HC Deb 30 March 1885 vol 296 c991

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether the evidence on which detective Henry Williams (in the Poole perjury case) was convicted of wilful and corrupt perjury at the Winchester Assizes, and sentenced to seven years' penal servitude, was exclusively that of persons pecuniarily or criminally implicated by Williams's evidence; whether the perjury, as alleged to have been proved by such evidence, was anything more than a discrepancy between the statements of Williams and the prosecuting witnesses, as to the length of time spent in a public house by a police superintendent, and as to the quantity of drink the said superintendent consumed; whether, having examined the report of the case, he is able to state that for such a crime, even if conclusively proved, a heavier sentence than three months' imprisonment has ever before been passed; and, whether, having declined to interfere with the sentence, he is willing to lay upon the Table of the House the documents on which he based his decision?


in reply, said, he had carefully examined, in consultation with the Judge, the evidence in the case referred to. He found no ground for interfering with the verdict of the jury, and did not see his way to lay Papers on the Table.