MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 963, 27 July 1877, Page 2

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH, Friday, July 27. (Before Q-. L. Mellish, Esq., R.M., and Dr. Deamer, J.P.) Wiii'UL Murder. —Carl Kedhe and Ehzabetli Lynch were brought up on remand charged with having wilfully murdered Henry Powell. Mr Joynt appeared for the accused. Inspector Feast conducted the prosecution. Inspector Feast said that with regard to the female prisoner he would ask to withdraw the charge against her. His Worship told Lynch that she might go, and the woman then left the Court. Mr Joynt asked whether it would be necessary to take the whole of the evidence over again. He thought it would be sufficient if the witnesses were called, and they stated they confirmed the evidence already given by them. It had been done on a previous occasion in that Court. All the Crown Prosecutor required was a committal from the Resident Magistrate’s Court. Inspector Feast said he had consulted Mr Duncan, who wished to have another set of depositions. After further remarks, his Worship said he thought it would be as well that the evidence should be taken. While Constable Rouse, the first witness was being examined, Inspector Feast asked him whether deceased made any statement to him. Mr Joynt objected to any statement being admitted in evidence which had not been taken in the proper manner. Statements said to have been made by the deceased had been published by the police, evidently only for idle and sensational purposes, and it would be useless to cumber the depositions with useless matter which would not for one moment be admissible in the Supreme Court. Inspector Feast said the police had nothing whatever to do with the publication of the statement that appeared in the newspapers. He thought he had a right to put the question he had asked. Mr Joynt said that he considered that Court competent to deal with questions of law, and he would certainly not argue questions of that kind with a police constable. His Worship asked whether the Supreme Court would not be the proper place to object to that question. Mr Joynt would submit, but still objected to the question. The public mind had already been inflamed by matter which could not possibly go before a jury in evidence. His Worship suggested whether the Judge’s direction to tlie jury would not prevent any ill-effects from this. Mr Joynt said no doubt His Honor would refer to it in Ids charge, but it would be impossible to prevent men’s minds being influenced to some extent by the publication of statements which could not be admitted in evidence.—His Worship having re-modelled the question, Mr Joynt did not object to it being put in that form, and the evidence proceeded given as already published.—ln cross-examination by Mr Joynt witness replied that he could not say whether Powell was staggering through intoxication or from the effects of drink. Henry Barrett repeated his former evidence, and was not cross-examined. Sarah Aubrey repeated her previous evidence, and in cross-examina-tion stated that Powell, and the woman Lynch remained in Barrett’s Hotel on Saturday night for about five minutes. The woman was in the house first, and stood at the fire in a small room off and opposite to tire bar. The door of this room opened from Madras street. The door was a glass one, but witness thought the blinds would prevent the man seeing into the room from the street without opening the door. The room was lighted up, and the man came in by the Madras street door. They went out together, but witness could not say which was first out. There were other persons in the room at the time. —Sarah Fawcett repeated her former evidence in substance, and in cross-examination said she had heard Kehde and Lynch quarrelling on some occasions. It would be when the woman had taken drink, and the man was angry with her. He did not beat her, and those quarrels only took place when Lynch had taken too much to drink. Witness had never seen any other wrong with the woman. Kehde always seemed to be a very quiet man. The woman used to cry and make a noise when she was drunk. —Elizabeth Lynch next called, was accommodated with a seat while giving her evidence, as she seemed to be very weak. —The witness repeated the substance of her statement before the Coroner, and said that in conversation with Kehde on the Sunday he said he was afraid he had hurt the man when he fell, and he would be very sorry if he had done so. —The witness was not cross-examined. —H. J. Milsom, next called, repeated his previous evidence, and was not cross-examined. —Dr. Campbell repeated his previous evidence, and Dr. Collins, house surgeon at the hospital, did the same, mentioning that it was possible that deceased might have inflicted the wound himself, but it was not very probable, as it would have then been more serious. James McCracken repeated his evidence, and was not crossexamined. —Inspector Feast did the same, excluding the statement made to him bydeceased prior to bis death. —William Fawcett repeated his previous evidence, and was not cross-examined. —Inspector Feast said this concluded the case. After the evidence had been read over, accused received tire usual caution, and, by the advice of his counsel, reserved his defence. Accused was then fully committed to take his trial at the next criminal session of the Supreme Court. Mr Joynt told the Bench that the police were in possession of Kehde’s keys, both of the house and boxes, containing papers, &c. As accused desired he (Mr Joynt) should have them, ho hoped there would be no objection to his obtaining possession of them. Inspector Feast said he would like first to go down to the house with Mr Joynt, or any one lie might send, before handing them over. It was understood that this should be done. The accused was then removed