-
Articles/Ads
Article THE PBO OF TASMANIA, ← Page 3 of 4 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The Pbo Of Tasmania,
evidence were adduced to show that four doors were closed . But the youngest person present would see that that really proved nothing , so long as the fifth door were left open . So hi this case . Mr . Ewing accounted for certain times during his stay in Melbourne ; he shut , as it were , nine doors by which he might have gone out and left the tenth open . Here the strength of m . alibi ; was to be tested at its weakest point . The evidence as then before the presbytery contained nothing about the Sunday evening ,
though a great advance towards clearing up the point was made ; and if would only have been necessary to have called Mr . Robertson to give evidence on the point as to where Mr . Ewing was that evening . Mr . Cohen ' s evidence now given was interesting on that point . It went further . To his ( Dr . Turnbuirs ) mind , therefore , the alibi was most complete ; no opening was left for any one to bringthe charge with reference to Melbourne against Mr , Ewing , or to say— " The presbytery have taken care to shield their
brother by putting the best view on the whole evidence ; but now we have that evidence j we have eyes , and we see the alibi was not proved . " In the supplement to the Examiner the substitution of the words Ewing for Cohen and Cohen for Ewing , had rendered one part of the evidence miintelligible ; and without Mr . Cohen ' s evidence to-day it might have been said the presbytery had not gone fully into the matter . There was now , however , conclusive evidence that no such crime as that imputed was committed in
Melbourne ( there was some applause here which was promptly checked ) . There was another matter—arid although it might be said the presbytery had no right to refer to other matters—still it w as so intimately blended with the one before them , that he would refer to it—namely , whether Mr . Ewing could have made the statement to Mr . Armour—made it for his own destruction . He confessed that such a presumption was so violent that he believed the whole sense of the community must be that no man could have
spread a statement like that which was sworn to , to lead not only to his being passed out of the church , hut out of society itself . ( Applause ) . There was one point which he would touch on in order that his view of the case might be understood fully , with reference to the evidence of Mr . Armour . He did not certainly intend to vindicate him ; but his impression after hearing Mr . Crosby ' s evidence was that Mr .. Armour had not
maliciously invented the calumny ; but that , having joined , as he admitted , in loose conversation , and so become the victim of that degrading practice , when Mr . Ewing told him certain particulars respecting a room in Melbourne , his prurient imagination induced him to say— ' He was there himself—he was in that room , ' ( Applause ) . He ( Dr . Turnbull ) considered the Rev . Mr . Ewing was entitled to a full acquittal . ( Benewed applause ) .
u The Rev . J . Robertson said he thoroughly concurred in every word wdiich had fallen from Dr . Turnbull . He felt the utmost confidence that Mr . Ewing had been calumniated . He was not inclined to make the same allowance for Mr . Armour that Dr . Turnbull had made . His own impression was that Mr . Armour had invented the calumny—had maliciously invented the calumny against the reverend gentleman . He could not trust ., himself to speak scarcely , and with the single exception mentioned , he concurred with I ) r . TurnbulL ( Applause ) .
"The Rev . T . Dove expressed his entire acquiescence in the opinions already expressed . The only dark shadow that remained on his mind had been removed by the evidence of Mr . Robertson . At first he was startled at the aspect of the statement ; its monstrous improbability , and only one witness to it . He had asked himself was it possible ? Now , however , all doubt was cleared away . He considered that Mr . Ewing's innocence was 3 d 2
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The Pbo Of Tasmania,
evidence were adduced to show that four doors were closed . But the youngest person present would see that that really proved nothing , so long as the fifth door were left open . So hi this case . Mr . Ewing accounted for certain times during his stay in Melbourne ; he shut , as it were , nine doors by which he might have gone out and left the tenth open . Here the strength of m . alibi ; was to be tested at its weakest point . The evidence as then before the presbytery contained nothing about the Sunday evening ,
though a great advance towards clearing up the point was made ; and if would only have been necessary to have called Mr . Robertson to give evidence on the point as to where Mr . Ewing was that evening . Mr . Cohen ' s evidence now given was interesting on that point . It went further . To his ( Dr . Turnbuirs ) mind , therefore , the alibi was most complete ; no opening was left for any one to bringthe charge with reference to Melbourne against Mr , Ewing , or to say— " The presbytery have taken care to shield their
brother by putting the best view on the whole evidence ; but now we have that evidence j we have eyes , and we see the alibi was not proved . " In the supplement to the Examiner the substitution of the words Ewing for Cohen and Cohen for Ewing , had rendered one part of the evidence miintelligible ; and without Mr . Cohen ' s evidence to-day it might have been said the presbytery had not gone fully into the matter . There was now , however , conclusive evidence that no such crime as that imputed was committed in
Melbourne ( there was some applause here which was promptly checked ) . There was another matter—arid although it might be said the presbytery had no right to refer to other matters—still it w as so intimately blended with the one before them , that he would refer to it—namely , whether Mr . Ewing could have made the statement to Mr . Armour—made it for his own destruction . He confessed that such a presumption was so violent that he believed the whole sense of the community must be that no man could have
spread a statement like that which was sworn to , to lead not only to his being passed out of the church , hut out of society itself . ( Applause ) . There was one point which he would touch on in order that his view of the case might be understood fully , with reference to the evidence of Mr . Armour . He did not certainly intend to vindicate him ; but his impression after hearing Mr . Crosby ' s evidence was that Mr .. Armour had not
maliciously invented the calumny ; but that , having joined , as he admitted , in loose conversation , and so become the victim of that degrading practice , when Mr . Ewing told him certain particulars respecting a room in Melbourne , his prurient imagination induced him to say— ' He was there himself—he was in that room , ' ( Applause ) . He ( Dr . Turnbull ) considered the Rev . Mr . Ewing was entitled to a full acquittal . ( Benewed applause ) .
u The Rev . J . Robertson said he thoroughly concurred in every word wdiich had fallen from Dr . Turnbull . He felt the utmost confidence that Mr . Ewing had been calumniated . He was not inclined to make the same allowance for Mr . Armour that Dr . Turnbull had made . His own impression was that Mr . Armour had invented the calumny—had maliciously invented the calumny against the reverend gentleman . He could not trust ., himself to speak scarcely , and with the single exception mentioned , he concurred with I ) r . TurnbulL ( Applause ) .
"The Rev . T . Dove expressed his entire acquiescence in the opinions already expressed . The only dark shadow that remained on his mind had been removed by the evidence of Mr . Robertson . At first he was startled at the aspect of the statement ; its monstrous improbability , and only one witness to it . He had asked himself was it possible ? Now , however , all doubt was cleared away . He considered that Mr . Ewing's innocence was 3 d 2