THE CHARGE AGAINST MR. W. W. WILSON.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume III, Issue 423, 28 October 1876, Page 2

THE CHARGE AGAINST MR. W. W. WILSON.

The case of Mr W. W. Wilson, charged with perjury, is one of extra hardship, and shows how easily a stigma may be attached to a man’s character through the readiness with which the machinery of the criminal law can be put in motion. That the accused “ left the Court without a stain upon his character,” as was stared by the Court, is but a sorry reparation for the wrong that has been done him, for despite this declaration—which is entirely sustained by the circumstances of the case, —it will still remain a slur that can at any time be cast up against him that he stood his trial for wilful and corrupt perjury. A more trumpery charge has, perhaps, never been brought against any man in our local law courts, and Mr Wilson is deserving of sincere sympathy. The circumstances of the case can be briefly described. A complicated series of adjustments and settlement of accounts between the parties had taken place, aud what with rearrangements and interest upon interest charged, omitted, foregone, or adjusted, the accounts were in such a muddle as to draw forth the marked comment of the Resident Magistrate on a former occasion, and of the Bench yesterday. But these complications had resolved them selves in a certain sum being paid as an acquittance in full. Whether or not this money was accepted as such is beside the question. It was clearly paid on the condition of its being accepted as such ; and accordingly in a subsequent suit the defendant swore that he owed nothing. On this oath he was charged with wilful aud corrupt purjury, and brought from Poverty Bay to Dunedin as a criminal. Apart from the evident belief in the defendant’s own mind that the account was settled, and the evident fact that it was settled, the complicated state of the whole affair throughout might have prompted caution in laying such a grave criminal charge against one in the responsible position of a professional man, but reckless of all consequences, the charge was laid ; and we fear it bears too much the aspect of simple malice. Any number of flaws in the proceedings might have been taken advantage of by the counsel for the defence, but not even evidence was tendered in reply, and the preposterous nature of the charge was so apparent on the face of the prosecutor’s own evidence lhat it was at once dismissed. Such a case as this is calculated to produce a very uneasy feeling in the public mind, and to create an impression that when the criminal law can be put so easily and so wantonly in motion, no man is safe.— Guardian.