A CURIOUS CASE.

South Canterbury Times, Volume XV, Issue 2068, 8 November 1879, Page 2

A CURIOUS CASE.

Sergeant Major Bovin, who had been dispatched to Sydney for the purpose of bring back T. P. Wilson, arrested on a warrant charging him with embezzlement at Dunedin, returned yesterday without his prisoner. The cause of the failure of his mission is thus explained by the “ S3 r dncy Morning Herald ”:—■ “ At the Central Police Court on Saturday, before Messrs Smart, Arguirnbau, and Pintey, J.P.’s, a man named Wilson was brought before the Bench by Detective Murray, in execution of a warrant from Dunedin, New Zealand, in which he was charged with having on the 15th of March last received into his possession—as clerk and collector for John Marshall and another of Dunedin, brewers, a bank cheque for payment of money, and embezzling the same. John Beviu, Sergeant-Major in New Zealand police, produced what purported to be a copy of depositions taken before I. N. Watt, of Dunedin, liesidenl Magistrate, Having, with Mr AVatt, compared the certified copy with the original, he was prepared to swear that it was a true copy. It appeared, however, that the depositions were incomplete, the Magistrate’s certificate of their correctness, supplied by the jurat, being absent. The Justices, under the circumstances, discharged the prisoner.” The “ Sydney News’s - ’ accounts add that tho arrest was made by Detective Murray of the local force. On being called on Sergeant-Major Bevin identified tho prisoner and produced Mr Watt’s warrant with the accompanying certificate. Mr AValtcr Smart, J.P., pointed out that tho documents produced in Court were most defective instruments to warrant the remand of the prisoner to New Zealand and he discharged the prisoner on account of no Jurat appearing on the copy of the despositions taken in New Zealand. Sergeant-Major Beviu tried very hard to get Wilson handed over to him, and swore that the despositions were taken before him : that he held a letter from prisoner to the prosecutor, admitting his guilt; and that Mr Watt’s name appeared at the end of the depositions. Detective Murray also swore that prisoner admitted his guilt when he arrested him, but Mr Smart thought it was uot British law to commit a man on such defective evidence, as the witnesses could not be tried for perjury iu conscqucucc of tho magistrate’s signature not appearing at the end of the depositions, testifying that the evidence had been sworn before him.

We believe that the Sydney Bench acted under a misapprehension for their duty in discharging Wilson ; and that the proper certilicate was attached to the depositions—a fact that has since been admitted by the Sydney authorities. Dunedin “ Star,” Kov. 3.