PUBLICAN AND POLICE.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XIII, Issue 4118, 20 May 1892, Page 3

PUBLICAN AND POLICE.

Sequel to the Gambling Case.

Prosecutions For Perjury.

In the Masterton R.M. Court this morning, before Colonel Roberts, R,M. and Messrs M. Oaselberg, W, H. Beetham, and J. Gardiner, J.P.'s, Edward <f. Searl was charged on the information ot Sergeant Henry , M'Ardle with that he did on the Bth April falsely and corruptly perjure himself in evidence given in the R.M, Court, Mr Bturd appeared for the prosecution, and Mr Pownall for the defence. Colonel Roberts, R.M,, intimated that as ho had keen subpoenaed as r. witneES in the case Police v. Searl ho would retire from the Bonch, Mr Gardiner, J.P., said he had been, subptenaed in the joint cases of Police ! v. Searl and Godfrey, and he would therefore continue to occupy his seat on the Bench. Mr Beetham, J.P., stated ho bad also been subpoenaed in the case Police v, Searl, but as he knew abaolutely nothing about the case, he had rosolved to adindicato, Mr Beard: Was your Worship subpoenaed by tho prosecution or the defence ? Mr Beetham: By the defence, Mr Pownall said he had no objection to Mr Beetham Bitting. Mr Gardiner, J,P., hsd been summoned as a witness by the other side which ho said was en extraordinary thing, Mr Beard replied that he had called Mr Gardiner to give evidence which Colonel Roberts could not give. Sergeant M'Ardle was here about

to band a subpeeua to Mr Gardiner, c Mr Pownall; I .vouhl like to point to Sergeant M'Ardin that if be issues a summons to a Justice on the Bench be commits a contempt of

Court. Mr Beard; The prosecution hue decided to offer no evidence on this information, Mr Pownall said this was most disgraceful conduct, on the part of the prosecution. Tho mud had been stirred up by tho police and now when they found that the Beach wns constituted against them they refused to go on. The case had not been authorised and tho conduct of the police was altogether extraordinary. He would point out that twenty-seven witnesses were present for the defence, Mr Beard: I would like to say that I have received instructions from the Police Dopsrtment to appear for the prosecution. Mylearned friend can rest satisfied on the matter. Further proceedings will be taken. Mr Pownall asked that under the Justices of tbc Peace Act a memoran* dum be entered that the accused was discharged, Mr Beard maintained that the

a Bench had no power to make such a Memorandum, It was perfectly dear that tho proper thing to do was to dismiss the information. Mr Pownall said ho wished the Bench to go further than tliut. It would be a pity if the police were allowed to bring similar informations against a citizen every day. Mr Caselberg: As no evidence has been offered tho Bench has decided to dismiss the information, Frederick Fnnklyn Godfrey was then charged with that he did on April Bth, falsely, wickedly, wilfully and corruptly commit perjury in the case recently heard in the K.M. Court in which Mr E. J. Searl was charged with permitting gambling to take place on his licensed premises. Mr Beard appeared for tho prosecution and Mr Pownall for the dofence. Mr Beard, in opening the case, said

there was no occasion to set out tho words used in a case of perjury, but to allege that perjury had been committed and bring forward the evidence to that effect. Tho accused (Godfrey) swore positively and clearly that a person named E, J. Searl was not present when the raffle was going on, and also that a gun was purchased from an individual to be raffled, The evidence would show that the gun had never been purchased, and that Searl knew that the rafflo was proceeding. He argued that this was a case that required further investigation, and accused should bo committed for trial, He pointed out to theßench that it was far more difficult to bring a case of peijury home than in any other case, It should be a guarantee of public safety that tho Bench should commit tho accused to a higher Court for further investigation on evidence which is sufficient, although the other side may havo most witnesses, Sergeant Henry McArdle, sworn, stated he was present in tbc Court when the case was heard

against E. J. Sear), on the Bth of rApril last, for allowing dice to be wirown on bis premises, He reraombered the accused giving evidence on that occasion. He administered the usual oath, He heard Godfrey state that E, J, Searl know nothing what* ever of any raffle being carried on in theStnr Hotel that night, and that when Mr Searl came home lie reprimanded bira for holding the raffle, He (Godfrey) further stated that tlio gun raffled by him had been given to him by a man named George Purvis, who Was at that lime in the hospital, Ho nlso stated that Searl had not entered the room during the time the raffle had been carried on, As far as his memory would serve him, Godfrey Staled positively that Searl knew nothing of the raffle before it was over, and that Searl was not in the fooffl.'apd 'afterwards with nim for holding the raffle without his permission. Constable Ca&luon gave corroborative evidence. By Mr Beard; Godfrey atated that the proceeds of the raf&e of the gun '-<4g?ent to Purvis, By Mr Pownall; The accused swore that Mr Searl callejl hjm on'one side,'and told ji'ipd ha'ljait np'figlit to jiol'tl tbe'rafljo withouthis permission, He would Bweav that Godfrey stated in the Court that Searl returned from Bome place, Although he could remember that Sergt. McArdle admit);, istered th oath to Godfrey, he could not remember who admisistored the oath to himself on the same case. Ho thought it was Sergeant McArdle, but he would not swear. The Court at this stage adjourned tiJl2,Bop,m,