SUPREME COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4541, 9 October 1875, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. Friday, October 8.

(Before his Honor Chief Justice, Prendergast and a jury of twelve.) The Court sat at ten o'clock. PERJURY.

. The case against Eliza Smith was proceeded with.

Mr. Buckley addressed the jury for the defence, and said he should call before them witnesses who would prove the prisoner's innocence, and show that the case for the prosecution was of such a nature that he "need not characterise it. He sketched the evidence he was. likely to adduce for the defence, and, then called a number of witnesses, the examination of whom lasted till a quarter-past three o'clock, when the learned counsel commenced to suin up the whole case. He said the present case had arisen out of the criticisms indulged in by a portion of the Press after the conclusion of Cameron's case—criticism which not only animadverted upon the verdict, but upon the conduct of the Court in the matter of sentence. This case was practically another trial I of Cameron for rape, for it was the case for the prosecution, or attempted to be proved, that the offence had never been committed. He then proceeded to review the evidence given, ■' first glancing at that of Mr. Jeffs. He asserted that, Mr. Jeffs and Mrs. Cameron had for weeks together concocted this case ; that the evidence of the former was contradicted on every point by other witnesses, and was so utterly contemptible that it could not be credited for a moment. As for the evidence of the boys, such a blackguard and disgusting : story had never been previously put before a court, and the details of their testimony were so irreconcileable that it was clear the story was devoid of truth. The learned counsel spoke for an hour and a half, and at the conclusion of his speech the crowd in court began to loudly applaud him, but the police at once put a stop to the unseemly proceeding. . ! ' . Mr. Allan replied on the whole case, and contended that he had completely proved that perjury had been committed. It might be that there had been discrepancies, that was to be expected in cases like these, but in the main the story had been thoroughly sustained. Mr. Jeffs had been doing that which was undoubtedly right, and instead of being censured he should have been commended. His anxiety had been to have justice done, and. the reason he gave. for the course he had taken was perfectly natural. Mrs. Cameron had been his servant; had been married from his house; therefore he desired to see justice done her. In concluding his address, the learned gentleman said he thought the evidence supported the indictment, and he trusted the jury would convict the prisoner. At 5.20 his Honor commenced to charge the jury, and continued his address for five hours. He first explained the law on the subject, and then gave the leading points of the evidence as it bore upon the two assignments of perjury. These he followed by an exhaustive and searching analysis of the testimony of each witness, showing that the evidence for the prosecution was one continuous stream of contradiction. With reference to the evidence of Mr. Jeffs, his Honor said it was unsatisfactory, and whether from design or inadvertence, he had given evidence at variance with facts. Looking at the whole of the evidence, his Honor put it to the jury whether they did not consider Mr. Jeffs had been guilty of rash and improper conduct in going to publichouses at Nghauranga " shouting," talking of Cameron'B heavy sentence, and inducing people to believe that he wanted to get evidence for a prosecution of the girl, and the liberation of tho thrice-convicted convict, or rather a convict who was undergoing his fotirth sentence. The jury would have their opinions as to whether Mr. Jeffs had merely been the tool of Mrs. Cameron or whether he had gone further than that.

At 9.20 the jury retired, and after an absence of three-quarters of an hour returned into court, acquitting prisoner.

. The boya Price and August having been brought into court by direction of the Judge, His Honor said : Price and August, the jury in this case have disbelieved you, and no one who has listened to the evidence given can have arrived at any other conclusion than that you have committed wilful and corrupt perjury. But talcing into consideration your age, and taking into consideration what I believe to be the fact, that you have been instigated to this wickedness by persons whom perhaps the law cannot reach, I don t consider it my duty to commit you for trial, as I have the power to do. You will leave this Court disgraced for life, for no one will ever believe you, even on your oaths. Take that

for your punishment, and let it work somereformation in you. I pray God that by somemeans or other your minds and morals may be the better for what has happened here. You may go.

The boys left the court, and Mr. Gooden having been called in, His Honor said : Mr. Gooden, I believe you are a weak and foolish person who hAve f>.sen operated upon by a designing, clever wßman Fanny Cameron. Many falsehoodsyouhavetold, whether intentionally or not I cannot tell, but one falsehood was certainly wilful, that was the falsehood with reference to what took place upstairs, and within the precincts of this court. [His Honor's remarks had reference to witness's denial that Mrs. Cameron had said after leaving the grand jury room, " Why the d- 1 didn't you tell the story I told you." A remark which Mr. Sam Howard proved to have been made.] I shall not do what I have the power to do—commit you for trial for perjury—but Heave it to the Crown to take into consideration what steps shall be taken with regard to you, your nephew, Collingwood Gooden, Fanny Cameron, and the convict Cameron. I say I shall not exercise the power I have, and commit the whole of you for trial, but will leave it to the Crown to take what steps the administration of justice and the preservation of the purity of justice requires. You may go.

The witness then left the Court. His Honor then said: I have one more observation to make in the presence of the jury. I have every reason to believe that these persons who have been instigated to come and give evidence have' been partly induced by the trifling error in a date this poor girl made in giving evidence on a former occasion ; but I very much fear that the foolish observations of some ignorant writer in the Press have had' a great deal to do with this prosecution. Thesentence passed upon James Cameron, convicted of rape, was evidently far too light. Of course, I am not here to enter into a defence of that sentence, but instead of the sentence Being too heavy it was far too light. The Court then rose.