Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

17 articles on this Page

THE PROSECUTION OF MR J. H.…

News
Cite
Share

THE PROSECUTION OF MR J. H. WILSON. Allegations of Perjury. At the Cardiff police-court on Wednesday— fletoro the Stipendiary Magistrate (Mr T. W. te\yis), Dr Paine, and Mr Peter Price-Andrew Thompson, a boarding-master, of Bute-road, was charged with committing wilful and corrupt per- jury at the trial of Mr J. H. Wilson, general Secretary of the Seamen's Union, before the Cardiff Recorder, on April 4-th. Mr Allan Upward (instructed by Mr J. H. Jones) appeared for the prosecution, and Mr Belcher defended. At the outset Mr Upward explained that several persons who gave evidence at the trial had been summoned, and he asked that the case of William Foam, who was the first witness at the quarter Sessions, should now be heard first. The Stipendiary remarked that he usually took summonses in the order in which they were entered, unless there was some objection. If there was an objection he would hear it. Mr Upward said that the charge was that certain words used by Mr Wilson during procession on February 16th were not Ottered. There was, however, one point Hpoa which he wished to say something. Wilson ttas convicted of unlawful assembly and it might be said that these summonses were in form, though not in substance, an appeal from the verdict of the jury. He did not think that the other side was entitled to say that, or that the jury believed the evidence of the witnesses "ailed for the prosecution, as it was clear that *he jury were not satisfied with the evidence, tnd therefore called a policeman, and apparently souvicted Mr Wilson upon the evidence of their aWn witness, the policeman. The Stipendiary Whose own witness ? It is new to me to hear that the jury called a witness in the case. Mr Belcher remarked that the jury simply ex- pressed a desire to hear the policeman, and forth- with be was put in the box. Mr Upward replied that there were contradic- tions between the evidence of the boarding-house witnesses and the policeman. For instance, foam swore that he was in the passage of his aouse, and saw certain men dragged out by the lcruff of the neck. Mr Belcher: We are now on the case of Thompson. The Stipendiary It is altogether irrelevant to 'his inquiry that this gentleman should comment ipon the decision of the jury. The question is whether the particular language upon which the sharge of perjury is assigned is true and I sup- pose that will depend upon documentary evidence ;11' the witnesses who may be called. The inquiry Would be of interminable length if you go through til these matters. Mr Upward said he only wished to illustrate '»hat in order to show that the prosecution were entitled to bring these proceedings, and that the inding of the jury in no way debarred them from proceeding. The Stipendiary: You have brought the proceedings, and therefore the jury's finding does not debar you. You have the case here, and you must show that the defendant swore that which was false. It is a simple matter. Mr Upward I only wanted the Court not to be prejudiced by the finding of the jury. The Stipendiary Those who preside here never Slater upon cases with prejudiced minds. Mr Belcher called the Stipendiary's attention to the evidence given before the Recorder. Thompson then said that he heard Wilson call Halt He then held up a stick, and pointing. to his (Thompson's) house, said This is a 'scab' house this is where the blacklegs are we'll give him blackleg to-night." The Stipendiary Yon are going to show that that is untrue ? Mr Upward Yes, sir. Mr Wilson was then called, and gave a com- plete denial to the evidence adduced by the de- fendant Thompson at the sessions. Cross-examined by Mr Belcher The proces- sion did not call at Thompson's house at all on she morning in question as a matter of fact, he did not know where Thompson lived. Their proceedings on that occasion only differed from the daily order by reason of there being more cheering. There were about 500 men in the procession when they left the Shipping OSice and as the different boarding-houses were pointed out — Gill's, Anderson's, and Beer's—to which the clothes of some men brought in from Shields on the previous night had been taken, he called "Halt!" and told off the men to go and ask for their clothes. During the whole tour of the district he did not hear hissing or hooting, and certainly on that morning did not say or shout out "scab house" or "blacklegs." lIe might have used the terms at a meeting during the day, as they were common expressions among the seamen; but they were not called out during the demonstration by either himself or any of the processionists—so far as he heard. It was also false that he held up a stick opposite the defendant's house. Mr Belcher at this point quoted the summing up of the Recorder, in which his Honour said that "there must have been perjury on one side or the other," and submitted that the issue which the Recorder left to the jury was as to whether perjury bad been committed; and therefore, if perjury was committed at the ses- sions, this case would have to be decided upon the Game evidence—plus that of Mr Wilson. The Stipendiary refused to allow such points to be argued. The question for the Bench was Whether Thompson had committed perjury. Cross-examination resumed: Two reporters accompanied the procession on the morning in Question, and were in attendance to give evi- dence for the defence at the session. He (Mr Wilson) could not say why they were not called. Messrs T. Davies and J. R. Stephens, reporters, Were then called, and denied that Wilson used the words attributed to him by Thompson the former stating that Wilson did not cross the street towards Thompson's house, and that he (witness) must have heard anything that Wilson said, as he was standing nearer to the house than Wilson was. In cross-examination, Mr Davies said that he heard the words "scabs" and "blacklegs" fre- quently used by those in the procession, but he could not say whether Wilson heard them. There were momentary stoppages opposite several houses in Bute-road and the side streets, but only to allow of men to fall out, and then the processipn moved forward. During one stoppage five or six men entered a house; but witness could not say who sent them in. There was a good deal of hissing and hooting during the morning's demonstration men in the procession pointed to certain" houses indicating where their clothes were, and opposite several houses "scabs" and "black- legs were shouted—as much, however, by people who were following the procession as by those in it. Witness admitted that what he wrote for his paper—that Foam, upon asking those who forced their way into his house, "Do you call this manhood ?'' was answered with hooting. By the Stipendiary: Mr Foam's remonstrance was shouted sufficiently loud to be heard by Wilson; and the latter must have heard the hooting. The Stipendiary asked whether, in the face o such evidence given by a witness for the prosecution, Mr Upward wished to proceed with the case ? Mr Upward replied that the case for the prose- cution was that statements were put into Wilson's mouth by Thompson which were not true. The Stipendiary But do you say that the evidence of this witness is irrelevant ? Wilson has accused certain persons of committing perjury, and calls this witness, who is a representative of the Press, and whose evidence is directly in conflict with that given by himself as the accuser. Mr Upward: The question is whether the expressions and hooting were heard by Wilson. The Stipendiary: Then you wish to proceed and go on with your case ? Mr Upward: Yes. The Stipendiary Very good. In cross-examination Mr Stephens said that the report which he wrote of the day's proceedings did not, as a matter of fact, represent the actual words used by Wilson in addressing the men. The term "hostile," in connection with boarding- masters, was his own. Witness was close to Foam when the latter spoke to the men for enter- ing his house, and although Wilson was several yards off, he could hear the hooting, which was "loud and general." He did-not hear the word "Halt!" called during the tour, and no real halt took place. Henry Gould, dock labourer, stated that Wilson did not cross from the blank side of Bute road to Thompson's house, and that all he heard him saying was in the form of a warning to the pro- cessionists to keep clear of the tram lines. Wit- ness did not hear anyone using the expression spoken to in the defendant's evidence. Cross-examined: When Foam spoke about the manhood of those who entered Beer's house, Wilson was at the head of the procession, which had continued walking, and could not have heard what was said. He was gisitive that from first to last of the morning's tour there was neither hissing nor hooting—so far as he could hear-and he was with the procession throughout. James Edward Halch, a member of the Sea- men's Union, stated, in cross-examination, that the procession stopped opposite the house of Anderson for three or four minutes, and when the men began hissing Wilson called to them to "stop that." The Stipendiary, after a brief consultation with the other magistrates, said the prosecution had failed to make out a prima facie case. The testi- mony for the prosecution was very gravely conflict- ing in many important particulars, and the sum- mons must therefore be dismissed. On the application of Mr Upward, the Stipen- diary assented to the witnesses being bound over to appear at the Assizes, where, it was stated, an Indictment would be preferred and the hearing of the other summonses was fixed for Wednesday next.

DEATH AT A CARDIFF RAILWAY…

MR D. A. THOMAS, M.P., AND…

SIR WILLIAM HART-DYKE AND…

LOCK-OUT IN THE LONDON BUILDING…

CARMARTHENSHIRE COUNTY ..COUNCIL

DEATH OF A NEWPORT POLICE-OFFICER.

[No title]

"THE BABY" COSTUME

GOOD TEMPLARY.

---"----------.BREACH OF CONTRACT…

:INFLUENZA IN SHEFFIELD.

COLUMN FOR BOYS AND GIRLS.

THE MANIPUR AFFAIR.

SERIOUS FIRE AT BARRY.

.--THE WEEK'S MARKETS.

Advertising