HAPPY HAYNES.

NZ Truth, Issue 127, 23 November 1907, Page 5

HAPPY HAYNES.

WHO COLLARED COLEMAN'S CASH ?

A Dannevirke Diversion.

MISS PACKER'S PECULIAR POSITION.

When Thomas Haynes took his skickered friend, George Coleman, home to sleep off the effects of his numerous potations, he may or may not have had an idea that he would be one of the principals m a Supreme Court case later on. That was a matter for the jury to decide, and the said round dozen of intelligent burgesses had a pretty rough proposition placed before them when they were asked to say if Haynes went through Coleman for what vulgar persons oall his gonce. There are some remarkable features about the story, the scene of which is laid m Dannevirke. George Coleman is an individual suffering from paralysis of the right side who gets a pension of 6s 2d a day from an unspecified source, and supplements his income by "laying 'em" to the fly flats about the rapid Scandinavian settlement. Haynes is a young fellow who used to be m the railway service m the South Island, but latterly has pursued other callings, although he had been out of work two weeks when this 'drama opened m Dannevirke. The third actor of importance is Florence Packer, .

A PREPOSSESSING AND VOLTJP-

TUOUS-LOOKING ( unmarried lady, who was managing the Coffee Palace, where Coleman was staying. The stirring incidents occurred on October 14, at 1.45 p.m. of which day Florrie saw Coleman depart m a state of sobriety, and return a couple of hours later m a condition of intellectual entanglement, which she suspected was not due to common swankey, t>ut to a drugt Haynes was with him and assisted him m his helplessness. The stranger asked her the number of Coleman's room and she told him No. 9, at the same time offering to help him upstairs with his inert charge. The assistance was declined, but she followed the two to Coleman's room and helped Haynes to undress Mm: Wlhen undoing the vest, the lady took a sovereign • case from one pocket and placed it m his watch pocket. It flew open when it Was m her hand, and she noticed three sovereigns and ahalf sovereign m the receptacle. Coleman also had two £1 notes m an inside coat pocket. She went downstairs and " Haynes followed shortly after. Returning to the room of Coleman, that obfuscated individual asked her to see if his cash was safe, and it was then discovered that the sovereign case and £5 10s m gold and notes had disappeared. Mr Wilford (for the defence) : You are engaged to Coleman, are you not ?— No. Well, you have been sweethearts for some time ?— No, we have not. He is a balancer, is. he not ? 'Judge Cooper ; "What is that ? Counsel explained Coleman's con-^ nection with the profession that claims Ikey .Mo as patron saint, and which was extensively imprisoned m Christchurch recently. You say you are not engaged to him ?— -I am not engaged to him. But you call him George ? (Laughter) . Arid you helped him to undress? (Witness speechless, with indignation). What did you go and help him to undress, for, , if you are not engaged to him ? You are a single girl. Did not the accused ask you to go out of the room while he took Goldman's trousers off, and you refused ?•— No, I did not.

Where did you sleep while George was m the house ?—

MY BEDROOM WAS DOWNSTAIRS.

The girl stated further that she was m the habit of making up George's accounts for him.

You are his banker, also, are you mot ?-JNo.

Well, shall we call it custodian of his purse ? You mind his money, don't you ?— Only when he has large amounts.

The girl stated further that she had since given up the Coffee Palace and had taken to the dressmaking bu-j siness, which paid better.

Coleman stated that he had £8 19s m his possession when he went out, and paid the sums of £2 17s and 15s away to different people, and collected 10s owing to him by another man. .He met Haynes m the Masonic Hotel bar, where he laid two doubles, and they had three drinks, two of them whisky, which affected Coleman so badly that he nearly fell When going out the door, and Haynes assisted him home. The cash had disappeared as stated, and he suspected Haynes, who was fumbling about his clothes "when Florrie Packer left the room.

Coleman acknowledged to Mr Wilford that he had been sent up for forgery fourteen years previously, but since coming out ol quod he had led a righteous, honest and irreproachable life. He denied telling, an hour previously, one Ryan,

TO WHOM HE OWED MONEY, that the cash would be all right because he had been appointed secretary of the Dannevirke Racing Club, nor had he advertised the fact that he had won £5000 m Tatt's sweep, although he did mention to a crowd when he received a telegram, "Oh, it's from Tattersall's." The money stolen was an instalment of his pension, and he mentioned the circumstance, although he refused m the lower Court to say where he had got the cash.

Did you say to the barman, Ments : "I had a bet with an old man through Haynes, and I want half a sovereign to give Haynes for the old man ?— I may have said that.

WOULD IT BE A LIE if you did say it ? — I will not say. Walter Ments, barman m the Masonic, 'Rave rather important evidence for the Crown, though it didn't help the case of Coleman very much. Prior ,to the alleged robbery, Coleman pulled out his sovereign case and demonstrated to Ments that it was empty. He also indicated his inside pocket with his hand and said, "I haven't got a bean," or something like that, and wanted to borrow 10s. Ments didn't have the coin himself, but he j procured it from a brother barman.

sThis testimony, if true, went ta show that. Coleman didn't have any, £5 10s for Haynes to steal.

Sergeant Cruikshanks' evidence showed that the girl who denied being Coleman's tart reported the alleged robbery immediately after Haynes left the Cbßee Palace, and the elderly officer arrested his man twenty minutes later. During the interval he had Haynes m view nearly the whole time. He was talking to a European and a Maori, but the witness couldn't swear that Haynes passed anything to either of. them. The suspected person entered the Masonic' Hotel, the bobby followed, and arrested him, but could only find 3s 6d on his victim when, he searched him. Haynes denied seeing the sovereign case or the money, but when a more thorough search was being made at the # station,* the empty sovereign case was found next the skin of the . left leg m Haynes' drawers and just above the sock. Haynes then : explainedthat Coleman had given him the sovereign case. ;

In his own defence Haynes started oft by saying that he had had fourteen drinks during the day. When he brought Coleman home he intended; to take his boots off and leave him lying on the bed, but Miss Packer suggested that his clothes' should be taken off, and lent a hand to remove his garments. When they at ..Coleman's pants, Haynes* modestly requested the woman to go outside while he took them off. She hesitated.

BUT FINALLY WENT OUT. In her- absence Coleman remarked to Haynes, "You take that sovereign case, I would not lose it for the world." Haynes usually wears horizontal pockets to his trousers (pair produced m Court), but on this day he was wearing for the, first tihie pants with side pockets. When he received the sovereign case he groped for the old pocket, ajid put the case' down the first opening, which was the top of the, trousers. He then forgot all about it. Haynes met Coleman by appointment at two o'clock to get 10s promised him, but Coleman said he didn't have the money, and borrowed it from Ments. Even then Haynes didn't get it, as Coleman immediately shouted with the coin, and H&ynes told him the half soy. would do some other time. After leaving ' Coleman, Haynes gave Watty Ments 5s to keep for him as he didn't want a Maori friend to see him with the cash.

Crown Prosecutor Myers got from this witness that he had been convicted of theft of 7s six years previously,, when ,he was sixteen, and was admitted to probation. When he was searched by the Sergeant, and the sovereign case was not found, he told the official he knew nothing about it, as he didn't want to be accused of taking the money which was alleged to have been stolen. He didn't leave the railway service because of the disappearance of a cash bag on the Riverton-Nightcaps section. Evetv person on the section, from the Inspector to the porters, had been called upon to give evidence, and Haynes didn't leave the service till three months after the inquiry. The appeal of Solicitor Wilford to the jury was characteristic. He recognised that the case hinged largely upon the evidence of Miss Packer, who swore that' Coleman had the px>ld and notes m his possession prior to the departure of Haynes, and counsel discredited that evidence m Van eloquent manner. Referring to the attractiveness of lady witnesses, he remarked, "From the time of Eve to the present day

THEY CAN TRICK. YOU : they can pull the leg of any jury,, and when I saw her go into the wits ness-box I knew I was m at 12st 10ft m a 'handicap. " This descent into the popular idiom for a simile seemed to shock the learned judge, who made a movement of protest, but uttered no sound. Counsel proi ceeded t6 say that the ladies were actresses, and made reference to the dramatic manner m which Florrie Packer had given her evidence.

The address of Prosecutor Myers Was analytical m dealing with the refractory ore of evidence, and he strongly deprecated the reflection cast upon the Woman by the defence —which was something more than a suggestion that they were engaged— m the q ues tion , " Whet c did you sleeo while Coleman was m the house V" Mr Myers stressed the fact that both Coleman and Miss Packer were disinterested witnesses, whilst. Haynes was fighting to escape conviction.

The matter was so much m doubt that the jury looked to his Honor for guidance, and his Honor summed un with distressing impartiality. Referring: to the woman m the case, he said counsel had attacked her character by innuendo only, and had adduced no evidence of anything improper. The girl was to*some extent upon her trial, and they were asked to reject her evidence, firstly. because she was a woman, secondly, because she was on terms of intimacy with Coleman and under his domination.

Mr Wilford said he did not desire her evidence to be rejected merely because she was a woman ; he believed that a good woman was better than a good man, and a bad woman was worse than a bad man. A woman, lift contended, was bettee able to conceal her thoughts.

His Honor commented upon the INEXPLICABLE CONDUCT OF COLEMAN, who declared to Ments that he had no money on him and then complained 08 the loss of coin. If it depended upon the evidence of Coleman alone, his Honor said it would be dangerous foe the jury to accept it, but it was corroborated by the testimony of Miss Packer, and the conduct of both witnesses was consistent with the assumption that a theft had been committed.

The jury retired at ten minutes to six, discussed the matter over refreshments, and returned a verdict off "Not Guilty" at 7,15.