SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2790, 26 January 1872, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CIVIL SITTING, Thls Pay. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Chapman and a Special Jury.) REICHELT V. NEW ZEALAND INSURANCE COMPANY, C eorge W. Elliot, agent of the New Zealand Insurance Company, examined by Mr Smith, said : Reichelt called at my office to see me on Monday, October 2. 1 had a conversation with him, and took a memorandum of what he said. Mr Barton : Before you give us that conversation, was it made 1 during negotiations between Reichelt and you for a seftlettieut pf this witter?

Witness: No. (To Mr Smith) : Reichelt opened the conversation. He said, “ I have seen Mr Jack and r Brodrick ; they told me vo see you, but did not promise to pay me ; ” lie also told me they had given him forms. I said, “ 1 will also give you forms, but before paying must be satisfied on one or two points.” In reply to questions, he said no goods had come to him by the Utago. I had asked him to account for the entries of a shipment by the Otago, when it was presumed no goods had come. He said they must have come by the J. Nicol Fleming, and that he was not a correct bookkeeper. I asked him who had informed him that Mr Jack would take advantage of the condition he had broken by having lucine on his premises. He replied, “ Mrs Jackson, my charwoman.” I may explain, that she is also charwoman for Mr Jack. 1 then questioned him as to the reason of his being on the premises on such an untimely' hour of the night. He said, “Oh ! let it rest; it is now done with.” I told him I had heard two stories about it, and must know the true one. He said, “You have been a young man; I am also young, and sometimes go after girls, and went there that night to see one.” I said, “Which of them —Miss Cane?” He answered, “No—Mrs Wright.” I asked him if Mias Cane knew what was going on, and if he was on such terms of intimacy with Mrs Wright. He said, “Oh no; she would have tom my eyes out if she had known.” I asked, “Why?” He said, “She would have been jealous, as I had her too,” I asked if he had any others there. He said, “ Yes,” but would not tell me their name.--, I said, “Had you the diarrhoea that you said you said you had ? ” He replied, “No, 1 had not.” I said, “Then why did you say you had ? Why did you not state the proper reason of your going to the shop ? ’ He replied, “ I did not like to, but told Mr Barton afterwards, who said as I had made one statement I must stick to it.” Mr Barton : Let us make that clear. He said: “I (Barton) said, as I had made one statement, I (Barton) or he (Reichelt) must stiek to it ?”

Witness : He said that you told him, as he (Reichelt) had made one statement he must stick to it; this was after the examination in the Mayor’s Court, I have not a note of the conversation, but that is my impression. One investigation had taken place before he told Mr Barton. Jriejsaid: “I am sorry that I did not at first tell the truth.” I asked him to tell me how the fire originated, as his going there to see Mrs Wright would not set the place on fire. He said, “ Oh, let it restand appeared disinclined to say it. I said, “ L must know.” He said, after some hesitation, “ I came down stairs and found the light I had left in the office had set fire to the place. I tried to put it out, but found 1 could not, and ran away.” I asked him which way he went. He said, “ Oh, let it rest,” and he did not tell me I remarked that I could scarcely credit that he could be on terras of intimacy with three women at the game time, iinder the same +oof, without each knowing of it. He made no answer. Mr Barton ; Messrs Brodrick and Wright are your joint defendants in these proceedings, and you act together in this matter ? Yes. I understand you to say that it was within two days after the criminal trial had terminated that Reichelt came to you stating that Messrs Jack and Brodrick had referred him to you ?—The trial concluded on Saturday, and he called on me on the Mon: day following ?t 11 o’clock. Ho you re* koUept saying at the last trial, when being cross-examined by mo, that yon would take uo advantage of any technicalities. and that you would pay the policies if you were satisfied that the goods were in the place ? And that I was satisfied with his innocence.—You partially, and Mr Jack wholly, admitted that the three of you had come to an agreement to take advantage of technicalities. We very rarely take advantage of technicalities.—Whst made yon ask' ijeiohelt how he knew Jack was going to take advantage of technicalities? Because in a conversation with Jack, we coaid nob imagine how it had got out.—Then you were “pumping” him? I admit I was “pumping” him,—Would you be surprised to learn that my fertile brain suggested that such a thing as technicalities would be taken advantage of, and that acting on speculation 1 supplied a name? No.—Did you not at the last trial say you would pay the Jp?.?. e £ if you' were-satisfled vvith the value of the stock? I don’t recollect saying so.—(His Honor here read his note, which was as follows :—“ We would not pay the amount even if he should be found ‘not guilty.’ I wfluld not take udyantagp of technicalities. ”j —Mf Bartflu here remarked that a upte taken at the time by Mr Stout bore out hi? statement, that the witness s 1 -jd ho would pay the policies if he was satisfied of the value of the stock. Witness said he added “and if he was satisfied of his innocence,” and would contradict a dozen witnesses who said to the contrary). Will you not swear that Eeichelt in his conversation with you reasonably understood from your previous conduct that the money was going to be paid ?—I believe he was under the impression that be had nothing further to do than ask for the money.—l ask you'then cjid not My Broil: rick, with your knowledge, get the Genjiau Consul to negociate between Reichelt and you three. Not to my knowledge ; this is the first I have heard of it. (Witness ryap here examined at some length, 88 t<? whether the Insurance Agents did pot employ Mr Houghton’s—the German Consul—services to effect an arrangement with Reichelt. Witness denied that Mr Houghton was ever so employed, Some invoices were then produced.) Why were not these invoices produced at the previous trial. I don’t know ; they were in Mr Hawkins’s hands.—Do you remember serious imputations being cast upon Mr Schole field for alleging that he had seen these documents —that he had, in fact, committed perjury by stating so? I don’t recollect —Did you ins tract you solicitors that there were such documents found at the fire? Certainly not. —Do you think it was fair to conceal the ojstence of such documents f It Was pot 1 with any wish of mine that they were concealed. (At this stage fully half an hour was occupied by a discussion be? tween counsel. When yon had your conversation with Reichelt, had ycu any intention of settling with him? Certainly; if I had been satisfied in my mind not only as to the value of his stock, but is to his innocence, Then the im. pression left on your mind was that ae was more guilty than e"er ? I believe be jad been telling me an untruth. (Witness vas here examined as to the conversations vith Mrs Wright. He said on one occasion ihe was in his office for an hour and a lalf). In answer to jurors, the witness said te did not supply his solicitors with a copy >f the result of the interview with Reichelt • le communicated the substance of it to heiDj but whether before or after the letter

“casting a slur” on the previous jury was written, he could not say. When was the appointment made ? It was on Monday, when she came into the yard.— Was that during one of your visits to the hack premises ? 1 had met her ofrvn enough before.—Was there anyone present ? His Honor: These sort of appointments arc not made in the presence of people. Mr Smith : That yard communicates with Raymond's yard. Is there not a door between ? Yes. —State how the appointment tookpiace? On the Wednesday previousin the evening—l saw her up at Mbs Cane’s. There were two girls sitting at the left of the fireplace.—Was Miss Cane there ? Yes. —What room was it in? The kitchen.— You say there were two girls present? 1 made a mistake at first. I said. “Is that you, Maggie ? ” Miss Cane replied “ No, it is a young person from the country”; that is, Mrs Wright.—ls Miss Cane’s name Maggie ? No —At what hour was this ? Towards the evening. Before or after your dinner ? lam not quite sure; but I think after.—State what took place. Some jokes passed ; all took part in them, Mrs Wiight as well—Nothing of importance took place ? No.—You swear that to have been your first meeting with Mrs Wright? Yes: On the following day she came to my office and asked me if I would oblige her with a few postage stamps. I said, Yes. I offered her a chair, and went from the shop into the offioe and offered her different stamps, We talked a little while. —Was there anything said about the appointment? No.—What took place at that interview in the yard ? On Friday she came a train to my office; she said she was in mourning, and wanted to look at some brooches and earrings. —Did she look at any ; did she buy any? No.—Why not? She was to call again.—Did she call again? On Sunday evening I was in the office ; 1 had the office door open, and could see persons going out. I heard two persons coming down : it was Miss Cane and Mrs Wright. Mias Cane gave me a scolding: She said I was watching her.—Never mind the scolding. I want to know what took place The appointment was made on the Monday ; we got acquainted, of course.—So you say the appointment was made in the back yard on Monday : just state exactly how it came about. We met there.— Who spoke first ?—I can’t remember what I said.

His Honor: Are we to have Ihe whole of this little courtship ? The fact of the appointment is no doubt important; but do we want the details of all their little billings and cooings ? Mr Smith : Who was the first to speak of the appointment ?—Witness : We came and looked at each other ; I said I should like to see her to-night. Did you say when you would come down ?—I said the music at the Buffet was playing rather late ; and I said I would come down after. You left your lodgings at what time A good deal after 12 ; near one. How did you go to your premises ? I went dbwn High, Clark, and Maclaggan street ;up Kattray street; went up the steps and went down the back way to my shop.—Why did you go that way. I generally went that way, because Miss Cane was sleeping just over my shop door, and I did not want to disturb anyone.—Having got down the bank, what did yo.u dft ? 1 went into my office through window, which was shut when I went there, —After lighting a lucine lamp, I took off my boots, put on my slippers, and went up stairs.—With the light in your hand ? No. Where did you place it ?—On the table. How did you light the lamp ? With a match, I think. How did you get out of the office?—l unlocked the office-door. With what key?— The usual key. Did you take it down in your pocket ?—I dqn ! t think X did. Whepp c|id you get the key ?—I can’t pemeinber— Noonan sometimes hung it in the recess j sometimes just at the door. After unlocking the ooor, I went up stairs, leaving the key in the door. I closed the door. Did you get inside up stairs?—Oh, yes. Was there any door ? Yes. That door could not be locked, because it did not lock. His Honor : Into what room did you go ? Witness : Into the kitchen.

Mr Smith : Did yoi; meet any there ? First there wa* pp. owe.—\Viia came then? slps Wright-— How long had you to wait before she came You gave a little knock, aud she gave an answering knock ? Ko ; 1 had to wait about 10 or 13 minutes.—How long did you stop in the kitchen ? A good while.—How did you account for tl}6 lapse of time be|o)-e oho answered .your knock ? Sipe did not boar ; 1 hail to knock three times. —Uow long were you with her? I cannot say.—Was it an hour and a half? It plight be.—After that, what did you do? She said there was some one in the office. J said it was nouseme | there wfts no one theie.