ALLEGED PERJURY BY THE POLICE.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1936, 29 August 1889, Page 4

ALLEGED PERJURY BY THE POLICE.

Weilingtok, Aug. 26. The following evidence was taken at the H.M/Court to-day in the charge of perjury against Detective Benjamin: Chemis deposed that Detective Benjamin came to his house on June Ist with a search warrant looking for the pocket-book stolen from Hawkins, Witness was searched, and his clothes and hands minutely inspected. Questioned as to whether he was wearing the same clothes the previous day, he replied “ Yes, and for a week before.” Witness then related the search by the police. The gun was not out of the bedroom the day before. One of the drawers was locked, and the key was handed by witness to Detective Campbell to enable him to search. He usually kept the drawer locked to prevent the children at the dynamite caps kept there. Detective Benjamin took papers such as bills, letters, etc., from the drawer, but no newspapers. : There were none there. The powder flask was alongside the shot pouch, and anyone could see it. When Detective Campbell found the he remarked “ There is some dust, on it.” The stiletto had not been out of its sheath for six months. Chemis’s evidence was corroborative of a good many of the details given by his wife as to the articles in the drawer alleged to have been overlooked by the police, his own movements on the night of the murder, etc., but in some important particulars it was greatly at variance with her. Mrs Chemis had sworn that the cocoa tin in the drawer contained £7 or £8 when the police searched, but Chemis said he believed he had taken out all the money there was on the day after the murder. Mrs Chemis had explicitly stated that when the police searched Chemis they did not take him outside to get a better light, and that Benjamin himself had lit a lamp. Chemis; without hesitation, said that he was taken outside to see letters, and he appeared to think that he lit the lamp himself, though he did not seem quite sure about it. The third point in which his evidence disagreed with his -wife’s was regarding the ultimate fate of the quail which he asserted were shot on the Wednesday and Thursday preceding the murder. He said that they were eaten at dinner on the Sunday so far as he remembered, that none were kept for tea, and that no one came into tea. Mrs Chemis had said that some were left over from dinner, and that she gave her brother-in-law, John Dowd, one for tea. In other respects the story of the quail and how they were shot, two at a time, was on all fours with his wife’s narrative. Chemis corroborated Dybell’s evidence as to the purchase of the wad-cutter. He had had no opportunity of talking with his wife since his arrest, but had had a long interview with Jellicoe. He did not know whether his wife had yet given her evidence. Ha explained that he obtained a dozen bullets from Gibson to shoot wild pigs with, but only used three because they were too small for his gun. In answer to Mr Bell, he said he did not wrap paper round the bullets to make them fit, but rammed paper down on the top. He could not recollect whether he collected any money for milk on the Saturday morning after the murder. He did not hear that Hawkins bad been murdered till the afternoon. Now he* remembered that it was about 11 o’clock at the Rainbow Hotel, Kaiwara. There were no fragments of newspaper in the handkerchiefs taken out to Inspector Thompson. Mr Bell asked witness why, when called upon by the Judge to say why sentence of death should n6t be pronounced, he did not mention this among other things;' Chemis replied that in such a dreadful position he only spoke what first came into his mouth. He could not say why he had not mentioned it in his statement to the Governor.

Mr Bell: “I invite you to explain it now.”

Witness: “ I must have forgotten

it.” It came out further on that Chemis had sheath-knife, but he said that he had never wore it. He had bad the stiletto since the water-works were finished. He last used it six months ago. It had a sharp point, and was not bent. The stiletto was shown to him, and he was asked if he could account for the p«int being now turned. Chemis expressed surprise at its condition, and tried to straighten it with bis teeth, but was promptly stopped; He could not account for it. It was not so when be last saw it. He said he had never threatened Hawkins. He had last talked with him about four months ago. Hawkins offered to settle the law-suit for £SO. Told him he was always wanting money, and was never satisfied. He also'complained to him about Hawkins’s children beating witness’, and Hawkins said it was not his children that had done it.

Chemis was cropped and shaved, and appeared in convict clothes. The Court adjourned at 5 o’clock. Aug. 27. The cross-examination of Chemis was resumed this morning. The righthand drawer contained no newspapers, only bills, Italian letters, and documents. He replaced a number of articles in the drawer after the police had made a search. When the Inspector took the stiletto from its sheath he remarked, “ The thing is rusty, we will see it better by daylight.” Ee-examined, Chemis said his

statement to the Governor was written in the Italian language. He was not aware who translated it, He had not had a private interview with Mr Jellicoe before that statement was made. At the instance of the gaoler, he only put down the more important particulars. It was not a full statement. He knew nothing of the present case, nor what they were investigating. After he was informed that Hawkins had met with foul play he fully expected the houses in the neighborhood of the scene of the inurder would be searched by the police. _He did not understand the evidence given at the trial by Mr Tasker respecting pieces of paper, therefore in his state : ment to the Governor he had not mentioned anything about fragments of newspapers. The evidence produced before the Governor he was aware of before he was shown it by Mr Jellicoe. They was no newspaper in the handkerchief when it was handed by Benjamin and Campbell to Thompson. In fact Thompson said, “ There is nothing we want from these; these are only letters and bills.” If anyone used his shot pouch he, would know whether his shot were greased., He had had a powder flash for four or five years; it was repaired a week or fortnight before the death of Hawkins. Dowd was at witness’ house on the Sunday after the murder. John Dowd, a brother of Mrs Chemis, said that he frequently went out shooting with Chemis’s gun, and was out on the Sunday before Hawkins was murdered. After shooting he put the powder flask, shot, and caps, back in the right drawer in the bedroom, but was not sure whether he put the wads back. On Sunday, June 2nd, after the murder, Mrs Ghemis told witness something about the detectives, and in consequence he went to the right-hand drawer and examined it. He found in it the revolver, the powder flask, the wad cutter, some dyniamite caps, some gun caps, blasting powder, fuse, and soihe revolver cartridges. Witness had tea at Chemis’s that day by himself. He did not see Chemis; he was out about the shed. Sir Harry Atkinson was recalled, and deposed thst the statement sent by Chemis to the Executive Council had not been published before it was laid on the table of the House of Representatives on Friday, and he considered it very unlikely that Mrs Clemis or anyone bn her behalf knew the contents before then.

Robert Oybell was also examined and the case adjourned.