THE CHARGES AGAINST BUTLER.

Oamaru Mail, Volume IV, Issue 1233, 31 March 1880, Page 2

THE CHARGES AGAINST BUTLER.

(From to-day's Daily Times.) MURDER. The hearing of the remanded charges against Robert Butler, alias Donnelly, 'alias Meadway, alias Lee, was continued at the gaol yesterday, before I. N". Watt, Esq., R.M. Henry Youngman, re-called, said : I found the trousers produced on the Town Belt on Thursday afternoon last, about twelve or thirteen yards from the place where I found the coat. They were folded ;up, and were under a bush. They were ■very damp, and were wetter inside the roll than outside. I brought them to the police station. Prisoner : What do you mean by saying just now that you did not take the trousers up I—Witness : I did not pick them up. I pointed them out to a man named Carey.

Did you examine them at the time ?—I did directly I got to the police station. Will you just look at the trousers'and say if you think they are in the same state now as they were when you found them? —No ; they are much drier now. Ido not mean that. Were there any marks I—l saw this mark here (pointing to a mark on the trousers). I did not examine any thing. This is the mark at the top of the knee. You picked them up on last Thursday ? Well, I suppose they must have remained there at least ten days ?—I could not say howlong. : • That is a matter of fact. Will you not account !,or the inner part being more wet than the outer ? I mean to say, would it not fairly account for the inner part being more wet than the outer- to say that they had got wet lying- where they were, and that the outer part had- dried v while the inner part had not ? Suppose they were folded up ; and placed under the bushes, they would get damp with the dew, and when the weather got fine the outer part would dry, and the inner would remain wet ?- I understand the question. I do not see how they could get wet in the I inner part under the bush. Now you see these trousers—the way they are. You see they are not over clean. -They are. stained all over with dirt and so forth. You see that. Now, just remember that fact, and from your examination of them do you think that they had been recently washed or cleansed ?—Yes ; I think the upper portion of them has been washed.

Why do you think so ?—From the appearance of them when I found them ; by the wetness of them. Have you any other reason ?—No, I have no other reason except that they were wetter on the upper portion. You have no other reason than that they were wet on the upper portion ?—No. And that the upper portion was on the inner side ?—No. You believe they might have been washed because the upper portion was wet; and you assume that that wetness can be accounted for by that portion being in the inside and not having dried 1 Inspector Mallard: The »trousers were never touched from the time they were found until they were brought to the police office?— Witness : No. You never lost sight of them?— No. They were just in the same state when you handed them over to me as when they were picked up ?—Yes. His Worship : You never touched the' trousers ? Witness : No, sir ; not at all. Inspector Mallard : There is a reason Mr. Ycungman had for not touching the clothes. I do not know whether I had better state it. His Worship : If you have a reason. Inspector Mallard (to witness): The fact of the matter is you got your hand cut?— Witness : Yes. Detective Bain, recalled, deposed : The trousers produced belonged to the prisoner, who wore them on the Saturday night previous to the murder. Edward William Alexander deposed : I am a dulyregisteredmedicalpractitioner. I examined the trousers produced on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. They were stained all over generally with clay. They were damp when I first saw them, but by my orders they were dried. On the left side near .the. groin there was a round blood spot consisting of a crust of blood. On the right side opposite these five spots of blood of different sizes, but all small. I examined the spots microscopically, and they showed the usual appearance of blood. There was a small stain on the lining of the trousers inside the near waist which proved to be blood on examination. I also examined the Paget coat and found a blood spot close to the fold of the collar on the left side in front. This spot also showed the features of blood.

Inspector Mallard: From the-fabric the coat is made of would the spots be easily i discernible? His Worship decided that the question was a leading one. Inspector Mallard.; Were the spots easily discernible or otherwise ? This question was also pronounced leading. Inspector Mallard : Very well, I will , not say anything further about the fabric. Witness continued : I examined the shirt and collar produced, and found a few very fine specks of blood on them. , On the shirt a little below the collar in front there were three or four very . minute specks, and there were some four spots in a line near the armpit. There was also one on the left sleeve below the armpit. The blood had entered into the tissue of .the shirt, from which I infer it was very fluid. Prisoner ; What, sir 1 Witness : Fluid—liquid—when it came in contact with the shirt. Did you see the house where the murder was committed ?—Yes. Now, you speak of a small crust of blood on the left side of the trousers about the loin ?—Yes ; a small spot consisting of a crust. Quite so. Now it strikes me> from looking at this plan (of the house where the murder was committed) —I suppose you did not see the deceased, Mi 1 . Dewar, or his wife before .they were removed from.the bed?—No; I have not seen them at all. Then I scarcely see how you can i answer the question I was about to put. ' —I saw the room. Prisoner (to the.OPurt) : I suppose Dr. Brown will be examined again, your ' Worship? His Worship : Yes. Inspector Mallard : Yes. Dr. Brown is unfortunately out of town. His Worship : I may tell you now that ; —as I informed you. before—it is my in--1 tention to commit you for trial upon the ; evidence already produced, but I do not intend to commit you to-day. You will be furnished with the depositions as soon : as they get cqpied out, Prisoner : Then I will leave the question for Drs. Niven or Brown, who saw] the bodies, to answer. His Worship : Whether the prosecution calls them or not,- you can call them. The prisoner : At this stage of the proceedings ? • ■ • - His Worship : You must give them notice. If they are present they can be called. .. - Prisoner (to witness) : Then you speak of a small stain on the. lining at the back of the typusors 1 His Worship : You did not say a small stain. It was not described as being either small or large. It was a stain. Witness : It was a small stain. Prisoner: Well, supposing that the blood on the front of the clothing should be accounted for by referring to the imurder, how on the same theory can you account for the blood being found at the back and in the lining ?—Witness ; I do not give any opinion about that blood at •the back. I ask you this, sir. Do not you think it ■ very, improbable that if the blood on the front of the clothes is..to be connected with the murder, the blood on the inside of the trousers could not arise from the game cause ?—lt could not arise from the spurting of the blood, which I assume was the cause of the spots being found elsewhere. Can you give any opinion as to the character of that spot of blood—-whether it was a stain put on, or a stain, as you say, injected on ?—X have the stain here. (Witness here produced a piece of cloth on which there was a; drop of blood, and it was shown to the prisoner.) . Did you examine that chemically I—l examined it microscopically. ; Not chemically I—No. Can you give any opinion about that

spot of blood—whether it was injected on or not I—l could not say. Will you please show me the Bpot upon the collar of the coat?—lt ha 3 been removed ; but I will show you the position. (Prisoner here was shown the coat.) If that spot of blood had found its way on the coat at the time of the murder, and by the act of the murderer, does it not follow that the coat must have been thrown open ? You see it is on the inside. Does it not follow that the coat must have been open at the time ?—Probably it would be. And you found no other spots on the inside of the coat?— No. I found no other spots on the coat at all. Prisoner : Now, sir, if the coat had been buttoned up, do not you think that it would have been not ouly improbable but almost impossible that spots of blood could havo found their way on the same time upon the armpits of the shirt ? His Worship : Is not that a question for the jury by-and-bye? It is a question of fact for the jury.' I do not wish to restrict you, but I may suggest it to you. Prisoner : I must remind your Worship that Dr. Brown answered a similar question. His Worship : I know. Very many of the questions are questions for the jury. Put them if you please. I am not going to restrict or restrain you —I am merely suggesting to you. Go on if you like. Prisoner : Then I will leave the question. (To witness)— You infer the fluid state of at least one drop of blood. Well, is it not a fact that Do you not think that if the blood had been put upon the shirt at the time of the murder it would not have been in a very fluid state—it would have been warm? His Worship : Put that question again, if you please. Prisoner: He infers the fluid state of certain stains of blood. I ask you if the blood would have been likely to be iri a fluid state. Would it not have, be.en coagulated ? Witness : No ; it would have been quite fluid. It coagulates afterwards. Supposing my hands and neck were very much scratched, do you not think these scratches of blood can be fairly accounted for from that fact'?—No ; quite impossible. You think it is impossible to account for the presence of these spots of blood by ordinary everyday oircumstances ?—These spots of blood have been impelled on the coat. They have struck it with some little force. I do not give an opinion ns to what the cause was. That is the impression given to my mind. It is not blood applied, but blood ejected. Does your opinion amount to an absolute certainty ?—I am prepared to swear that on my professional opinion. I ask if you are prepared to swear that these spots of blood were impelled ? Yes. You cannot be mistaken?— No. Inspector Mallard : Assuming the blows were given with that axe (produced), would that in any way account His Worship : You have not got any blows in Dr. Alexander's evidence. They are the foundation for questions of the kind. Inspector Mallard : Dr. Brown has stated beyond doubt that certain wounds were found upon the head of the deceased. If the wounds were inflicted by the axe produced, would that, in your opinion, account for the propulsion of blood as you have described ? Witness : That would account for the fine spots I have seen. Very probably they were thrown from the weapon on to the shirt. His Worship : That is new matter.; the accused will be entitled to cross-examine again. Inspector Mallard : I am going to stop there. lam not going to carry it on any further. Prisoner : You say it would account for the very high spots—the spots high up. Would it equally well acoount for the other spots ? Witness : It is a matter of opinion. I think the larger spots would be occasioned by the blood from the heads of the deceased.

His Worship : You mean directly ? Witness : Directly. The largest spot ? i Yes. Prisoner : Does this opinion refer to the spot upon the waistband of the ' trousers and upon the spots of the arm- • pit of the shirt, and other spots upon the shirt showu 1 His Worship : I cannot understand the question. Prisoner : I ask him if this opinion he ! gives refers to the spots upon the arm and armpits upon the shirt and other i spots upon the shirt. His Worship : If the opinion refers to the spots. Prisoner : He has just given the opinion that the larger spots might have been —— His Worship : Would have proceeded directly from the heads of the deceased. Prisoner: Well, I ask him if that opinion applies to the spots on the inner ■ clothing. Witness : The fainter spots were occasioned, I think, principally by the weapon which was used—were thrown from the weapon which was used. Prisoner : If you say that in all probability the coat was buttoned, do. not you think the inner clothing would havobeeii protected ? Witness ; I did not say that, Prisoner : I understood you to Bay so, His Worship ; He said just the reverse. Inspector • Mallard : If your Worship pleases, I do not propose going any further to-day with the murder case. His Worship : For what date would you ask an adjournment? Inspector Mallard : If your Worship would say Saturday, I think it woujd suit. His Worship ; Very well, Inspector Mallard ; There cannot be any hardship to the prisoner, His Worship (to prisoner) : You shall be furnished with the depositions as far as they go, and you are remanded until Saturday on the charge. BURGLARY. In the case against the prisoner fof burglary at the house of John Stamper, the evidence given went to show that, on, the morning of the 12th instant, thp inmates of Mr. Stamper's house were aroused by an alarm of fire, Yery little of the contents of the building were destroyed, and the lives of the inmates imperilled, Amongst the artioles found upon the prisoner when arrested were binocular glasses, afterwards identified by Mr. Stamper, Mrs. Stamper, and Mr. J. R. P. Stamper as the property of the firsts named witness. The prisoner examined the two male witnesses, particularly with reference to the articles that were saved from burning building, but nothing came pf the questioning gave the fact that the glasses were not saved from the fire, On being asked if he had anything to say, prisoner said, " No, sir." He was then committed for trial at the next session of the Supreme Court. | BOBBERY FROM A CHURCH. Prisoner was charged with stealing from St. Joseph's Church some Friday, the 12th inst, Alfred Harold Norman, conductor of the church choir, identified the musiQ produced as belonging to the choir, and said he missed it on Sunday, the 14th ipst., and Sarah Gillespie, housemaid at the Scotia Hotel, gave evidence to the prisoner stating that the music was his property. The prisoner offered no defence, and asked that the case might be dealt with summarily. The Magistrate took time to consider his decision, and the prisoner wtw remamjed,

AmaCFTING TO SHOOT. The charge against the prisoner for levelling loaded arms at Constable Townsend, was then proceeded with. Constable Townsend repeated the evidence given by him in the murder case in reference to the prisoner pointing a loaded ptstol at him. Prisoner : Yoa left the road to come to me I—Witness : Yes. How far from the road was I lying 1 — About six yards. You stood and spoke to me as you J say I—Yes. j How far were you from nie when you stood and spoke to mel —About three yards. About nine feet then ?—I would not be sure. It would be about that. Of course I did not measure it, and I could not say. Do you remember that you asked me what was my name i First you said, " What is your name." —No, I asked you at the police station. Did you not ask me what my name was, and I 3aid " Lover I " —No. Now think —No, I asked you at the police station. It is not a matter of much consequence. Yoa asked me several questions, and I replied. His Worship: The police station where? —Witness : Waikouaiti. Prisoner: Did I seem alarmed or auspicious when you were speaking to me I—Witness : Yes; you did. You asked me what I wa3 going to charge you with. When you spoke to me—l mean before you arrested me? —Yes ; you looked very suspicious and alarmed when I arrested you. While I was lying there I—Yes. Now, do you mean to say that before you and Constable Colbourne interfered with me I pointed a revolver at you I—Vt 1 e never laid hands on you until you presented the revolver at us. When I was about three paces off you jumped up. Then, you assert that I presented a revolver at you before you advanced upon me?—Ye3. There can be no mistake about the revolver being pointed at you ?—None. Did I have my finger on the trigger ? I could not say. Now, I said I had fully made up my mind to shoot the first man that interfered with me ; but did I not also say when it came to the point I had not the heart to do it—l could not do it ?—Yes, I asked why you did not shoot me, and you said something kept you from doing it. The only fault I have to find with your evidence, Constable Townsend, is that yoa forgot that part. —I have stated it now. Constable Colbourne also repeated the evidence given by him formerly. On being asked whether he had any statement to make, the prisoners said : " Yes, your Worship. The charge preferred against me, your Worship, is that I levelled a revolver at Constable Townsend with the intention of shooting him. That I levelled the revolver has been shown to be true; but that I thereby intended to shoot and destroy him has not been shown. Constable Townsend clearly proves that such was not my intention, for while he affects to believe that I did wish to shoot him he say 3 in effect that I did not. Several points have been proved, and they are these : First, that I seemed alarmed and suspicious on encountering him and Colbourne, and, therefore, a3 forwarned is forearmed, I would have been ready to have attacked them before they reached me. Townsend says that he left the road and came through a distance of at least eighteen feet. It doe 3 not appear that he came upon me unawares, for he stood some time talking to me. When he first advanced upon me with the intention of seizing me he admits that he wa3 nine feet from me. Now all this shows that I had both time and opportunity to have shot, not only him, but the other constable also, if I had wished to do ic. When he 13 nine feet away from me the revolver is already levelled at him, and I had merely to bend my finger to have sent him into eternity. The fact remains that I did not fire, and the evidence shows that I had any amount of opportunity of firing. If I did not fire it cannot be said in any case that I would have fired, and almost immediately afterwards I disclaimed all intention of firing, and said that although I had been indulging in vague notions of firingat anybody that interfered with me, something—that i 3, some feeling—(this remark was also made at the time in the heat of the moment) —prevented me. I think, your Worship, that these facts alone clearly show that I had no intention of firing on the constable. Well, I submit to your Worship that the indictment has not been made out."

Hi 3 Worship : Have >oa any remarks on the evidence? It would be out of place now, seeing that I am not to judge the matter. I have merely to point out to you that yon seem to be under a misapprehension of the law. Supposing that you merely levelled the pistol at a constable with no intention of shooting him, it was an a33ault. Whether you had the intention for one moment or not, you were guilty of a grievous offence. Whether you had or had not is a matter of fact to be decided by a jury, not by me. Do you wish to make any further defence, calling witnesses? Have you any witnesses to call 1 . Prisoner: Well, no, your Worship. I will call no witnesses. There wa3 a third party present at the time. Ui3 Worship : It i 3 hardly possible that you should have any witnesses. Prisoner : I will reserve my defence. His Worship : You stand committed to take your trial at the Supreme Court. With respect to the other case which you wished to be dealt summarily with, had it been a single case I should certainly have done so. It appears to me that it i 3 most convenient to commit you for trial, as the session is so near at hand, and you cannot thereby be prejudiced to any extent. Under all the circumstances, it is advisable to commit you on that charge likewise.

Prisoner : I wish to speak to your Worship on a point in connection with these g;i3es in general. Seeing that there is but a short time left hetwepn now and the opening of the sessions, my time for preparation, especially in this first and moat serious case, will be small. For that reason,, but more especially for another reason, I should wish, if possible, to have the case postponed at all events for a month. His Worship : This is an application you would have to make to a Judge. It }a one I cannot deal with. The only way j could comply with your request would be tq go against the express intention of the law by remanding you continually until the sitting of the Supremo Court is over. That would be a course I should not be prepared to take the responsibility of. It would be D3ing a technical power that I have for a purpose which .was never intended to be exercised. The proper way is to apply to the Judge for an adjournment for a week or month, or until next action. A3 you may see, ho i 3 the person to judge, me. I should only be going almost in defiance of the law in taking the course you suggest. I have no doubt Jou will have every opportunity of getting dealt with fairly. _ . . Prisoner: You see, your orship, it is soon after the tragedy that the minds of the public will be in a sort of ferment. His Worship : It is exactly a question I have nothing at nil to do with. Tt on Kiust go to the Judge with that clearly. That may be a very proper application to make to the Judge, but I have nothing to do with it. Is that all 1 Prisoner : That is all, sir. It was subsequently agreed to take the case again on Thursday instead of on Saturday.