Deva Kala, on Trial for His Life* Tells Story of Barrett’s Death

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 114, 4 August 1927, Page 13

Deva Kala, on Trial for His Life* Tells Story of Barrett’s Death

HINDU COOK TO FACE ANOTHER JURY

Press Association.

PALMERSTON NORTH, To-day. AFTER a trial lasting all day yesterday, the jury which heard the case against Deva Kala—the Indian chef who was charged with the murder of William John Barrett, a barman of the Commercial Hotel at Pahiatua, on June 14 — /ailed to agree, and Mr. Justice Reed ordered a new trial for to-morrow.

A CROWDED court listened to the evidence against Kala, who appeared in the dock well-dressed, and perfectly calm. He pleaded not guilty. Mr. F. D. McLiver, of Auckland, appeared for the Indian. “I KILL HIM” Thomas Davidson, ltitchenman at the Commercial Hotel, said that at about 1 p.m. on June 4 he was in tinscullery washing plates. Barrett, passing through on his way to the kitchen, exchanged greetings with him. Ten minutes later witness heard a groan come from the direction in which Barrett had gone. He went into the kitchen and passed Kala coming out. Kala made no remark. On entering the kitchen witness saw Barrett lying on the floor in a pool of blood. Other evidence for the prosecution was given by otljor servants in the hotel bearing out this statement. Kala told Davidson, according to that witness, *‘l kill him.” William Saunders Routlege, dayporter at the hotel, said that he found the meat-chopper with which the crime was allegedly committed, in the kitchen sink. KALA TELLS HIS STORY From the witness box the accused Indian said his wife and two children were in India, and he first came to New Zealand in June, 1918. After mentioning various places where he had worked he said he intended to leave the employ of Mr. H. P. Pe.rry, licensee of the Commercial Hotel, as he did not like small hotels. “I was always friendly with everyone, including Barrett, and we always said good morning to each other,” continued accused. “I got Barrett his meals, always asking him what he wanted to eat. Barrett had never insulted me before, nor I him. “On the day of the tragedy Barrett came in for breakfast as usual, and for his morning tea. There was no conversation. During the lunch hour I served meals for the dining room and Barrett came into the kitchen for his lunch at about 1.15 o’clock. I

accompany the application on its mission. The Department of Internal Affairs notified that in regard to the ordinary supply of water by meter it has been decided to bring down general legislation this session. No special legislation is required in regard to the £IB,OOO North Ward Supplementary Loan. In connection with the consolidation of the four water reticulation rating areas, the Minister cannot see his way to insert a clause in the Local Legislation Bill. He suggests, however, that the council submit a separate clause dealing with the unexpended balance of the Waterview reticulation loan of £3,000. TRAFFIC BREACHES HAMILTON COURT FINES Trevor Hugh Shoard, as the outcome of an accident which occurred on the Hautapu Road, was fined £5, with 10s costs for dangerous driving, and ordered to pay 10s costs on a charge of negligent driving, when his case was heard before Mr. Wyvern Wilson, S.M., at Hamilton yesterday. Similarly, James Gilbert, land agent, was fined £3 for dangerous driving as* the sequence to a collision, and a further 20s for failing to give way to a vehicle passing along Victoria Street. O. T. McGirvin was fined £3 and 13s costs on a * charge of dangerous driving. Defendant was blinded by the lights of tin approaching car, but continued on and struck a pedestrian.

was cutting up bread for stuffing, working at a table behind him. “Barrett had soup, and I asked, ‘What are you going to have for lunch, Bill?’ After serving Barrett I resumed cutting bread. Barrett then said to me, ‘Are you leaving on Monday?’ I replied, ‘Yes.’ ” Accused said that Barrett said he (accused) was going to get 10 years’ gaol and used an'offensive expression. “Barrett spoke slowly and angrily,” continued accused. “I lost my temper at that and said ‘shut up,’ at the same time swing-, ing the chopper behind me.” Mr. McLiver: Why did you do it? “I LOST MY TEMPER” Accused: I was angry. I didn’t know I was going to hit Barrett with the chopper. I had lost my temper and didn’t know that I was going to hit anything. Barrett was close to me, and it was not until I looked back that I realised I had struck Bill. 1 was then frightened, and could not move for a couple of minutes. I did not mean to hurt or kill him. Having put the chopper in the sink I then ’went to my room, changed my coat and went down to the office. M.r. McLiver: Why did you ask the doctor to come outside and you would tell him all? Accused: There were women in the kitchen, and I couldn’t repeat Bill’s language in front of them. The Crown Prosecutor: Did you look when you swung the chopper? Accused: No; 1 just called out “shut up.” My back was to Barrett. When I saw what I had done I was paralysed for a time. Sydney Andrews, hotel proprietor, Dannevirke, described Kala as an excellent cook, even tempered, and with no inclination to violence. Thomas Kirkwood, hotelkeeper, of Stratford, described JCala as “a thorough gentleman, quiet and unassumThe jury returned at 10 p.m. and announced that it was unable to agree. A new trial was then ordered for Friday.