SUPREME COURT.

Globe, Volume III, Issue 259, 10 April 1875, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. [Before his Honor Mr Justice Williams.] THE LYTTELTON MUKDEB. [The following is the report of the examinations in this case which took place yesterday after we went to press.] Sussanna Toomey—l reside in Lyttelton. I remember the 9th January last. About a quarter before six I looked out of the back door of my house, which commands a full view of the parsonage grounds. I saw a man coming out of the'parsonage grounds into Eipon street through the hedge. He came out of the corner nearest Oxford street. The hedge is of gorse. After he got through the hedge he caught hold of the post and rail fence which adjoins the gorse fence. The man had a dark grey suit on. I recognise those produced as the same color d clothes he had on. I was not near enough to recognise the man’s features.. He was of medium height, and stout built. He went along Oxford street towards the station. I saw him cross Exeter street, going down Oxford street, still going in the direction of the railway station. Cross-examined by Mr Joynt—l do not know how far my house is from the parsonage grounds. It might be 300 or 400 yards. I saw him distinctly come out through the fence. He staggered as he walked along Ripon street and Oxfor street. The moment he came outside the fence he walked down the street. Annie Rouse—l live at the corner of Oxford and Ripon streets, Lyttelton. I remember the evening of Saturday, 9th January last. I saw a person come out of Ripon street into Oxford street; It was nearly a quarter to six o’clocir. It was a man that I saw. 1 see him in Court now—the prisoner is the man. I could recognise the clothes he wore ; those produced are like the clothes and cap he had on. He went towards the railway station. He was walking rather hurriedly. Cross-examined by Mr Joynt—l was in my father’s house at the time, at the bay window. The window faces on Oxford street. I was pulling up the blind when I saw the prisoner coming out of Ripon street. I noticed him because he was a stranger, and I know all the people about there. From the look I had of him, I couid swear alike to him and his clothes. I was examined before the coroner on the second inquest—on the Tuesday week after I hi st saw him. I never saw him at all between those times. I did not see the prisoner pass with sergeant-major O’Grady from ray house. I did not see him at all in sergeant-major O’Grady’s company. I recognise him by the clothes he wore and by the face. I should know him anywhere, and at any distance of time. He had a black and white scarf round his neck on the evening I saw him. He had something black and white round his neck I am positive, but whether it was his scarf or his shirt 1 connot say. He was walking hurriedly, but not unsteadily. There was no particular reason why I should look at him. I have not heard him described by anyone since that time. I described his clothes and general appearance to sergeant-major O’Grady in my house on the same evening that the child’s body was discovered. ! Re-examined by Mr Duncan—He had a scarf on tof- a pattern like the one produced; I

but I cannot say which, whether the shirt or the scarf. By the Foreman—l didn’t notice whether he staggered or not. The road up there is very rough. By bis Honor—ln passing our house his right side would be towards me. He passed about four or five yards off. I did not see any blood upon his face. Beyond a soiled face I did not notice anything particular. Robert Russell—l am a carpenter, living in Christchurch. I remember Saturday, the 9th of January last. I was working in Lyttelton that day, I returned to Christchurch by the 6 p.m. train from Lyttelton, I know the prisoner by sight. I saw him that evening in the train. He was in the same compartment that I was in. I recognise the clothes produced as those he wore that evening, so far as regards the coat and cap. The prisoner remarked that the Government men ought to go into the horse box and leave room for the public. I remarked that he ought to wash his hands before he spoke. Made this remark because I saw blood on his bands. It looked pretty fresh. He said he had been killing a sheep. I saw two spots on his face, one on the nose, and the other on the right cheek below the eye. This also appeared to be fresh. I am quite sure this is the man. Cross-examined by Mr Joynt—l had never seen the prisoner before. I noticed the blood more especially along the forefinger and thumb of the left hand. The blood was not wet but had not lost its color; it was fresh colored. They looked more like spots than patches; and when he told me he had been killing a sheep I did not doubt his word. I did not observe any signs of blood about his clothes. He was near to me in the compartment. I saw the prisoner next at the inquest on the Tuesday week after the Saturday. James Quin Sheehan, a little fellow whose head hardly reached above the witness-box rail, deposed—ln January last my father kept a boarding-house in Christchurch. I remember Saturday, 9th January. I was at my father’s house. I saw the prisoner on that night at ten o’clock. He came to our house with another man for a bed. He shortly after left the house to get a drink somewhere. He came back in half an hour’s time. He pulled out a blue paper, in which he said there was half a pound of tobacco. He pulled out a knife and looked for some money. He did not find any, so he put the things back again. I think I should know the knife again. It had a brown handle and one blade. I had it in my hands that night looking at it. I think the knife produced is the one. I could not recognise the clothes he had on, as it was dark, but I could the cap. It was a French peak, and the one produced is it. He slept in my father’s house that night. He said next morning he was going to Port. Cross-examined by Mr Joynt—My father had gone to the theatre, and I looked at the time a little before the prisoner came in. I couldn’t see his clothes because of the gas not being on the side he was on. I never saw him before. I saw him afterwards at the Maeistrate’s Court in Lyttelton. It was some time afterwards, nearly a month. There was only one man besides the prisoner in our house that night, and he went up to bed as the prisoner came to the door. The man who came to the door with the prisoner did not come in, nor the prisoner. They stood at the door and asked for a bed, and gave me a shilling. He went away then and came back alone. I saw the knife when he came back with the tobacco. I saw the man who came with the prisoner, but I do not know that I could recognise him again. I knew the prisoner because he stopped at our house. I have seen other knives of a similar character to this one, but I should know them apart, because the one or two I have seen like it had holes in them. I pointed out the prisoner from amongst a lot of men at the Mitre Hotel, Lyttelton. Mr Benjamin asked me about the man, and Mr Feast asked me about the man. Mr Ben jamin came to our house, and I told him I had seen a man with knife ’and tobacco at our house that night. I described him as a short man. 1 did not notice whether he had a comforter on. I noticed his cap. The man was half-drunk when he came to our house. I know he was half-drunk by the way he spoke, though he did not stagger at all. I see a good many half drunken men dating the day. John D’Arcy—l was on board the Cleopatra, lying in Lyttelton, in the month of January last. I remember Sunday, the 10th January. I know the prisoner. He came on board the Cleopatra on the Sunday, about eleven o’clock, I would know the clothes he had on when he came on board. I identify the coat, cap, and trousers produced as those he had on. I did not notice whether he had a muffler on. He washed himself and changed his clothes when he came on board the vessel: I did’nt see him do anything with the clothes he took off. I saw a knife in his possession whilst on board the Cleopatra. It was a one-bladed knife. The knife produced is the one. I do not know whether the prisoner changed his under clothing. After the prisoner had changed his clothes, I noticed several articles of wearing apparel floating near the vessel. I took them to be flannel shirts. They did not appear to have been long in the water. I picked up the knife produced in the coalhouse on the Monday following. The prisoner had a bag for his clothing, which he kept in the cabin. Cross-examined by Mr Joynt—l had an opportunity of seeing the knife on the Sunday, because the prisoner laid it down. It was shut. I did not take very much notice of it. It is a very common sort of knife; I have seen many of the same kind like it. 1 put a mark on it on the Monday before I gave it up to the police. There was no other person aboard the vessel on the Sunday who had a knife. I do not know that it is a custom with sailors leaving a vessel to throw old clothing over the side; it might be done. I have never to my knowledge done it myself. All hands were leaving the Cleopatra that day. I saw the prisoner on board on the Saturday about four o’clock as near as I can say; it might have been after. The prisoner, another man, and myself, went ashore together, and it would be close on five o’clock when we got ashore. I saw some carpenters leave the Canterbury and go ashore just after we did. I could not say what time they knocked off. I couldn’t say whether it was before or after five o’clock that we went ashore. We went into Parsons' when we got ashore. We only stayed long enough to get a pint of beer—not more than two or three minutes. When I went away I left prisoner and the third man there. Ido not know who the third man was, I believe he has left the province for Wellington, but I have never heard of him Binoe,

By the Foreman —I know of no reason why the clothes were thrown overboard. By His Honor—The prisoner did not look as if he was drunk. He took lemonade at Parsons’. The Court adjourned at 4.30 p.m. to 10 a.m. this day. TRUE BILL. The Grand Jury returned into Court with a true bill in the case of Regina v Thomas Weir, obtaing goods and money under false pretences. MEETING OF THE GRAND JURY. The Foreman stated that fnr M. Le Fleming, Messrs Dobson. E. M. Templer, and W. Keunaway were desirous of being excused from attendance. His Honor excused those gentlemen from further attendance. The Grand Jury then dispersed until Monday, when they will meet to consider the case of Regina v Fox, bestiality. This Day. The Court reopened this morning at 10 a.m. THE LYTTELTON MURDER, The hearing of the case of Regina v John Mercer for wilful murder was resumed, the court being again croAvded. The foreman of the jury, prior to the case being proceeded with, expressed a hope that the counsel on both sides would not protract the case longer than they could help, so as to avoid the jury being locked up over Sunday. His Honor said that of course the counsel would not unnecessarily detain the Court, and would endeavour to allow the jurors to get away as soon as possible. The following evidence was given for the Crown; Harry Feast —I am chief detective officer in-the Canterbury Police Force. I remember Saturday 9th January last. From information I received I proceeded to Lyttelton on that day. On the 11th—a Monday—from information I received, I went on board the Cleopatra with Sergeant-Major O’Grady. We went off to see the cook. When we went alongside the prisoner was standing by the fore-rigging, just at the port side. O’Grady asked the prisoner if he Avas cook, and he said he was. We were both in plain clothes. I noticed a large piece of skin off prisoner’s nose as Ave went up the side. I said, “What’s the matter with your nose ?” He said it had been done some time before on board the schooner. I took the prisoner down into the cabin, having previously asked him where he was on the Saturday night. He said he was in Christchurch. He had a bag there, and O’Grady pulled out the clothes and laid them on the table, and I examined them. I asked him if those were the clothes he wore on Saturday, and he said yes. I noticed a spot of blood on the trousers. The clothes produced are the same. There was a lot of gorse spines stuck into the coat and trousers. I took possession of the clothes and muffler produced. I then searched the prisoner, and found a piece of tobacco, but no money. I asked the prisoner if he had a knife, and he said he had not. I then remarked that the tobacco had been cut with a knife. He said he used the galley knife, and when he did not use that he broke up the tobacco with his fingers. I commenced to search the prisoner, and he said, “What do you want?” and I said, “You murdered that poor girl, and have got the mark of Cain on your nose.” Prisoner muttered something about would I like him to say he did do it, W e then took him ashore, and when we got him to the police station I told him to strip. When he took off his boots and socks I noticed dried gorse in his boots, and looking at his knees I saw what I thought were gorse prickles. The prisoner said that it was not gorse but pimples. We squeezed one thorn but, and sent for Dr Rouse, who took out a number of gorse prickles out of his legs, and I think also from his hands. I noticed that there was a scratch on his hand. The stains of blood on the clothing .appeared to be recent. I produce the socks taken from the prisoner’s feet. We detained the prisoner. I received the knife produced from D’Arcy, or rather from Constable Maguire, Cross-examined by Mr Joynt—We went on board the Cleopatra about six o, clock on Monday morning. There was no one on board except the prisoner. We did not see the captain or any other of the creAV. I believe the prisoner knew me, and knew Avhat 1 was perfectly Avell. We all went doAvn into the cabin together, Avhcn I asked him to let us see his clothes. He ansAvered all our questions frankly and openly. The bag Avas an ordinary sailor’s bag, a large bag. I did not hear the words distinctly when the prisoner muttered after I accused him of the murder of the girl. I believe it Avas, “Would you like me to say 1 did it. ’ It came out in a muttering kind of Avay, he standing at one side of the table, and I at the other. Thomas O’Grady—l am Sergeant-Major of Police, stationed at Lyttelton. I remember the 9th January last. From information I received I went on board the Cleopatra on the morning of the 11th with Chief-Detective Feast. Previous to going alongside the vessel which was lying in the stream, the prisoner came from the cabin to the fore-rigging. I got out of the boat and on to the vessel. I asked the prisoner what his name was, and he said Mercer. Feast then came on board, and I asked prisoner what portion of the vessel he occupied, and he said the cabin. He asked him to take us into the cabin, and he went in before us. The prisoner then had no coat nor cap on. I asked him where his clothes were. He went into a cabin on the f>ort side of the vessel, and took from there a ong clothes-bag which he opened. I took it from his hands as he came into the cabin. It was tied, I commenced taking out the clothes. A short distance down the bag I found the trousers produced. I thought I noticed stains or marks of blood on them, and I put them on one side. At the bottom of the bag I found a coat, scarf, and cap. I saw blood marks on the coat, ‘and a large quantity on the inside cuff of the left hand sleeve. Chief-Detective Feast also examined the scarf, and he detected blood on it. I heard the Detective ask prisoner how the blood came on his clothes. He said he got it by killing a sheep on board the vessel in Wellington, and the marks on his nose he had got on board the Canterbury schooner. There was a scratch on his nose, and on his left hand. I then told him that he must pack up his traps and go ashore with me. Feast made some remark about the mark of Cain on his nose, and he said, “ Do you want me to admit it.” He said he heard in Christ church that we had another man for the murder. I measured the distance from where the prisoner was standing to the coal tub, and found it six feet seven inches. We took him ashore to my office, and I told him to Btrip. He took off hia trousers, and I

said “ Why there’s prickles all over them. He said, “ No, they’re not prickles; it will take you some time to get them out of my flesh.” I said, “Why man they’re sticking out on every inch of you.” He said he had a breaking out, and that these were pimples. I sent for Dr Rouse, and we took prickles from the thighs, knees, hands, and fingers. The prisoner still persisted in saying they were not prickles. I took the clothes produced on the 14th to Dr Powell. I also assisted Dr Rouse in taking gorse prickles from the body of the deceased girl, Isabella Thompson. I found a large number on the thighs, hands, and fingers of deceased. I took a portion of the hair from the head of the deceased girl, which I produce. It is full of gorse thorns, and the whole of the deceased’s hair was similar. I gave Dr Rouse some gorse prickles from the place where the body was found. I took charge of the clothes of the deceased girl worn by her when brought dead to the station. They were full of gorse prickles and stained with blood. All the clothing produced has been in my possession since the Saturday. I observed gorse prickles in all the articles of clothing now produced except the cap. The prisoner admitted to Feast in my presence that the clothes now produced were worn by him on the Saturday. He said nothing about the waistcoat. I first saw the body of the girl at half-past six on the evening of the 9th January. The dress and petticoat produced bear marks of blood. The handkerchiefs produced bearing blood stains were found in the prisoner’s bag. The tobacco pipe and matches were found in the prisoner’s bag. I heard Feast ask him if he had a knife ; he said “ no.” Feast asked him how he cut up his tobacco, and he said with the galley knife, and when not in the galley that he broke it up with his fingers. The tobacco produced which was found in the prisoner’s possession bore marks of having been recently cut with some sharp instrument. The body of the girl had a very large wound on the left side of the neck almost right round, and there was a large quantity of clotted blood on the head, face, and hands. The body was brought to the station at 6.30 by Constable Wallace. Dr Rouse was with it then. He had been called I believe by Constable Wallace. I had the body removed that night to the morgue. The marks upon the prisoner’s nose and hands appeared to be recently done, I pointed them out to Dr Rouse in my office. Cross-examined by Mr Joynt—We had information by description the night previous as to the prisoner, I first asked the prisoner what his name was. No one in my hearing asked him if he was the cook of the Cleopatra. I be’ieve the captain intended to lay an information as to some damage on board, but it had not come to my knowledge then. Prisoner was alone, and I understood afterwards that he was in charge of the vessel. He told me at once where his clothes were, and he handed them out to me at the door of the cabin as his clothes. On the Sunday I did not arrest any one else for the murder. There was a man arrested, but he was not identified by any of the witnesses, There was a boy who said that he thought he was like the man he had seen in company with a girl in Canterbury street. He was placed in company with several other persons for the purpose of identification. I swear that not more than one person said that they had seen the first man in company with a gild on that evening. The style of the beard and coat of the first man arrested was similar to that of the prisoner. The boy said that the first man arrested was like the man. The boy was very young. This took place in the police station. Before the adjourned inquest on the morning of the 12th, I took the prisoner round the suburbs of the town to get away from the public gaze. I took him through Ripon street, Oxford street, Winchester street, Canterbury street, Dublin street, and Norwich Quay. I passed by the house of Rouse in taking the prisoner on that morning to the Mitre Hotel. I took him into no public houses except the one in which the inquest was held. The inquest was held at eleven o’clock, and I took the prisoner into the dining-room of the Mitre, where it was held, between nine and ten o’clock. The dress worn by the child on the day of the murder was a light grey—at least I should consider it so, but I am not a good judge of colours. I do not know of a man named Brown on board the Canterbury. I have no recollection of hearing the name Brown in connection with the prisoner. I heard that D’Arcy, the prisoner, and a third person were drinking together at Parson’s on that Saturday afternoon. I made inquiries from D’Arcy, and from what I heard I did not think it necessary to press enquiries further. 1 may have had a conversation with this person, but I do not think I had. I have conversed with a number of persons (seamen) on this subject. I will not swear either one way or the other. Re-examined by Mr Duncan : The first man arrested was brought to the station by Chief-Detective Feast. I do not know how he arrested him, or whether the man was in charge. The day I took the prisoner round the streets I was taking him to the inquest. I was in plain clothes myself, and I had a constable with me in plain clothes. I wanted to take the prisoner away from the crowd ; in fact the prisoner thanked me for doing so. By the foreman : The prisoner was just before me when he went into the cabin. I passed the house of Miss Rouse before she gave her evidence, and before she identified the man. She gave a description of the man to me on the night of the murder. It was before I took the prisoner round the streets. Chief-Detective Feast re-called ; There was a person suspected of this murder. I came to Christchurch, and found him in the police yard. He was very deaf. I looked at his coat sleeves, his clothes generally, his knees, &c. I knew that he only had that one suit of clothes. He went in the same train as I did to Lyttelton, but not in the same carriage. He was not arrested ; he paid his own fare, and went by his own consent. He went up to the police office when he reached Lyttelton, He stopped in Lyttelton that night. Cross-examined by Mr Joynt: The railway constable went over with the man. I told him that he was not a prisoner, and that he was not suspected, as it was impossible for him to have committed the murder. I did not consider that he was at any time in legal custody. He slept in the cell all night, I believe with his own consent. By the foreman—l cannot say whether any attempt has been made to wash the bloodstains off the clothes. James Wallace—l am aconstable in Lyttelton. I remember the 9th of January last. From information I received I proceeded to

the Rev Mr Pember’s garden, situate in Ripon street, and known as the Parsonage. I arrived there about twenty minutes past six. There were four or five boys there when I went up. On looking through the fence I saw the body of the deceased girl Isabella Thompson. I saw her lying with her face covered with blood. The body was lying with the head towards me and the root of the fence; her feet were up-hill. Her clothes were thrown up over her chest; she was undressed up to the stomach. On looking at her, I discovered a large cut wound, commencing at the left ear, and running round the throat. I put my hand on her stomach; the body was warm but the limbs were cold. I got through the fence about ten yards from where she was lying. Where the body was found was in an angle of the garden. The plan produced is a correct delineation of the spot. I found a pair of drawers under her right thigh. They were torn and were off her. The button which fastened them behind;was torn off and hanging by a thread. [Drawers produced and identified.] The skirt of her dress was torn off the body. I did not find the body of the dress. There was a lot of dead gorse —a great quantity—lying about loose where the body was found. When I found the body there was no hat on it; I found the hat produced about four feet distant from the body towards the cemetery. I found a man’s pocket handkerchief having stains of blood on it. I found two school pic-nic tickets lying close to the right hand of the body. The name of Mrs Thompson was on both tickets. As soon as I saw the body I took charge of it and sent for Dr Rouse. After the doctor came, I removed the body to the police station. Sergean t- major O’Grady took charge of it there. The hair and clothes of the body was covered with dry gorse ; the hair being matted with it. Close by the neck of the body there was a pool of blood. There was a hole right through the fence in the angle close to where the body was found. Cross-examined by Mr Joynt—l judge the handkerchief to be a man’s pocket handkerchief, because it is very seldom you see so large a one used by a lady. There are no initials on the handkerchief. Lewellyu Powell : I am a legally qualified medical practitioner in Christchurch In the month of January last sergeant O’Grady brought me some clothes for inspection. He brought a coat, trowsers, scarf, pocket handkerchief and shirt. I identify the clothing produced, except the trowsers, which I am not certain about, as that given to me by ser-geant-major O’Grady. I examined the articles on the handkerchief, there are stains of blood, and on the scarf are some drops of blood; on the coat, more especially the lining of the left cuff, there are marks of blood. I retained a portion of the coat cuff for more careful examination ; the other articles I scraped, except the handkerchief which I soaked. I can say that the blood is that of a mammal, but I will go no further than that. The stains on the handkerchief look as if something had been wiped on it. It has the appearance of this. My examination of the spots was conducted by means of the the microscope, the spectroscope, and by chemical tests. The stains were, I believe, recent, and not many days old. I received the clothes on the 14th January last. Cross-examined by Mr Joynt—A mammal is an animal that suckles its young ; but I cannot say that this might be the blood of any animal that suckles its young. I am in the habit of using the microscope for tests. Tests would not be so satisfactory with old stains as with fresh; but they would, unless in certain exceptions, be perfectly satisfactory. This is as regards the microscope; as regards the spectroscope there is no difference. I have not examined gorse prickles under the microscope. By the Foreman—lt is laid down in. works on the microscope that you are not justified in stating whether dry blood is that of a human body or a sheep. John Thomas Rouse—l am a legally qualified medical practitioner residing in Lyttelton I remember 9th January last._ On that evening, from information I received, I went to the parsonage grounds. Constable Wallace was there, and I think it would be about a quarter to seven when I arrived. I saw the dead body of a female child lying in the angle of the parsonage orchard. It was a dead body. I made an examination. I found the body warm, but the limbs cold. On the left side of the neck was an extensive gaping wound extending over the whole of the left side of the throat. The body was lying obliquely across the angle, with the head up bill. When I saw the body the legs were uncovered, and the dreis was disorder, d and with stains of blood on it. The ground was thickly strewn with dry withered gorse. There was a great deal of gorse on the dress of the body, and also matted in the hair. The body was removed on a stretcher to the station. I afterwards made a post mortem examination of the body. The wound on the neck was a threefold one, one commenced in the middle of the throat near the chin, dividing the skin only for about two inches. The instrument with which the cut was made then took a deep plunge of about an inch and a half, and then upwards and backwards to the base of the scalp. This large wound was five inches. Half an inch below the first mentioned wound was one an inch and a half long, also skin deep, leading into the main wound, leaving a piece of skin protruding into the wound. Below this again there was another about an inch and a half long, having no connection with the main wound and only skin deep. The cause of death was the main wound, which had divided the common carotid artery. The body was that of a well nourished girl. Death must have been almost instantaneous, I formed the opinion that the wound had been inflicted by an instrument not very sharp, but at the same time sufficiently so to have divided the carotid artery. The knife produced would inflict such a wound. I may may say that when I saw the handkerchief produced there was a fresh blood stain on it as if something had been wiped on it, and I said to the constable “ that has been done by a knife of not very wide blade.” That was the opinion I formed at the time. I extracted a number of gorse prickles from the person of the deceased girl—from her knees, thighs, and body generally. I produce the prickles I extracted. When I first saw the body I formed the opinion that she had not been dead more than an hour. There were irregular marks on the body, which suggested to my mind the possibility of a struggle. There were bruises on the upper part of each arm, on the forehead, and on the outer side of the right of the neck. The body when I first saw it was lying on its back. I saw the prisoner at the police station on the Monday, the 11th. He was partly stripped, and I examined his body in the presence of Ser-

geant Major O’Grady. I found a number of spots about his legs, which the prisoner said were pimples. Sergeant Major O’Grady asked him if he was sure they were not gorse prickles, and he said, No ; you will find no gorse prickles in me.” With the assistance of sergeant-major O’Grady, I removed several prickles from his legs and from the back of his left hand, which on comparison under the microscope with the thorns of gorse taken from the spot, I found to be identical. I produce an exhibit of four gorse prickles. No 1, taken from the person of the accused ; No 2, taken from the person of the deceased ; No 3, taken from the clothes of the prisoner ; and No 4, taken from the spot where the body was found. They are identical. I have compared the prickles taken from the body of the deceased with those taken from the person of the prisoner, and I find them identical also. On the day I examined the prisoner I observed a recent scratch on the bridge of the nose. I did not examine the clothes of the prisoner. Cross-examined by Mr Joynt—l have examined the gorse prickles produced carefully under the microscope. Thus examined the prickles of gorse are entirely different from any other, and not at all liable to mistake. I have not in connection with this case examined any other prickles. I confined my investigations to gorse prickles alone. The only difference between the appearance of the gorse prickles is where they have penetrated deeper into the flesh, and have got stained with blood at the ends. The examination I have made of prickles generally, before this case, has been for curiosity, and not as a matter of scientific research. Hugh Macdonald—l am a legally qualified medical practitioner in Lyttelton. I, in conjunction with Dr Rouse, made a postmortem examination of the body of Isabella Thompson on the 11th January. The body was that of a strong well nourished child. [The witness then proceeded to corroborate the evidence of Dr Rouse as to the wounds. | The knife produced would be very likely to inflict the wounds as described. A great quantity of gorse prickles were extracted from the body of the deceased. This closed the case for the Crown, Mr Joynt intimated that he did not intend to call any witnesses. At this stage the Court adjourned for half an hour. On re-assembling, The Ciown Prosecutor proceeded to address the jury. He cou'd congratulate the jury upon the comparatively easy task which the evidence imposed upon them, as it pointed most conclusively and markedly to the prisoner. It was a murder committed in the broad light of day, committed by a strong man upon a weak girl for purposes best known to himself. Neither himself nor his learned friend had questioned the medical witnesses upon the point as to whether the girl had been violated or not; that was not included in the indictment. Now let him bring before them the facts. The girl was seen by her father going towards the Colonists’ Hall, and afterwards was seen by Captain Russell, one who knew the prisoner intimately. At this time the girl was in perfect health; her clothes untorn, and .she was last seen alive in the company of the prisoner by both Allen and Russell going towards Ripon street. There could be no mistake, because both men knew prisoner well, and had worked with him. The dead body of the girl was afterwards found by the two boys as detailed to the jury. The state of her dress, the torn condition of her underclothes, proved that a struggle had taken place; that the girl seeing the crime he intended had struggled with the prisoner, and thus supplied the motive for the murder. What was the evidence to connect the prisoner with the murder ? There was the evidence of Mrs Toomey, who saw the prisoner coming out of the gap in the fence, where the body was ultimately found, and Mr Skeet, who saw the prisoner shaking his coat to get rid of a portion of the evidence which had that day been laid beiore them. There could be no mistake ; the prisoner was seen by Miss Rouse coming down the hill from the spot; by Skeet, who deposed to seeing blood on his face, and had the prisoner not had his hands in his pockets, doubtless Skeet would have seen blood on his hands. There they had the testimony of a witness to seeing the blood on the face of a man seen coming out of the gap of the fence where the body of the unfortunate girl was found. Then they had the testimony of Russell who when the prisoner got into the train noticed blood on his face, on his clothes and on his hands. The prisoner did not deny —let the jury remember—that there was blood on his hands and face, but he said that he had killed a sheep. What opportunity had he of doing so. When he passed Russell and Allen there was no blood on his face ; but after he left the place when the murdered body of that poor girl lay, he had blood on his face. The statement as to the sheep was a lie, a false lie. He thought that he would be able to get through to Christchurch to get rid of the stains of his crime. The jury would remember the witness Sheehan, the little boy who gave his evidence so straightforwardly, so clearly, notwithstanding the efforts of his learned friend to get him to contradict himself. The little fellow, as boys would, was attracted by the knife, and he swore to it as the one produced. There they had the link supplied that the prisoner on the day of the murder was possessed of the instrument with which the life of the poor girl had been taken. Did they find the prisoner acknowledging that he had a knife? No; he tells Feast that he does not carry one, though the little boy saw him with one on the Saturday night, and beyond this the testimony of D’Arcy, the prisoner’s mate, that he was possessed of a knife. Now let them rememberabout the clothes. These were admitted by the prisoner to Detective Feast to be the clothes worn by him on the Saturday, bearing as they did the marks of blood upon them. The blood, it was impos. sible for the medical men to say was human blood, but they swore that it was blood of a mammal. Then the person of the prisoner was found to be full of gorse prickles, as well as his clothes, which was a damming piece of evidence against him. Dr Rouse had examined the prickles taken from the body of the deceased, from the person and clothes of the prisoner, and from the spot where the murder was committed. He thought it was not necessary for him to trouble the jury with any lengthened remarks. Never had a case been brought clearer before a jury ; there was not a link missing in the chain, not a fact wanting ; there was not a ray of hope left to the prisoner’s counsel to entertain of an acquittal. It was not for him to expatiate upon the diabolical nature of the crime ; he contended it was the duty of the jury not only to punish crime, but also to hold up an example to

others to deter them, notwitstanding the result which might accrue to the prisoner. Notwithstanding that, they might regard this as a reason why they should view the case in a light of inclination [towards mercy, he put to it them that their duty to their country, as well as their oaths bound them to find the prisoner guilty of the crime of which he was accused, because the evidence which had been led was of the very clearest and conclusive nature, pointing as it did to the prisoner at the bar as the murderer of that unfortunate girl. Mr Joynt then proceeded to address the jury on behalf of the prisoner. His Honor having summed up, The jury retired at 3.55 p.m. to considered their verdict, and at 4.5 p.m. returned into Court. The foreman of the jury, in answer to the Registrar, said—After a careful consideration of the evidence, the jury find the prisoner “ Guilty.” His Honor then passed sentence of death in the usual form, which was received by the prisoner with utter indifference.