LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 601, 1 September 1909, Page 11

LAW REPORTS.

'-;:■■-■/.y- ;■ - : '.'^~—-'*--— — .;''■ SUPREME COURT." 'f6uRTH\DAY OF WIMSETT TRIAL. . GIVES WITH 4/;:,/: :;: SEALING WAX. ~-;., iThe:trial';of Arthur Frederick Wiinsett ..,' .was continued in the Supremo Court yester- . before lim Honour Mr. Justico 'Chapman,, and a'-jury .of'twelve.' Wirasett ':.;■' is;charged',w.ith having committed a burglary ■ ;at,'tho-i'arcols I'ost Olfico ;.on January ll ■'.;.• laitV/'anid stolen a, number of packages. of jewellery,'-arid ' cancelled "bank notes, and, .:':■•' oiterriatiyolyy ■ with" haying aided James' Hem- - ingway.in-'tlio orinio.'; Hemingway,, w-ho. is . '.now serving' a s'entonco of fivd years, in con- '.-■ Motion with .this"and. other • burglaries, was :':' thoj chief .witness for the prosecution, and ' • hb'~was in 'the. witness-box tor two. days. . ./Mr." Myers,.' Crown' Prosecutor; "'conducted procecdiiigs/for the-Crown, and Mr, Hislop, \ aiid.;Mr. Pothcrick appeared for.tho defence.; ; : .'Crass-examination-of -Hemingway was con- : eluded '. early'yesterday. Tho when re-examined -by Mr. ■ .-.Myers; consented to .'dompiistrate his methods of obtaining-key- .. inlp'ressions/v _ . ...■■■,■■ .' \ ......... .He;,was supplied with a stick of'sealing :.:• was,,-and a tapcry ' witb'.which.ho instructed, '.. tho; jury'-in. tho 'making -ofwax impressions. He'.ihado ithroo-of'the'safe key in a'few v minutes,'.ono-of which he declared to bo. : quite .workable.-.■'■ Ho said, .that' others ; fibm .. whicji he :■ had worked-bad' been, more satisfact'dry. : : ; -.■. i •-.■'.''.- .■ .-"'-.; ■~ :-.;. ■_. ■■. .'■■■;■ ■ ' his' Honour,' witness said that, ..-..0n/the- Monday. morning, after tho burglary, ■.''■■ ho)';'tbbk'. the' three, post offico keys away with, . hinVand- throw them fi'om'.the'-ti-uin on tho -. 'other'"sido of Porirua, before I 'tho first: tuu- ', nbl?;; On ■ tho Wellington station platform, .'.before leaving,' ho •■spoke to a lad named ".-.■: Coleman, who worked in Nathan's. .'. . ,'. ■■'Mr. Hislop: What was your namo on the morning, of .January 11? Was ,it Rose?— .'■ "Nb/'sir;"- ■- ; ' i ---, , : ".'■ ~: ; ' ■Kierard?—"l ara-riot sure.".-'- ••-'.' "■■ 'P'Hagan?—"No, sir; I think;it was tho '■;.-first;"'.. ■ /■ ..'.-'. '.■'■: .;' „• "■ '■• - • ; ;

\ : . Ash?.•'-..•;Kenny? Mathjeson? Mathioson is l ono. of your -oldvnames? —"It , ttiaj: have bcon..:Mathies'on.", , , .'•' .„.; ••; Miad ?—"I. lmvo an': idea', it was Roso." ''' .' ; HiiHonoitr: In what ilaind.did 'you put up ' BtVFeilding?—"lu.jny bwnvnamc,. sir.!'., <. " ".■ i/flle,witness left: tho bos' at 11.45 o'olock. .'''Alfred Harris, 'membor'''.of -the:.'firm .. of 'Mandel,',' Harris-, and. Company, wholesale his firm received.monthly consignments, of .unset diamonds by.-regis-tered; parcel post, from London. A packago .reqeived'-on October 6 last-was worth £450 J ;'and-,the November parcel '.was ;,. '.valued' at .'£182., Jhq. witnessa described' the .' ;.- marks that;.' appeared Von registered' and in- . .•'Bured'/parcols!coming .through tho post". ' f'Additional particulars were supplied by 1 '■, Isaab. Crichton (officer-in-charge. of. the:-par- ( .. colsV;,oilice),; who'was-i'recallecT.V.; , '■ ... JJamcs,.'Lindsay,',accountant in tho „hoad ( office of the Dank of New Zealand, was also f ■■'■■'. recalled.: He'produced'a sealed'package con'- : ] tairiirig|4sß :caJicelled ; £1 notes'' (the 1 humber ajle'ged to have been sent through from Wai- ' ~..', maw;>. and-'stolen). 'Mr. Hislop objected to ' ; this,:;as'cvidonco had already been'heard as to. tho .appearanco of-the particular,, parcel.' ■:■: iphief-Detectivo .Broborg-stated, that ac-' " : cu scd,-when arrested on April-20,-denied any i' complicity; with ;Hemingwny.'.- : Accused said -that Hemingway, had stayed with him on and- . off ;for nine months, but if Hemingway committed .tho- burglary, ho know, nothing of ; it;'- . Accused also stated: that ho had received ; -.-:'• several; presents; from- Hemingway—two '.; .■fountain pens,;som,'ctweed,:a leather wallet,' ) -... and-jother things. In witness's''opinion, tho' .. • presents would ho worth in all, about £3 ~ ; or;.'£4.T;-■;,':■ .".'.... .-./.'.„■".--..;' * •. .'. I""-.' ;Td.>,'Mk'HisloD-.-Accused had"said, that ,tho '•• .. statements' :mado.-by ; Hemingway, as to ; 'th'o •' ■ s K9 s ,?L9L. t !i e . ,' ; Ho.isjiid.that Hemingway:took'tho good's to '■ V Sydney, and. gavo-.-thom;to ; his .brother,'- 1 John/ * .■'.-. wjio.jjidgcd' tJjem.iiiiiai-baiifc. ■<■•'■'£■ - ,■ ■;..■■ , -_#y ; jp;.-jurbr: Th'o first,intimation made by- >.• ; Hetnifigway. .that, ho .would - give evidenco , a&aui^t';:\\,imjatt;.was•,on, Sunday,, April 25. ■ .Vthfedjato of- his (Hemingway's) arrest. Hem-.--.,-ingftay on that occasion had denied his '■ ..identity,.and witncs.s had. -then., intimated' ''- that-|ie would bring Winisett'along to ide'n- -'•:" tify .'him." :It was' tnon that Hemingway said ' .'tliat;ho.kne)y that Wimsott,had "given.him. t -~; -J-'Mr! Hislop" romarkoci'that'tho'-Crowri Pro.'.geciltor.; had .ipraftically,;apologised,: in ;: his ■opejiijig,; for ,:tho:L..class--,ot-.. evidence ho", had .•■.\,to,vtenoer.,. i Xti. the jury to- ■'-,. •deiiido. mado by ■ '. • Hetnmgwayvi'hsvd..•becn/bornp V.oiit by over-, say.that- :■/■ ''.the;.aecu^d;..\/Say'iJ^lty;":vTheVeircurastanco^. . that had.stakeri'-fkeys'Ho' Ekins'3- ■ . had 'v.beon-'r-intfadilcedyAbu't'ivtho 'statemoritsniade; :by>'-Tsk.iiis r ':aiid.-- by wcro' '-, quife^inconsisJ,6'h^ i withl.cabh\r'6th6r. - Thcro' ■ ''.:■ Y;ero.':'gravo>.doubts" aV-to 'whether tho safo .. .was'^pened.witllVa'kbyiH-Experts w'ould say '■■■!. thnt-~tho door"Was I 'locked 'after the theft, ■whichi-'was contrary. to':tho evidence, for tho ■'■•■"; prasdeution.''.-',There. -vrcro.vstrong, circum- , V stahbes,jh''fav'bur ; of;-thb-theory. thatVtho safe hadib'cqn fired -opeii.., Hemingway had given . ;ov'ideiice which, had .been marked by. dis-, , ■•.hoijiisty'and hypocrisy, and if thoro was any. - truth/'in' tho assertion that, accused .had as-: sisted'Hemingway; why'was'it.that,accused ,'■'•■ Lad not informed. :him; to- better 'purpose •re'-' i , girding ;tho parcels passing- through.. ..tho, . officp?r;-'Mr:'"Hislop then "wont ..'on to explain ' 'v that :a". friendship' had/been commenced in ■ • ' 1903: between- accused, who •',; fferb,then'neighbours.,'.Accused'took-ill and . , wnsikindly treated, by Hemingway's mother. :.Subsequently, when.;. Hemingway's! parcntB 1 . ■ >.'■ iw'erb away,..' Mr', and'-Mrs. wimsett did-all . , tliey;T.could for* tho .lad.,- Accused : had 'ra- -":- ceived .promotions regularly : in-tho -Depart-- ,-■'/-■; mint,':'■ he'had been elected to:tho Appeal ';■ Board,' and ; ho;had gono-.tht'ough -th'o' grades. . .Witnesses might, havo i'-beanj'.brou'gut from Nelson to 1 proveTiis,'char-; abtojr'y' and ;his,'■ wifo belonged; to what; tho ..'. : : Scbtch'•.called "decent.- folk" .in : Oamam. : Hemingway, ho' urged,-, had not' desired to ', ■ tell.tho.truth. . His only, motivo was a .dis-, ':, eased feeling;of revenge.' 'The.fact:'that tho: .'... Wiinsetts would.not sneltcr his villainy was -tho.'wholo causo .of the :prescnt. unfortunate ~;■ ...ca'sj.';. "•-.':-;.''-- 1 ,.' '•■■;,?..-•:■■ ,■.'.■:■■• ,: ; ;- : ' •.'..-::' -': •fKatherinoAVimsctt, wifo of accused, said .-.'tha't-she first.knew •tho.Hem.ingiVays in, 1906, -.-.' when": Mrs. •Hemingway practically • 'saved ;/ . Wimsett's. life. James .Hemingway- loftl for. ..South Africa suddenly .'in; March, 1907, but ■ ■ thoro'..'. was .nothing known; against him at . that.'timb,:...When heireturnod,'witness did :';allySh'o! could for" him. He said. ho had had V enterib, fever fivo times, and- on two oc\ipasibn's lie had to brought, homo from . work;, because of\pains-in ; tho headv.On one ' occasion, when ho wn3 ill, he threatened to . ...- cqmnlit:suioide,; , ':'! :; : ./;',- ;• 'At this'staKej Ifivo o'clqek,..'thb- Court ad-' joilrnqd until 10.30 this morning. Mr.-'Myers ■■ • . espressod h |a regret that the Jury had been ''.'.; cornfeolled to servo for longer" than a week. - Had-he known .that tho. case, was/going to : ': last Jqr.'five days','ho would h'iivo taken it at tho;'.bcginhing of ,a week. . His Honour re- ■■;'• marked that, frorb feading tho depositions, lib .;■'• had.-' formed,- tho opinion - that it iwould last ■■'.'■ only ! two ! days.f';Accused..vi ; a'sVgrantcd bail.- .i.

' ;•" ; ; /. | •' MAGISTRATE'S COURT. , (Bc/ire .Mr.' W. G Itiddell, S M.) ... .'A ROWDY STEWARD. .... A steward oil the s.s. Paparoa Uccaiiio(iuto'xiciitcd on Monday rfight, and went on tho ship in. that condition." When the' second Btaward, Frederick Morgan,. endeavoured to persuade him to go to bed quietly ho used : objteno language, and'.'assaulted Morgan. ''Subsequently )i<i also, assaulted the. chief officer, Harry -jMakopeacc. His . Worship i warned defendant that lid had better absta.ii) ' from taking liquor if it caused " him to act in -tliia way.." iVf drunkenness, hb would . be:'convietcd and discharged, for . using obBcene language ho would be filled £3, in default _ fourteen days' imprisonment, for assaulting Morgan iine'u 21)3., in 'default seven days, and for -assaulting.-Jfakepeoco fined 2(13., and costs 3s,,'with :( similar altcrnative.' v. / PETTY THEFTS. For stealing a gas ring, valuodat 35., the property of Edward Lauder, Jobn Moir, who

had fifteen previous convictions against his name, was. lined 10a., and costs 125., in default 21 days' .imprisonment.- > . Timothy Blake, 'who: was convicted of stealing a tattooing -machine, valued at U 55., tho property of Henri Swift, was .ordered to pay costs 33., and come up for sentenco when called upon. •INSOBRIETY. . '',„' John turner' was fined 10s., in default 48 liours' impriscrinieut,. for insobriety. unc first offender was fined a similar amount, •with an alternative of 24 liours. '. CIVIL IHISINESS. . 1 .'/-'(Before Dr. A. M'Arthur, S.M.) 'judgment for plaintiff by default of defendant was given.in the .following imdefended cases:—Pitcaithly and Co. v. John White, £25, costs £3; Commissioner ot Lands v. E. Barnes, £7 Is/, costs 65.; tho sa T mo v. Sing Kee, £4 2s. Gd., costs'os,; , the same v. John .Moffatt, £10 45., • costs 10s.; the- same v. John Walter Williams, .4-1 7s. 6d., costs os.; Isaac Bitansky v. Timothy Jamca M'Quinn, £10 35., costs £2 Is. 6d,-; A. Hamilton v. Peter Lilly, pessossion and .£2, costs lis;; Advances to Settlors Department' v". Richard Edmond Greatford, £9 10s. Id;, costs' 125.; Richard Free Badham v. -Alfred Reynolds, £11 -75., costs £1 10s. Od.

"'"'"JUDGMENT SUMMONSES.. .■ ■ ■'••In tho judgment■ summons caso of Bridget O'Neill v. Richard Carroll, a debt of £20 Is.' od., the debtor was ordered to pay on or before September 14,- in default fourteen davs'-'imprisonment. • ■ ■_ ' , His Worship raado no order m. each of- tho following cases:—James. Thomas Hall v. Archio Cochrane, a debt of £G Bs.; Francis M'Parla'nd v. Alexander. Nelson M'Meehan, a debt of £8 4s. Bd.; Bertcnshaw and Evensen v. William Kirkpatrick, a debt of £21 Bs. ;•'Ernest'-W.-T. Luta v. John Fuller, a debt of £1 13s. Ud. .BREACHES OF AN AWARD; PIECEWORK. ,-• The Inspector of Awards (Mr. W. Newton) asked that a penalty of £2 bo imposed on Alfred.lf.. Boyd, coachbuilder, Upper Hutt, who was alleged to have employed ono Louis Richardson, on piecework, , ' , '' ■" Mr. ' Webb' appeared on behalf of; the defendant/ who admitted tho breach of tho award:'- Richardson, ho stated, lived a long way from the shop, and it.was inconvenient, for him to' come to work regularly. The defendant, who at. tho time was ignorant, of ,the provisions; of the award, , therefore entered into an agreement with Richardson, .whereby, tho latter was to ,bo. paid only, for the'work'done by him, at so much per.

.job.' ' :■■ . '-.'':■■■■ His Worship imposed the penalty of £2, as asked for.- ■'■•,■ , ' LoUis ' Richardson was charged with having allowed himself to bo employed oit > piecework, the. inspector asking for a penalty of £2. ■■ ■■ ■ " ,„, ~ l Mr: Herdman ..appeared-'on belialf of the defendant,., who denied that he had been so employed. He admitted that he had not worked regularly, "'bat' asserted that, he had been paid at the rate of Is. 3d. per hour,for the time ho had worked, in" accordance with the award..' ,' His Worship held that the offence; had been proved, and imposed a penalty of. £1. ~: No' costs wero allowed in oitrier case. wages of bootmakers'/ . operatives; . . ' ; .-. ■ Tho Inspector of Awards also proceeded against R. Hannah and Co., Ltd., to recover a peiialty of £20 : for' an alleged breach of the. Bootmakers'.. Award. Mr. 'Newton, 'for tho prosecution, said that tho' minimum ■wage Used by tho award for female opera-tives-was £1. 7s 6d. per. week, for those .who 'had" been' at- tho trade -for a-period hot Mess than five years. The defendant company had been. paying the, award wago 'for -tho last thr«avor l -iouiL.wecks ) ,.but.;prior . to that had. not done so: -,;„, .■'-." ..-. v ;. ~ Mr."'"Blair/.- 'for.-t\io,' defendant';'(company, 'contended that ■•no brea"cli' of-Hho-award; had boon committed, for tho operatives cited in tho' caso had not worked for five years in New Zealand, buthadrscrvcd.a part of their time at Horao. "■ ■' *'■ •■'' * '■•';'■'. _:'■;.'' Hia Worship ' reserved his' decision until Soptembor'2.-• ■ - : . . • ..-■:'..