SUPREME COURT.—CRIMINAL SITTINGS.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5392, 9 July 1878, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.—CRIMINAL SITTINGS.

Mohdat, Jdlt 8. _ t (Before hia Honor the Chief Justice) ATTEMPTED POISONING. William O’Connor, who had been found ■ guilty of attempting to poison William Light, was placed at the bar. The Chief Justice, addressing the prisoner, said : When yon were before.the Court on a previous day you were called upon to say why sentence should not be passed upon you, and passing judgment was postponed until this morning. : - Prisoner,., who .seamed extremely nervous, said : In the first place I wish to say that I am 65 "years of age, and as to the act ot which I have been found guilty by the jury . I am as innocent as your Honor sitting upon that bench. X wish the Press to publish the whole of my statement. I have been upwards of 33 years in the police force. I joined the Irish Constabulary in 1815, and I left the Canterbury police force on the 12th of last January. I spent 12 years in the Irish Constabulary, and I then went to the Australian colonies, where I remained until March, 1867. I joined the Canterbury police force on Ist April, 1867. On the ' 12th January I was promoted to the rank of. sergeant, and was in charge of the Lyttleton station." I held the rank for eight years, and was discharged with a first-class certificate. Prom that time—from the first day X ever left my parents to do for myself, or before it, I never applied for, I never asked any person, • never signed for.any poisonous drugs in my life.. I never found any in in a-public street, road, or highway. During my time in the police force I have on various occasions risked my own life, to save the life of a fellow creature when In danger on hearing them singing out for help. The prisoner then referred to the fact that his wife became afflicted with insanity and had to be placed under reatraint.and spoke at considerable length as to his movements from the time of his leaving the police force, stating that he had been at ■ Bates, where his wife and children were, and also at Wanganui. . Finally he came to Wellington to try to get a situation in : the Kailway Department. He stopped at Barrett's Hotel, kept by Mr. Light. Ho bad intended to return to Wanganui the day before the alleged offence was Commited, htb he missed the steamer. He proceeded to say— ... I remained then living in the hotel. During my time in the hotel I stopped with the prosecutor himself, the landlord, on three different occasions. He brought in a decanter to have drinks out of it, and left it bn the table in the same room as is described on the plan. That was on Monday night the Bth and on Sunday' the 14th. No one was there hut the both of us. And on'.Sunday the 21st—well, we remained together on Sunday the 21st for over . two hburs. Not a human being was in that room but the both ot us. Which he then stated to me there that be was tired of keeping a publican’s life ; that ho had no pleasure in it, and that he wished he could sell out. I ashed him the rent of it, and he told me it was £5 a week, and there was a five years’ lease, I understood from him that he was a year.and five months in it, or that there was three years and five months to run ; either of the two. I asked him what ho would want for it, and he said £3OOO. I offered him £2OO (|) and to take the stock and furniture at a valuation, on bills. .“No,” he said, “giveme £3ooo,'and I will walk out and you will come, in,”. I told him I could not, do that. That, evening we were together until about a quartet past twelve o’clock. It any person came into that baV he went out to serve him, and came In and sat down again; in my cbm-, pany. As I was there a week on Monday, the 15th, and was .going out in the morning, he asked me if I would settle up. I told him that I would be leaving sotoe day in the week and Would settle all of it. On the 21st, when we were together there, and I was about to leave the room, he asked - mo if I was going to settle up, and I paid him three sovereigns for the fortnight’s ' board; ' thirty' shillings a • week. I remained then until, the Monday following. On Sunday, then, the 28th, I wont into that room, which is sworn hereto, at a quarter-past ten o’clock, for the purpose to inform, him that the .police were visiting houses. . When I went into that room there were five people in it.’ A few minutes, or two minutes oreb aftcrlgoingin,laskedfor shandygaff, which I was. supplied with. I should 'say I was aboht five minutes in the hotel when 1 the police did visit it ;’"at least, I won’t say that though I was informed by the barman and by the parties- in the room. The position of the men was upon that- occasion— the man who gave evidence here was sitting at tho end ..of the table that was described on the plan. * (Prisoner referred to the position of Mr.-Light as at the end of the table furthest away from the dock), j There was another gentleman, in: dark clothes, a black cloth coat,’a-black boll-, topper ; and there was sitting : at this end a roan with sandy ■ whiskers a sandy-com-plexlojiedroqn, , There were two more-between pie and the door, but who they" are, or their

" names, I do"not know. Thera was a conversation between them, and Sir George Grey’s name was made mention of, also Julius Vogel’s, also Major Atkinson’s and Mr. Stafford’s, on Parliamentary matters. I remained there for some considerable time. Tho prosecutor came in. He had a light coat upon him. He, the landlord of the house, stood up by the wall close to the door leading into the bar for about a minute or two, and returned back into the bar. Some short time after he came iuagain, stood at the door, and said “ Gentlemen—You are speaking too loud ; you will be hlnrd in the street. It is now a few minutes —it is close upon 11 o’clock, and it is time to close up, as the police is about.” At that time the four men stood up and weut out by the bar door. There is a chandelier in the room with two burners lit with gas. The one that was alight was that next the door at the lower cud of tho table. The one at this end was not lit at all. Tho men. who were in tho room will be able to certify' to the statement X am making here now. After the men goiug out the prosecutor came in and. he"sat down on the chair by the aide of the door in front of the fire. The conversation for. a few minutes .was in the line of ages and families, and the old gentleman said that he was 115, and had a daughter or a grauddaughter 29Jor 39 years old, or something like that. The old genjemrn then got up to leave, and after he going out I stood up off the chair where I was sitting, and came down by the side of the table on that side of tho room. Tho prosecutor was’stauding in the bar in the front of the door, and I removed the chair from the door that was leading into the passage. I removed it with my left hand further up to open the door, and unlocked the door, going to bed. I spoke to him in the bar, bidding him good night. He asked would I be leaving tomorrow. I said yes, that I would not miss the steamer , the same as I had yesterday. I would be leaving at 12 o'clock. He asked me then to settle up for the week. I said yes. _ I put my hand in my pocket, and I gave, him two sovereigns. He returned me the change, four half-crowns, out of his own pocket, on the spot, and never left the room. Then when I was going he said, “ You had better have a parting glass.” I said I did hot care for it, as Iwas after having a shandygaff. He said, “ You had better have one.” I said I would. He asked me what. I said, “I do not care.” He said, “Will you have some Irish whisky.” I said, “Yes, and I will have some lemonade in it.” He went out in to the bar, and I sat down on the chair on the side of the door, and he fetched it in. He was at least two minutes or a minute and a-half to two minutes away before he returned with the liquor. He placed my liquor‘ on the end of the table, and he placed his own at the other end. He returned back to the bar for a bottle of lemonade, which he was after placing on the counter, so he had only to go two steps. When he came in with the lemonade I reached my hand over the tumbler—my own tumbler—that was placed before me. I had the tumbler in my own hand, with the liquor in it. He said to leave it on . the table, ns he would be pouring the lemonade into it, that it would be flying out. I said “ No.” He said “Yes, that is a wrinkle that very few know.” I returned back the glass again on the table, which tumbler was about three parts full, with liquor, lemonade, and all. 1 told him that would do, and he left the bottle on the table by the side of the tumbler. I reached my hand for the tumbler which the liquor aud the lemonade was in, and he sat in front of me where he described that I sat. I say here, in the open Court, before God that is over me, that I never sat on that chair at the back of the door, as he described; no more than your Honor that is sitting on the Bench—that is, on that day. I told him then I would be settling down in Wanganui, and if he would ever come by that way I would bo happy to see him. He said he would be going up in a short time to see some friends, and if I was there he would call to see me. I took a portion of the liquor. I had about twothirds of it; I left about one-third in the glass. In fact, I spat out some of it, and said it was not good. I said the bottle was open before. He said “ No, I took it up fresh.” I said, “Well, it is flat.” During the time when I was drinking it, and when I was laying the glass down on the table again, he never took his eyes off of my face. After a few minutes he took hold of his own glass and he looked at the liquor and said, “ What is this ?” He stood up and I st"od up. He held it before the lamp that was burning, and I could see that the liquor was dark on the top. ’ I asked him what sort of liquor it was, to which he did not reply. At the time he held it before the glass there was no more sign of any white powder round that glass no more than there is in that glass-on the table now to be seen with the naked eye. He left his tumbler down on the table and sat down where he was sitting. For fully two minutes I never spoke, either him or me. I left the room and went to bed. I went to the usual place to light my candle, and went away to bed. I took out my watch and placed it on the table. It was a quarter-past eleven o’clock. I undressed and went to bed, and did not turn out of that room until a quarter-past seven o'clock on the following morning. When I turned out in the morning I went down to the wharf to see, what time the steamer would be going, and after receiving the information that she was advertised to leave at 12 o’clock, I returned back to Barrett’s about half-past 8 o’clock, and went iu to breakfast. The prosecutor and one of the waiters was at the sidetable at the time when I went in, and I was supplied with breakfast. [Prisoner then said he went to the Government Buildings and telegraph office, and on his return to the hotel a few minutes past ten o’ elock] I spoke to.the prosecutor himself in the bar. First, I asked him for a glass of beer, and if any letter came there forme to send it up to Wanganui to the Pier Hotel. He then asked me A party came in for a liquor, and when the party loft, he asked me then, “ Who went into the room last night at the time we were there ? ” I said, “That is best known to yourself, Knight (Knight I used to call him in place of Light). Yon were in the room the same as I was, and you know who came in and went out.” He says, “You will have to explain .that before yon get to Patea.” I said, “That would be easy done. It was you fetched in the liquors. If there was anything else, you are the man that knows what was in it.” I went upstairs then into the reading-room. There was one of his boarders there, which his name it was McCarthy. I knew him to be in the Telegraph Department in Christchurch some years ago, and he called me into the billiard-room, and stood by the side of me. He then told me that Light had a warrant for me for putting poison into his glass that night, and that the police were looking for me. “That being the case,” said I, “McCarthy, I won’t leave this until they come, and if I had had that mlioh information on the night that both of us were together, he would net leave that room until some of the people in the, house would he down, or the police in. It then oonld be seen where I sat at the table, and where the glass was that had a portion of the‘ liquor in it.” I declare to this Court that the man never left the room only to go two steps to the counter for the lemonade. There was a bell that did ring. I think it was about the time that the four gentlemen left. ' I think it was about that time that there was a bell rung. , The prisoner then repeated the assertion that he had never had poicon in bis possession, and said that not a crystal of it had been found upon him- Ho alluded to matters in which he contradicted Mr, Light’s-evidence. Finally,, lifting his hands above his head, he declared, in the presence of Almighty God, that he never had poison in his possession. • During his address, which lasted for more than an hour, tho prisoner was much affected, especially when alluding to his wife and children.

Mii Head, governor of the gaol, who was called by the prisoner, said ho seemed to be suffering from the effects of drink when first at the gaol, ' James Grey, Parliamentary shorthand-writer, said he hod known the prisoner for many years in Canterbury as a thoroughly respectable and inoffensive man, who had the good opinion of his officers. * Superintendent Shearman stated that the prisoner had always, home a good character while in the force.- Ho never knew anything detrimental to his character. 'Documents speaking highly in favor of tho prisoner's character were put in. - Tho Prisoner then said: Prom tho day 1 was • born to this day I never procured it (poison). I have not bought it. I have not sent another to buy it, I never signed for it—however it came there—whether it was in it or not. If it was in it,(Almighty God knows that: the liquor I took wont into tho wrong glass. .That glass was fetched in there, and the liquor went into the wrong glass; I am an innocent man/ and I trust that for the sake of my wife’and my family the four men who were iu tbejroom will send in their names. The Chief Jrtstico : Prisoner at tho bar/ you must be aware, as must in fact all persons who have any understanding, that offences of ’this, sort must bo very severely punished, Ta my mind 'the use of a knife is much leas

repugnant to tho feelings than the use of poison, and tho use of such a deadly poison as strychnine. It is not for me to question the verdict of the jury. I intimate no opinion whatever, Ido not think it my dpty to say at all that I approve of their verdict. Certainly it would not be my duty at all to intimate that I disapprove of their verdict. It is for mo only to pass the sentence of the law for the offence of which the jury has convicted you. Some of the statements you have made here to-day are inconsistent with the evidence given by Mr. Light. That is the only observation I have to make upon that point. The sentence of the Court is that you be kept in penal servitude for ten years. The prisoner was then removed. CIYIL SITTINGS.” (Before the Chief Justice and a Special Jury of twelve.) MATTHEW. M'OBEDIB V. JOSEPH NATHAN AND CO. Mr. Travers, with him Mr. Edwards, for the plaintiff ; Mr. Gordon Allan, with him Mr. Brandon, for the defendants. The plaintiff sought to recover £351 3s. 2d. from tho defendants, being a sum he had paid under protest; £271 19s. Id. was made up of amounts alleged to have been wrongly charged for commission and interest, and £76 15s. lOd. was an amount which ought to have been allowed on purchases made by the plaintiff from the defendants.

Matthew MoOredio, the plaintiff, stated that ho bought the ironmongery business he now has from Mr. McKirdy, who carried it on under the style of Sample and Co. He commenced trading with the defendants. He informed Mr. Roxburgh, who was then manager for Nathan and Co., of the terms on which he purchased from McKirdy, which were that he was to pay by acceptances at three, six, nine, and twelve months. Sir. Roxburgh, for the defendant’s firm, endorsed the' bills. The arrangement as to endorsing these bills was that he should pay 2i per cent, commission. As to renewals of the, bills it was said by Mr. Roxburgh he, would not be charged com.mission on them. The arrangement referred only to McKirdy’s bills iu this particular transaction, and it was verbal. Ho became a customer of the defendants on the following terms: —That he should purchase his immediate requirements, from their stock; but as it was very limited in that line they would not debar him from buying elsewhere. For accommodation he was to be charged interest at the rate of 10 per cent, per annum; that was upon cash that might be advanced to him to enable him to meet bills, or on discounting his bills. He was not to be charged commission on bills merely endorsed by Nathan and Co. for his accommodation. As to purchases from the firm he was to receive a liberal allowance off the current rates, or a percentage on the cost. Mr. Roxburgh was not then prepared to say which would bo the better way, but it was agreed that when it was definitely arranged he should receive the allowance'on all goods he had purchased. He was to give security over any property he had, and a hill of sale over the stock, hut it was not to be registered. He was to keep up thq stock to £SOOO. The bill of sale was to cover the balance of accounts on demand. Mr. Roxburgh said, ha would not register the bill of sale, so that he (plaintiff) might be able to do business'more to his advantage. As a fact, the bill of sale was registered. He bought from other firms at first without difficulty, but that was not the case after the bill of sale was registered. He complained to Mr. Roxburgh, who said he was very sorry that he had forgotten to give the necessary instructions not to have it registered, but he would place him (plaintiff) on a better footing by giving him letters of guarantee to persons he was iu the habit of doing business with, aud for wfiioh nothing would ha charged. Mr. Roxburgh gave guarantees to four firms. Plaintiff continued to carry on business in that way until July, 1877. He received an account from the firm of Joseph Nathan and Go. iu the beginning of April, 1877, which was the first statement he had received. He had an interview with Mr. Roxburgh as to the balance brought forward, £lll, at Nathan and Co.’s office. Plaintiff had these particulars given him : —Cash, £250 ; interest, £1 17s. ; and commission on endorsements, £159 3s. At the bottom of the account there was an item, commission on endorsements, £125 Is. fid., makiilg altogether £2Bl 7s. fid. That sum was charged for endorsements on bills at the rate of 2-1 per cent, commission. He then pointed out to Mr. Roxburgh that commission had been charged on renewals, aud asked to be credited with the amount thus charged. A ’ sum of £ls was first of all allowed, and £25 was afterwards credited. Mr. Grafton, book-keeper to Nathan, wrote on the account, by Mr. Roxburgh’s directions, “less commission wrongly debited,” in all £7O 11s; 3d. At that time he only pointed out what he recollected to bo renewals, and 'since that he found a sura of £1996 lls. 2d., and another, £208175. 5d., on which commission had been wroaly charged. Those were renewal bills under McKirdy’s contract. Another account was tendered in the beginning of July by Joseph Nathan and Co., but he did not examine it at the time. The balance shown ou the 4th -July was not correct inasmuch as the amount charged for renewals of £1996 and £2OB had not been corrected. He wrote a letter asking for a more accurate account. There was no inaccuracy iu these accounts beyond the commission: excepting that a sum of £IOSO due to the firm was not inserted. At that time no conclusion had been come to as to what was to be allowed to him in respect of goods purchased, and no such allowance was shpwn in the statements, .Such an allowance was not unusual in bis trade. The balance of the last statement was £3040. He oeasedtodealwithNathan and Co. in July. They had made a proposal for a fresh agreement, which he would not consent to, and he gave notice that, he would close his account. On the 9th July he received a letter with a note of commission on guarantees. The guarantees had been given before the delivery of the first statement. They were—To Dawson, £3OO ; Mills, £3OO ; Taylor, £300; and the Bank of New Zealand, £IOOO. No claim had been previously made for the guaranty commission. He wrote a letter to the defendants repudiating the claim. He did come to terms with Mr. Nathan. He received an account irom Nathan, and Co., which included commission at the rate of 21 per e’ent. on all accommodation transactions and on the guarantees and interest besides. The amount he disputed was £271 19s. Id., and he claimed £76155. lOd. allowance, being at the rate of 71 per cent, on his purchases. Interest had been charged oa the sums debited for commissions. Plaintiff made a claim for deductions, which Mr. Nathan refused to allow. Being threatened with proceedings, ho paid the disputed balance of tho account under protest. He had received allowances from other persons from whom he had boqght of a similar nature to the 7J per cent. By Mr. Allan : He was a clerk in the Treasury before going into this business, and previously had served ton years to the trade in Melbourne. He had also been engaged in business in New Zealand. He had when he started a little capital, and property to tho extent of £IOSO. The goods purchased from McKirdy were worth [from £6OOO to £7OOO ; some of them were to arrive. In the beginning of May he had oonyersationa with Mr. Roxburgh as to purchasing' MoKirdy’s business, the final arrangement being • made in May. The final terms agreed upen were arrived at at Mr. Nathan’s about the middle of May. He was to be charged 2 J per cent commission for the firm’s endorsing MoKirdy’s bills, and 10 per cent, interest for, any accommodation he might require ; for any .indenting the firm might do for him a charge of 5 per cent, would be made. He was to buy goods ior his more immediate requirements from their stock, and ou these ho was to receive a liberal allowance. A definite arrangement as to the allowance never was made. He thought Mr. Roxburgh took some notes, .but he could not say whether he did’at that time. Bills for three, six, nine, and twelve months were given for some part of the stock. Mr. McKirdy agreed that if ho gave bills at three months a part of them should be renewed, so as to (bring them within tho terms of tho agreement; and it was agreed that he should not pay commission on tho endorsement of those , bills. These renewals were on account of the stock to arrive from. England. There were no renewals in respect of the stock in the shop. The agreement as to not charging on these renewals was made in Mr. Kennedy Macdonald's office. The arrangement to give bills at three months was for Mr.' MoKirdy’s convenience, because his bank would not take the long-dated bills. He at first told Mr. Roxburgh that he would not agree to this, ns ha had to pay 2h per cent, for endorsement, and Mr. Roxburgh said, “Wo will not charge you 2i per cent, for : endorsement on the renewals.” Mr. Allan:. Why was the bill of sale not to bo • registered? Was it to commit a fraud upon people in tho town ? Wao that the the reason you wanted it (—You ask rap a question and answer It top. I will toll you thy roaspn if you will allow me.What was your reason for wishing that hill of sale kept secret'?—l did not wish it at all.

Why did nofc you say, “ Register it Why should I ?

Why did you to it?—Because it was not going in any way to injure me, but would rather arid to my credit. Supposing this bill of sale had been kept secret, and you had gone to some merchant in the town to commence dealings, and he had said, “Is your property free?” what would have boeu your answer ?”—X would have said, “No.”

What was the advantage of keeping the bill of sale secret ? Probably through not having a bill of sale registered my credit would be much better.

No doubt, because you would be held to the world as having all this stock perfectly free to dispose of ?—I do notJcnow that. Plaintiff proceeded to say that on the 2ith June he bad an interview with Mr. Nathan, in order to got from him £3OO to help him to meet one of McKirdy’s bills. He gbt the money.

Mr. Allan asked the plaintiff to explain how it was that he had given a bill for £316 Is. Cd. for the £3OO ?

The plaintiff : X signed a bill in blank, which was to bo filled up with a sum’of £3OO, with interest added. A few days afterwards I received a debit note, showing that per cent, had been added.

Mr. Allan : Do you mean to say that the document was forged ? Be cautious, Was filling in the sum of £316 Is. 6d. contrary to your arrangement?—Certainly.—You gave a blank form?—Yes?—You are a business man? —Yes.—And gave a blank form ?—Yes ; I had such confidence in the firm, *

The plaintiff in his evidence further said that he gave a blank form to be filled in for ap advance of £BOO made on the following day, and on that 2£ per cent, had been charged. There was a lengthened examination as to various bills and other matters. The plaintiff stated that he only indented one lot of goods through the defendants, namely, eight tons of fencing wire. Ho admitted receiving a letter from Nathan and Co. on 23rd July, 1877, asserting that the 2 J per cent, commission on money advanced for the plaintiff’s accommodation was an. agreed charge. The total value of goods he purchased from Nathan and Co, was £ll3O 12s. Id., and he supplied goods to them, including some of those to arrive from England, at 10 per cent, on the cost. . Re-examined by Mr. Travers : Mr. Nathan held a pretty stringent .bill of sale over him, the amount due being payable on demand. Nathan and Co. had .a mortgage over his property, aud held security over everything he had in July, 1877, when he paid the firm the £351 he now sued for. When he found that commission had been added to the £3OO and £BOO bill he did not say anything about it to Nathan and Co., for he was still in their hands. Mr. McCredie was under examination from 2 o'clock until twenty minutes past 5 o’clock. Robert Gardner, ironmonger, stated he had been twenty-five years in the trade, wholesale and retail. If a retailer bound himself to one house he would 'be supposed to have goods cheaper than anyone else, because he would be shut out from getting the benefit of competition in buying. Ten per cent, would be a fair rate if the security given were good. However, if a person had the right to buy anywhere ho would not be entitled to any concession, neither would he if he broke an agreement to buy from one person. The allowance would be a matter of stipulation between the parties. George Denton, ironmonger, would exppct an allowance if-he were bound to deal with a particular house. He would expect that if he took all goods they had in stock. A fair rate would probably be from 5 to 10 per ceut. All would depend upon a special agreement. He had never been bound, Mr. Gardner, recalled, said in reply to Mr. Allan that he got more than 10 .per cent, off the ordimvy wholesale price from the person to whom he was bound. This closed the plaintiff’s case. The Court adjourned at a quarter to G o’clock.