it until July. 1920. Easton stated at the heaving of the ease that the./reason why ho had not presented the cheque was because he thought .Wright had not enough money at Hie Bank to meet it. He had presented it in July, 1920, because of

Wright’s. recent winnings at the L _ Wellington winter meeting, which NBjfcjad amounted to thousands, fasten stated that he had demanded (he money by letter, but receiving no reply had instituted proceedings for the recovery of same. I nder crossexamination by Mr Ongley, Easton had stated that he had not arranged witli "Wright to return the horse Stevens after Wright had 'been disqualified, and .that it was untrue that lie had received the horse back from Wright, or that (lie horse was ever on his property after he had sold it to Wright. He said also that it was untrue that lie had ever leas- - ed the horsg to W. G. Trask, a horse trainer at‘Eoxton. Easton also said it was untrue that he hud finally given the horse to Trask, his trainer.

•To'Mr Wilford; Witness and Easton had been on very bad terms for a long while. He had not told Mr Junes, solicitor, of Palmerston N., that “the b—• — bughl to be.put up

for perjury.” To Detective Quirke; Witness and Easton bad not. spoken since lie had been instrumental in getting Easton convicted at the Magistrate's Court ;u 1998 for insulting language, when Easton had been lined £5. Any bad feeling that had arisen between witness and Easton had been flie ouleomc of him doing his duty. Mr Wilford: Was' it not -that he called you a thief because you had overcharged Ids men for mileages.

Witness: Yes. Mr Wilford: There was an inquiry. .Witness; Yes. I was exonerated. I am only giving evidence here as to Avhal happened at the Court ease at Foxl on. Air Wilford; I acknowledge Hie iegret with which you give it. Witness: Thank you, Arthur Afoul ague Ongley, barrister and solicitor, of Palmerston A,, remembered the hearing of the. ease Easton v. Wright, at Eoxton. He could not undertake to give the whole of the evidence. In cross-ex-amining accused in that ease he had asked him if he had lakenjhe horse back after lie had sold it to Wright, and whether the horse had been on his property after he had sold it lo Wright. Both of these questions had been answered in the negative. Easton also denied leasing the horse to anybody after the sale to Wright, Easton replying “Certainly not.” Easton statedlie had not leased the horse to Trask, or given it to him when the horse broke .down. To Air Wilford: Witness said he could not say from his own knowledge that any of the statements made hv Fusion were untrue.

Frank Daniel Whihley, reporter for the “Manawatu Herald,”. Foxlon, staled he was present at th'e Court when Easton was being' crossexamined by Mr Ongley. Easton had staled that the horse was never ■hi liD property- after the Kile to Wright. Also that lie had never leased the horse to Trask, or given it to him.

To Mr Wilford: Witness-said he could not undertake to give the exact wording of Easton':; evidence. From his own knowledge ■he could not say that any of the .-tatements made hv Easton were untrue.

To the Magistrate: The Court usually sal. at Foxton at noon, but on this occasion all the parlies beingpresent Ihe Court commenced earlier, Witness armf.nl at the Court somewhere about live minutes to iwelve, and the case had then been •an for live or ten minutes. Mr Ong,ev was cross-examining accused when witness urrived. Witness left the Court somewhere about one o'eloekr The Court was still sitting at this time, but tbe Hast on- W right case was finished.

Alfred Mitchell Wright, horse trainer, Foxton, said he arranged to buy Stevens from the accused for C2OO, giving him a cheque for this

amount, and took possession of ihe horse from accused,-’ He retained Slim until lie was disqualified in August, 1912. The horse was spelling at this lime. After witness was 'disqualified Mr Easton told witness to return the horse to his lann, and ill at he would, take him back. Ea--!on told witness the cheque had not been present <*ik Witness sent the horse to accused's properly next to !he Fox ton Cemetery, at Mr Easton's request. At this lime witness was working ou Easton's propet ly. Witness was riding a bicycle in and cut to work, and shortly after Easton told witness lie could ride Elevens in and out to work. While witness was using the horse it was. kept on Easton’s place byplay, and witness’ by night. While witness/ was riding Stevens Mr Trask enquired it (he In-rse was for sale. Witness told him" Tie didn’t own the horse, but would make inquiries from the owner. Made enquiries from accused if the horse was for sale. Easton said he was for - sale for f2OO. Told Trask that Easton would sell him the horse -for €2tit). Eater Trask told witness that Easton had agreed to lease him the horse. Witness thou told Trask tha-t ho had been feeding the horse, and witness wanted to know who was going to pay him lor that. 1 old Trask this would be about £lo, and Trask said ho would pay this amount, which lie did. *A receipt was given for the amount received from Trask." Witness afterwards saw the horse’in Trask’s, possession. Was present in Eoxtou Court on September 17ih, when accused sued witness on the cheque for £2OO above referred to. Heard the accused give evidebce oil that occasion. He denied, on oath, having taken the horse back. This statement was not true. He also denied that the horse was ever sent hack to his properly. Witness said ho never saw the horse on witness’ property, but when Easton fold witness to ride Stevens as a hack he sent his man -cut to Easton’s property to get him. Easton staled in the Court he never leased the horse to Trask. Air Wilford: No questions.

William George Trask, stud groom, Levin, said he lormeiiy resided in Fuxton, and in 1013 was training a horse, Lady Munioa, ioi accused. In January of 1913 witness asked Mr Wright if tlm horse Stevens that he.was hacking lihout was tor sale. , Mr Wright, was disqualified at this time, and was working at Mr Easton s mill. Saw Mr Easton afterwards about the horse Stevens, and asked if he would lease the horsey to witness. He agreed to lease the horse to witness tor two years on a percentage of either 15. or 20 per cent, of the winnings. Witness got possession of. the horse about the end of Janu-

ary, 1913, being authorised •by ae■vuscd'to take.possession ot him. Go! Stevens from Mr Wright, Paid Mr Wright £ls for feed -that was in the horse, and received a receipt for .-mine. About a week after witness got Slovens he jumped into a wire fence and cut himself, and. witness doctored him up and'kept him in the paddock until lie was right again, about a month later. At this time witness.had no written lease of him, but got the lease in the first week in May, 1913. The lease' was drawn up hy Mr Easton and witness, . r il Easton’s office at hi.s residence. He thought Easton wrote it out and alien both parlies signed it. Witness signed it, and Illusion signed it. It was not witnessed by anyone. No copy of il was made. After it was signed il was put in an envelope and was addressed to (be Secretary of the Racing Conference. Was not quite sure whether he or Air Easton addressed it. Witness posted it the same night. The lease slated that the racehorse Stevens was leased from F. S. Easton to W. Cl. Trask for a period of two years. Witness did not remember the exact dales. It was May, 1913. Easton asked witness if he gave Wright anything for feeding the horse, and witness replied “Yes. T gave Wrighf £15.” Easton asked if witness got a receipt for it. Witness told him that he had, and gave the receipt to Easton. Easton asked witness to show him the receipt. He said lie was going to burn it that night, because if the Raping authorities got hold of it they might all get inlo trouble. Easton also showed witness a cheque that night, which he had got from Mr Wright for £‘2oo, and said, “I hope yon have better luck with (his horse that wind Wright had.” Witness said the official notification of the registration of the lease was published in the .Referee. Witness said he raced St evens at Olaki and various other places. He was raced in witness’ name. Raced him v nnlil the August meeting at Christchurch in 1913, when he broke down, ami witness brought him back to Eoxton. Afterwards witness had-him tired, and he was turned out on Easton’s property, at the hack of the woolshed. This was a different place to the cemetery paddock. Kept the Imrse until March, 1915, when witness had the horse in again, and was hacking' him about. Easton was-at witness’ place one day, ami

said, “Do yon know what I would do with Stevens if I were you, Dill !” Witness slopped him and remarked, "If 1 were in your place 1 know what T would do with him. I would make a present of him lo me, and then I could do what 1 liked with him.” He pulled out his watch, and said it is about 5 minutes past 12; from, now on I make him a present to you, and you can do what you like with him.” A paragraph appeared in the Sporting and Dramatic Review on March 251 h, 1915, about the gift ,ol the horse to witness. (Copy of paper containing same produced.) This paragraph vva • never contradicted or disputed. Later on witness lent Stevens to a friend named Procter to hack about, and the horse broke his neck. Was at the Fox tun Court on September 17th hi.-l, and heard Easton give evidence in the ease '.Easton v. Wright, Remembered him saying rh, l l he never leased the horse to anybody. This statement was not ime. Heard him say t-ke horse was never an his place after he sold him lo Wright. Thai statement was not true, as the loose had been on bis place. IR' said be never matle anyone a present of the horse, 1 his statement was md true. Mr Wilford; Xn f|tjcsiions.

Thomas Vipoml Proctor, labourer, Foxion, said Trask lent the horse Slovens to witness about six monl lis prior (o the horse being killed. Rode him about Foxlou frequently, and met Mr Easton ou several eei-asiniis, and be nevef"qnes|hated wit ness.

No questions were asked by Air Wilford.

Oscar John (leorge H’Alh, seeveiary of the Otaki Maori Racing Club, said he knew W. ft. Trask. He raced Ihe horse Stevens at the Otaki meeting in June, 1913, in the name of W. 0. Trask. The name of .the owners would be published in the race card, and Would lie a mailer of public knowledge. Mr Wilford did not question Ihe witness.

Mr Wilford asked that two of the charges (numbers three and four) be dismissed, and on (he other he proposed reserving his defence. He said that according to Section 130 of the Crimes Act perjury docs not consist of staling what is untrue unless such assertions are known to witness to be false, and that by Section 134 no person shall he convicted of perjury on the uncorroborated testimony of one witness alonc. Charge No. 1, “That the horse had been taken back from Wright,” there was evidence by Wright and Trask, and he therefore proposed to ask that this bo left to the jury. No. 2, “That the horse was leased to Trask," there was the oath of Trask, against Easton, plus some evidence which may be deemed' by the Court to be material. No. 3, “That the horse had been given to Trask," there was only one man’s word against another, and therefore he submitted this must be dismissed. No. 4, “That the horse was never on-Easton’s property after the sale to Wright,” there was no corroboration iif the evidence for the prosecution, and he submitted this also should be dismissed. On the charges Nos. 1 and 2 ho asked leave to reserve, the defence. Mr Wilford said that it had, come out in evidence that ou flic day of the trial at Eoxtou Easton had telegraphed to the Racing Conference, asking if there was a lease of the horse Stevens. This telegram, was

sent before the Magistrate.delivered his judgment, and if the Magistrate had known Unit Easton had done this. Mr Wilford said he believed, the MagiMrate would have hesitated before lie made the references in the judgment that he did make. The,Magistrate said that as'far as the charge in connection with the giving of the horse to Trask was concerned no corroboration of the evidence of Trask, and that charge would therefore be'dismissed. In reference to the horse never being on Easton’s property it appeared to him there was some corroborative evidence, and accused must he committed for (rial on that charge. Accused then pleaded not guilty, and reserved his (Tbfenec, and the Magistrate commit tod him for trial on the three counts, at the Supreme Court, Palmerston North, on November. 9th, 1920. Bail was allowed on accused’s own recognisance in the. sum of £IOO.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MH19201028.2.14

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 2195, 28 October 1920, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
2,983

ALLEGED PERJURY. Manawatu Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 2195, 28 October 1920, Page 3

ALLEGED PERJURY. Manawatu Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 2195, 28 October 1920, Page 3

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