THE CASE OF WILLIAM O’CONNOR.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5404, 23 July 1878, Page 3

THE CASE OF WILLIAM O’CONNOR.

Pursuant to advertisement, a public meeting was held in the Provincial Hall at 8 o'clock last evening, for the purpose of .taking. into consideration the case of William O’Connor, who is at present undergoing a sentence of ten years’ penal servitude for an attempt to poison Mr. William Light, the lessee of Barrett's Hotel, Wellington, The meeting was called by his Worship the Mayor, in accordance with a requisition presented to him with that object, signed by 66 ratepayers of the city. There was a large attendance, the seating and standing accommodation of the body of the hall and gallery being availed of to the utmost possible extent. , Oatliemotionof Mr. Hutchison (ex-Mayer), . seconded by Mr. Taylor (builder), the chair was taken by his Worship the Mayor. The Mayor read the requisition which was addressed to him, and the advertisement calling the meeting in accordance therewith. Whatever his views and opinions might bo on this or any other question in which the ratepayers took an interest, he deemed it his duty to call a meeting when he was requested to do so. At the same time he wished it to be understood that ho . was not identified with whatever opinions might be expressed by those who should address the meeting. He was there simply as a listener, and he would be glad to hear any information that might bo adduced. He saw that Mr. Hutchison was one of those signing the requisition, and he would therefore call on that gentleman to address the meeting. ... Mr. Hutchison said he had a resolution to propose, but before doing so he would say that it was a matter for congratulation that so many people had assembled in the hall on so inclement an evening ; it was doubly a matter for congratulation when it was considered that the hall was not a place in which public meetings were frequently .held. They were there to discuss the case of an unknown stranger—a colonist of New Zealand ; personally, he would not know O’Connorif ho met him in the street; but it was not the man they had to consider, but the principle involved in the ,case. (Hear, hear.) Ho felt it to be their duty to meet there under the circumstances, even if the man bad ■ been a heathen, a Turk, or a Hindoo, He did not think that the case had been properly got up by tho police, or the Crown, or both. He was not there to impugn the verdict of the jury. No doubt they arrived at the conclusion they did conscientiously, but be did not think that the prisoner should have been convicted on evidence of so circumstantial and uncorroborated n nature. Therefore it became a question of principle whether tho evidence of one witness was sufficient tq convict a man of an offence laid to his charge. That was the real question to be considered, and if the principle of convicting a mart on the testimony of one witness alone wore admitted, then the same thing that happened to O’Connor might happen to any day to anyone of those assembled in that hall. (Applause.) The speaker then pro-, needed to recapitulate the main features of • the .evidence brought forward by the Crown ' against O’Connor. Ho pointed. out that the • moment Light gave information to the police O’Connor’s mouth .was closed; that O'Connor could not have divined that Light would ask him to drink ; that a man premeditating the taking .of human life _by _ poison would not have carried out his intentions iu the way in which it was alleged O’Connor had carried out that intention to poison Mr. Light. Circumstantial evidence was all very well so long as every link of the chain was Jinnly welded to the other; but in this case there was no chain, there was only one. link. He did not say that O'Connor was guilty or innocent; ■ but this be would say, that the evidence was not sufficiently conclusive to justify a verdict of guilty. The police were now acting as the people of Jedburgh did in former times. They were trying to bring forward evidence that - they ought to have produced at the trial. (Hear, hear, and applause.) The clothes which were handed to the police .ought to have been handed over in the presence of some unbiassed person. (Hear, hear, and applause.) What appeared in that night’s Evening Post viaa not evidence, and he must say that the police were acting in a most disingenuous way in this matter. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) If *o’Connor, after very searching inquiry, was found to be guilty, by all means let him remain where he was; but if satisfactory evidence of bis guilt was not forthcoming, he thought they should lose no time in asking the Govern- ‘ meut to liberate a man who had been condemned on evidence that was by no means conclusive of bis guilt. (Applause.) They r were not in this matter fighting the battle of a condemned man only,—they were fighting for a principle, for law, liberty, and justice. (Hear, hear, and-applause.) He begged to move the following resolution, —That this i meeting is fully alive to the necessity of repressing crime of every kind, and more especially crime aimed at the destruction of human life; yet it views with regret and some measure of alarm the conviction of William O’Connor, charged at the recent criminal sittings of the Supreme Court of New Zealand, held at Wellington, with attempting to murder by means of poison,—because the said conviction was really based upon the evidence of one witness, without definite corroboration from any other source, and consequently the proof of guilt was neither clearly nor satisfactorily established. This meeting does not seek to impugn the veracity of the_ witness referred to, but it considers, if such evidence is to be accepted as conclusive of guilt, that innocent persons may possibly suffer, and even the Courts of Justice heturnedfroratimetotime into a moans of indulging private and personal ■ malice, thereby seriously .endangering the rights and liberties of individual citizens. _ Mr. Tayloe said as one of those who signed the requisition to the Mayor to call the present meetin" he begged to second the resolution. He would not occupy their time in making a speech, but he would only say that he concurred in all the statements made by Mr. Hutchison in proposing the resolution. (Applause.) , ' ’ Mr. Hutchison said he had forgotten to read the following letter which he had received from the Yen. Archdeacon Stock: — ’ Te AroParsonage, JulySO, 1878. " My Dear Sir,—! thoronghly assent to tho petition and resolution. 1 have to attend a meeting on Mond«y and may-not bo able to attend yours also, . H teems to me that, If. I bad taken up tho theory that Light himself placed the poison in tho glass, in order to ohlaln power over O'Connor, this, theory was just asllltleor as much to be proved by the facts of the “case, aa.far as, they are known, as. that .on which O’Connor has been convicted. I begin to think that ft jury may b& the cause of great injustice from their haatv decisions. It is most difficult; as I know full well, to upset ft verdict of a- j"ry when once, in their wisdom, they have pronounced-judgment.—l am, &c., ■ A. Stock.

W. Hutchison, Eaq. , , , , ~ , Mr. 0. K. Jeffs referred at some length to ' the weak pointa in the evidence given against O’Connor/and with reference to the alleged discovery of strychnine in O'Connors clothes, Mr; Jeffs asked those present how they were to know that his clothes had not been tampered with ? i (Hear, hear, and applause.) It was well known that when people were ar- ■“ rested and brought to the police station they were searched ; whatever money they had was ■ taken ont, and next morning the unfortunate prisoner found himself los.* short. (Hear, ' hear, and applause.) Mr. Jeffs concluded by proposing a resolution. ' Tlje Mayoe asked Mr. Jeffs if he desired to . move it qs an amendment', . Mr. - Jeffs replied in the negative. The Mayok said that two resolutions could not he placed before the meeting at once. Mr. Jeffs said ho would withhold his resolution until a later stage. The resolution proposed by Mr. Hutchison was then put, and. declared to be carried; the Chairman stating that two hands only were held up against it. Mr. Jeffs then moved, —That in view of the facts connected with O’Connor’s conviction, and of the evil resultswhich might possibly arise therefrom (apart altogether from the suffering bf the presept convict), this meeting respectfully requests thp Hop j,ihe Minister for Justice to cause further inquiry fo be instituted into the aforesaid case ; and if the facts shall bear but the representation of ‘ this meeting, that be will recommend his Excellency the * Governor to annul the sentence of William Q’Connor,— as pay be considered best for effectually upholding the interests of law'and justice. ' ■ ■ Mr; Gwynneth, C.E., seconded the resolution. If the Scotch law of, "not proven" had been in force here, there would have been no ' necessity for the present meeting. He took it that the great majority of -those present were of the opinion that the evidence given against O’Connor was not sufficient to warrant aeonviction. This was certainly his opinion. (Hear, hear, and applause.) The Mayor asked if any other gentleman desired to address the meeting? ' " Opo of the audience stepped forward and said tie did not know that there was apy necessity for further speaking. They were all unanimous on the point. (Hear, hear.) If any one came forward in opposition, t}ien, they could argue‘the’matter out ; but there was no opposition, and therefore no “necessity' for ' further speaking. (Hear, hear, and applause.) ' Another of the audience by bis style of

speaking and gesticulation produced considerable merriment as he proceeded to state the reasons which induced him to consider that the guilt of O’Connor had not been established by the evidence given against him on his trial. The Mayob said he did not wish to utter a rebuke. There was a time and a place for everything. They bad met. together to consider a very serious matter, and he did not think it was an occasion for tho indulgence, of jeers and laughter. (Hear, hear, and applause.) Tho resolution was then put, and carried unanimously, amid cheers, Mr. Buck (a coal-dealer), who said he was the originator of this raeetiog, moved, —That the chairman bo requested to forward the resolutions of this meeting to the Hon. the Minister of Justice; and with the object of still further indicating the extent of the public sentiment on the subject, it is hereby resolved that a petition embodying the views of this meeting be circulated, signed, and presented to the same Minister.

Mr. Barton, jun., seconded tho motion, and said O’Connor ought never to have been convicted on the evidence brought against him. There would be uo safety for anyone if convictions were to be made on such evidence, (Hear, hear, and applause.) Mr. Light had spoken' first, and therefore O’Connor’s mouth was closed ; but if O’Connor had spoken first; then Mr, Light would have been placed iu tho samp position ns O’Connor. (Hear, hear.) Mr. F. Cooper said he considered it was unconstitutional to attempt to overthrow the verdict of a jury. (Cries of “Oh, oh,” “Sit down," and confusion.) He opposed the present proceedings altogether. The speaker attempted to proceed, but was eventually compelled to sit down. The resolution was then put, and carried, Mr. Cooper being the only dissentient. Tho Mayor said, iu accordance with tho wish of tho meeting, he would forward the resolutions to the Hon. the Minister for Justice without delay. - On the motion of Mr, HUTOHI3ON, seconded by Mr. Jews, a vote of thanks was passed to the Mayor for presiding. Mr. Hutchison intimated that the petition was ready for signature, aud a largo number at once signed their names. The following is a copy of the petition ; To the Hon, tho Minister for Justice. The petition of the undersigned, citizens of Wellington and others, humbly showeth,— That at the recent criminal sittings of the Supreme Court of New Zealand, held at Wellington, a person named William O'Connor was. charged with attempting to murder by means of poison.- lie wirs convicted of this crime on the evidence of tho person whoso life was thus theatened, without, so far as your petitioners have been able to learn, any distinctly corroborative evidence whatever. Your petitioners offer no comment on the evidence; but. taking all the information obtainable in the case into consideration, and bearing in mind the following facts, —the unsupported testimony of ono witness, the absence of motive in the convict, the utter lack of evidence to prove that lie had at any time bought or obtained poison,—they respectfully submit that the evidence was not sufficient to convict O’Connor of tho crime for which ho is now undergoing punishment. ' . Your petitioners sympathise with tire convict in these circumstances, and they view with some degree of alarm the conviction of an individual on evidence so meagre and unsupported. If such a verdict were permitted to pass without protest and inquiry, it would not only deprive this prisoner and others of tlie benefit of a “reasonable doubt” in their favor (a well-established maxim in British law), but it m'ght suggest the disagreeable possibility of any evilminded individual having it in his power to injure the character of another by an unsupported statement —a condition of things which few could contemplate with equanimity. Your petitioners therefore, in the inte-ests of justice, earnestly urge these facts upon your attention, and pray that you will cause further inquiry to bo made into O’Connor's case, which is probably without a parallel' in tho annals of tho New Zealand Courts ; and having caused the necessary inquiry to be made, if the facts are are found to be such as your petitioners represent them, that you will thereafter recommend to his Excellency the Governor to annul or commute O’Connor’s sentence, as the interests of law aud-justice may seem to you to require-