SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2789, 25 January 1872, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CIVIL SITTING. This Day, (Before Hfs Honor Mr Justice Chapman and a special Jury.) REICHELT V. NEW ZEALAND INSURANCE COMPANY. Mary Ann Wright, widow, having stated she came down country on the Wednesday previous to the fire, and stayed at Miss Cane’s till that night, was examined by Mr Smith as follows Whan did you first see plaintiff? There was a man, who came into Miss Cane’s on the Sunday night before the fire, and she introduced him to me as Mr Reichelt. I never saw him before. Between Sunday niglit and tlx© fire, did you see Reichelt ? No. When Miss Cane introduced him to yon, did she say what relation he stood in to her. Yes ; she said “This is Mr Reichelt, my landlord.” Did he address any conversation to you ? No. To whom did he talk in particular ? He talked to Miss Cane. Do you recollect any particular subject of his conversation ? He was telling how Mr Howard was; and was acting what Mr Howard used to do. Was the plaintiff laughing at the time ; was he making fun of poor Howard as a madman? Yes ; 1 took it in that light. Did he create laughter amongst Miss Cane and her friends ? Yes ; they seemed to enjoy it very much (laughter). Since that time have you ever spoken to the plaintiff? Yes ; after he was taken prisoner and brought into Court. Miss Cane then said to me “ This is Mr Reichelt.” Have you spoken yourself to Mr Reichelt? He came to me and said he was sorry that such talk was going about. I said, “ Well, it will make it no better for you to be coming here.” He said, “ I do not know what has been the cause of it.” I said to him “ Ido not know.” Where did that conversation take place ? In the Glasgow Pio House. I was there for a few days between the trials ; as they could not get a servant I waited at the table. Was that the first occasion after the Sunday evening already spoken of, that yon said Reichelt spoke to you? I went down to Murray’s private hotel, accompanied by Miss Cane. Now, before you say what has already been said about Reichelt’s conversation at the Glasgow Pie House, will you tell me whether you have spoken to him or he to you since that time? Never. When became to the Glasgow Pie House he spoke to you ; do you recollect what he said ? When he called upon me, there was an insinuation thrown upon me in Court here in cross-examination. —Mr Smith: You are not at liberty to go into that. Witness: His first words were, “Mrs Wright, lam sorry this report is going about.” I said, “What report? He said “It is in reference to something between you and me.” I said, “ What is it?” He said, “I don’t like to tell you ; lam so sorry for it. ” 1 then said, “ If there is anything in it, it will not make it better if you are seen calling upon me.” He hinted at something which was not very nice, and I did not wish him to be coming where I was. He asked me to have a glass of wine with him, which I did, and he went away. I did not see him after that. His Honor : All this appears a rigmarole to me ; there is no consecutive story. It is something about something.—(Laughter.)

Mr Smith ; Your Honor will see its im portance directly; it leads up to the question I am about to ask.

Mr Smith : What was it he said to you ? —Witness : He said something to me that Miss Cane had been speaking about. There was an uupleasapt report gqing about in reference to yourself and him, which he was sory for ?—He did not tell ihe what it was, but Mrs Howard did. When ?—One day in Court here ; during the first trial, after I had given my evidence. Then you told Eeichelt if there was such a report it would make it no better if he came visiting you there?— Yes. I am sorry to have to ask you the question, but my duty compels me to do so: I have to ask you whether Mr Eeichelt was in your chamber on the night of the fire?— There was no person in my room that night but a girl aged twenty-two years, who was sleeping with me. I don’t Ijinow her name ; she was called Mary. On that night, or on any pther occasion, did Mr Eeichelt have improper intercourse or familiarity with you ? —There never was any between us ; I never knew the man, and know nothing of him except what I have'learned qf him since the trial. I don’t see how such d thing ’Hu bp insinuated- I think I am better kpown in the country than to have a thing like that said of me. Mr Smith : I think so too. His Honor i You have bad an opportunity of contradicting it. Mr Smith ; At what hour did you retire to bed that night ?—Witness : Miss Cane and I left tho kitchen together at 12 30 p.m. The other girl was in the room before me, but she was not asleep when I got to the room. I went to bed half an hour later than the others. Who was the last person who went downstairs that night ?—Miss Cane. Again let me ask you if Eeichelt has stated to anyone that on that night be was with you, is it true or false ? Utterly false, and I can prove it is. After asking the witness some questions as to her interviews with Mr Elliot, Mr Barton questioned her as follows :—During ths last trial did you not come down to the Court for the purpose of seeing Mr Smith ? Did you not ask the officers of the Court where you could find him ?—1 was waking for him when you came forward and appeared to be very anxious to know what I wanted, but I told you I would not speak to you. Mr Barton : I did not speak to you. Witness : You did. Who did you see? I saw SubInspector Thompson, and told him 1 wanted to see Mr Smith about the report that was going about about me. He said “Is that all,” and I replied “ Its a great deal to me.” You say you only saw Eeichelt once during these trials ; will you swear you did not see him offcener ?—Miss Cane asked me to go and see him at Murray’s one night. I went down there, but there was another man in his company at the time. Then Miss Cane was not enough protection for you.—l don’t think so, I always protect myself. Why did you swear a few minutes ago that the only time you spoke to him after being introduced to him was at the Glasgow Pie House ?—I was going to tell about meeting him at Murray’s ; bgt Hf Smith told me just to answer bis

questions, and doing so put off what I was going to say. (The witness was here questioned as to the hour of going to rest). You had a light with you ?—Yes. Did you not tell Miss Cane you were going to write a letter and wanted the lamp ?—I did say so, and intended to write, but did not, (Witness was here questioned as to the mode in which she aroused the inmates and dressed herself on the night of the fire). Do you know Wylie’s at Waipori?—Not now; not latterly ; I was there before I was married. What do you mean by saying ‘ 1 not now ?” Did you mean at the time of the fire? His Honor : Were you at Wylie’s at any time ? Witness : Yes, about four months after I landed in the country, Mr Barton : Was your business there that of a dancing girl ? They never kept a dancing-house while I was there; 1 never was in a danc-ing-house ; I can make my living without clauc’ng. Is your occupation that of a barmaid ? —I don’t think shame of anything I do ; I always go whore I can get the most wages. Has your occupation, except when married, been that of a barmaid ? —Yes, Will you swear you did not go into Reichelt’s office on the Friday before you were introduced to him, for some stamps ? 1 never was in his shop or office. Were you introduced to him as Miss Wright, or Miss ! Anne Wright? -As Rirs Wright. Mr Smith : Did you have any conversation with ( Reichelt at Murray’s ?—On going there Miss Cane said, “This is Mr Reichelt.” On our entering the room the person who was with Reichelt left us. Reichelt said, “Do you tnink I would do that to any person ? ” I ; said, “ T do not know, but it would look very bad.” He asked, as I was in a public place, that I should see what public opinion thought of it. The other witnesses examined were Constables Turnbull and O’Donnell ; Doctors Hulme, Alexander, and Deck ; Messrs W. Mander, Mitchell (late watchman on the Bell Tower), P. Boyes, R. Robertson, Leslie Charles, and J, E. Coyle.