ALLEGED INJUSTICE.

Dunstan Times, Issue 1073, 17 November 1882, Page 3

ALLEGED INJUSTICE.

Mr. Harpcastjle, R.M., Wellington, has obtained for himself an unenviable notoriety lately on account of the extraordinary judgements he delivers ; sentrnoes in many cases being in almost direct opposition to the evidence adduced. The following is the 1 itest instance : Another curious case of alleged unjust conviction has cone under notice. On Wednesday the Bth inst. a woman named Symes was accused of stealing a green silk umbrella, the property of Mrs. Brighton (who had felt it at the Wellington Hospital, where the defendant was a patient), ami whose husband swore that he subsequently found it in the possession of the latter, recognising it by certain particular patches. For the defence it was deposed by several witnesses, friends of the accuse I, that the umbrella found in her possession was purchased several years ago at Oln-is church, the name of the vendors and the circumstances of the transaction being distinct')’ remembered and state 1. The defendant’s witnesses also identified the umbrella by certain marks. It further appeared that there was no hesitation to produce the disputed umbrella whin asked for by the police, and, in short, that nothing seemed to fav nr the assumption of guilt save the possession of the umbrella, while that was claimed by I.nth pari ms on apparently equivalent proof. 'I he r asooalile supposition wouldseem to be that it was a case of mistaken identity as regards the umbrella, but to the general surprise of those who heard the ease Mr. Hardcastl-, R.M., pronounced the ohaigo proved, and sentenced the defendant, who is said to be a respectable woman in delicate health, to fourteen nay’s imprisonment. It seems to ns that this involves much danger of wrong being done. The testimony, looked at in the most favomable light toward the prosecution, was equally balanced, and theref ire the accuse 1 should have received the benefit of the doubt ; but in view of the f ict that he whole qu- sti-m turned out. on the identity of an old umbrella, we cannot help thinking that the presumption is greatly in favour of the defendant’s avitnesses, while ave atlri buto to the other side nothing averse than mistake of memory. We believe it can he proved that the defendant was not in the hospital within some weeks after or before the umbrella being left there by Mrs. Brighton, and that Mis. Symes .has been in continuous possession of the umbrella which she claimed to be hers ever since purchasing it in Christchurch It is clear, too, that the inability of the accused or her husband to give evidence in tho ease must have seri ously prejudiced her chances. We are glad to hear that the matter is likely to be further investigated. - Wellington Post.