THE LONGHURST CASE.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1276, 15 February 1883, Page 2

THE LONGHURST CASE.

TO THE EDITOR. Ths unwarrantable delay in releasing young Longhurst is meeting with severe criticism. An esteemed correspondent writes to us as follows ;— Sir,—Will you, with your well known endeavors to assist and defend the oppressed, please re-produce in your valuable columns the enclosed letter of “ Fair Play,” excised from the “ Post ”of 9th Feb. Agreeing with all that “Fair Play" has advanced, I might add thereto, which also must be borne in mind, that the Adams’s were dependant, needy people, and it was not till alter they had received notice to quit Longhurst's house, and an unsuccessful endeavor made to obtain money from his mother, that the heinous charge was made. Not only has the unfortunate lad to be deeply sympathised with, but also his fearfully and sorely-tried mother, whose anguish of mind must be beyond all endurance and not to be comprehended by those outside of it. What the ultimate and disastr-ous effect will be if he be Uot released, it is impossible fo conceive; therefore, it behoves every philanthropic per son to be up and doing, and the "voxpopuli” to be raised, and never allowed to rest till the desired end is accomplished, and George Longhurst's wrongs adreued. The injuries and scourges he has received will never be wiped out, so let our beet efforts be put forth to assuage them.—Yours, etc., In Loco Parentis.

(TO THE EDITOR OF THE “ POST.”

Sir,—l consider that the Executive has taken an anomalous view of the Longhurst case. The position is this—At the trial of Longhunt for abusing a girl under ten years, the girl Adams, then over seven, but under eight years of age, wae the principal witness for the prosecution. True, there was the medical evidence; but doctors differ, and they did in connection with this case. Sergt. Ballantine (in his Experiences) says that it is most dangerous to base the issue of a case upon scientific evidence. The girl Adams and her father are next prosecuted for conspiring to give false testimony on the trial of Longhurst, and the jury return a verdict of guilty ; that verdict, on a technical point, is set aside, but as a finding on the fact it stands. That technical point is that sufficient evidence was not adduced to rebut the presumption that the child being between the age of •even and fourteen years is unable to commit a crime, and, therefore, was held incapable of conspiring, practically saying that whatever the father or anyone else might instruct her to say, that in law she was too young to distinguish as to whether such instruction was base or otherwise. This seems to me an equal ground for looking with great suspicion, m fact for rejection, of her evidence on the trial api m tt; but, independently of that, looking at the fact that the verdict of a jury has been returned, only set aside on a technical ground, and virtually in force, finding that the principal witness in Longhurst's case had given concocted evidence, probably the finding in the conspiracy case was influenced by the evidence that came to light of a doctor who wai not examined on the Longhurst trial, who stated that although he did not make a close examination, yet gave it as his opinion from the inspection that he did make, that the child had not been violated ; but, however it was arrived at, I say that from the finding of the facts, the Executive was bound to extend a pardon to Longhurst.—l am, etc. Fair Play, Opaki, Bth February.