R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume X, Issue 3190, 27 April 1889, Page 2

R.M. COURT.

JIASTERTON—FBIDAY, .Before H. S. Wardell, R.M. Police v Brodie, continued. On resuming, Mr Pownall further questioned the witness Goodwiu. During harvest witness was engaged "pitching." Joseph Lyons,, and several Maoris also worked on the stacks. Did not see the. stacks stuffed with manuka and other rubbish. Heard accused say Joseph Lyons had not built the stacta right to keep but the rain. Neither of the Lyons' offered witness money to get accused into trouble as he could remember. On one occasion whilst, drawing water with Joseph Lyons, the latter said "I would not like to be in your place; I would take money."- All Joseph Lyons said to me;during luncheon to-day was whether I' had a'good dinner. On being further pressed witness admitted that Lyons said " It will either be you or Brodie that will get into it, so you had better shove it on to Brodie," Witness replied "I know nothing about it." .

TotheSergt: When all the witnesses were ordered out of Court Joseph Lyons said to me that Brodio had his pocket full of matches on the day' of the fire. Had spoken to Mr Pownall and Brodio at Pownall's office last night. They 'took Him there. Might have been there two hours. Went to bed at 12 o'clock last night. Left Pownall's office' in company with Mr Brodielast night. Tliey went to the same liolel and slept in the same room. He paid his own expenses. Accused could not remember any conversation he had with Messrs Pownall and Brodie. The stacks were erected without foundations. The men employed at the stacks were in the habit of throwing their coata down at the foot of the stacks.. Never had anything' to do with building the stacks, The stacks looked small compared with those he Jiad seen in the Old Oountry. It had not rained in the morning so far as lie could remember. Did not complain to anyone that it was too wet to go out for wood. Don't know whether it did rain very hard on the let of this mouth. Could not say how long the stacks had been erected prior to the fire. To Me Pownall: On the morning of the fire some thistle M in the bush caught five and nearly destroyed the firewood, Could not say whether the log set the thistles on fire or the thistles set the log. "Was too far gone to recollect what 'was said last night. Stayed, at Phillips' hotel. Went there because he could not get into tho boarding-house where he lwd already paid for his board. 1 i Joseph Lyons, shepherd, gave evidence as to being employed by accused at the time of the fire, and up to the 15th Maroh. Had been in his employ since the 16th October, Was in Masterton at the' time of the fire. Last January, about t)ie latter end of the month, had a conversation with Brodie about the crops on their way i from Masterton to the farm. He ' asked witness what be thought they would yield. Told him No. 1,2, and S, paddocks on the map would go from 25 to 80 'bushels to the acre. Said the bush paddock, No. 4, would not go more thau half that amount, • At. this time the paddocks had [ not been harvested. Went through ( the bush paddock several times, i It looked very miserable then, [ as water lmd covered nearly ( the whole of it,, and tho rabbits had eaten it very badly. This was in i October, Had had twelve years , experience in agricultural land, Had grown crops for four years In Southland. Remembered having another conversation with accused in January concerning thebuilding of the stacks, This was at the same time . he spoke about the yields. It was on this occasion he mentioned that Mr Caselberg had a lien on it, Caselberg could get it insured, and he r (accused) would burn it. He also said "As you are going to stack it I'll get you to put in a lot of flax and rubbish, to make the stacks look large." Witness told him if that was ; what he was going to do he would ' not have anything to do with it. He said "That has nothing to do with you, I'll bum it myself." This conversation took place on the road home, and both ol us wo perfectly sober. He said he would get someone else to staok it. This he advised him to do. When he went home Goodwin asked whether witness was going to build 'the stacks, After that time, two or three days after, had jt further conversation with Brodie, who said he had changed his mind and was not going to burn the stacks. Ho gave no reason whyhehad changed Ms mind, Witness said in that case he would build the stacks. This he oommenced to do on or about the 4th Fobruary, Built one stack, after which a'coused said lie could see the crops were not going to turn put as well as he expected so he would have to burn the stacks. Brodie was sober at the' time. Witness said, "If you want to do anything like that you had better get somebody pise to built your jstacks," and • told.him lie would have nothing to do with, him and would not put up another sheaf for him. Had some conversation with Brodie at the dinner table that day in the presence of Mrs Brodie and Mr Albert Percy. Brodie said, " You had better go on building the stacks, Lyons." Witness said " on no account would I put up another sheaf for you, There.is a Maori here who may build your stacks as you want; I wont," The Miori Bubsequpntly built all the remaining stacks. W? B in Masterton on March Ist, the day the fire took place. Some time that afternoon Brodie came to liini in the street and told him that" seven of his stacks were burned. - Witness asked [ him how it happened and he replied, " Oh, you know." Witness asked him what' he meant, and Brodie replied, "go and see George' (Goodwin) _ and he'll tell you all about it." Brodie was sober at that time. Witness lived! in the same house with acoused, About a week after they were -passing the site on wliioh the burned stacks had stood, when, during a conversation accused said, "I set fire to onestack at the bottom and at the eaves of the thatch." Witness said " are you not frightened of-getting into trouble as George was with you ?". Accused said " He would not say anything aboutit, lie is too frightened of me." The seven stacks were small/ two of them were oats containing about five one horse loads each. There was no flax or scrub put in the middlq or underneath ,the .stacks. Was in company with Brodio. and : James Boss about 15th Maroh," near the latter's premises. Boss asked accused for certain monies. Acoused said to Boss "Go to Caselberg and endeavour to getjqiif money out of him. ; Toll him you know Jiow the fire ocotirfeii. Loft his employment': on good term? with as<us?d on loth Marcl),

Cross-examined: Did nbt intend. to say anything about the burning of tlie staples unless the police asked him, and lmd not dono so.: Had; received no money Miimsolf.nor, had any of his brothers, from anyofie, in' connection with the matter of bum J ing the stacks; About a fortnight or? three weeks iigo was told the. insurance agent wanted to ste him, and he went to, the office at Wellington. -The agoiit asked was he on the place at the time of the fire, and witness said he was not. He was then asked ii lie thought the fire was an accident, and lie replied he was certain it. was not. His brother Thomas had not received five pounds to liis knowledge from ! the insurance Would swear he had not received any money himself, nor any promise from the insurance; office,' to give evidence,; - Did not leave the employ; of- accused after the stacks were ' destroyed; because he could not get settled up with him. Brodie knew a great deal more about farming than he pretended to. . . A letter was produced from Mi's Biodie addressed to witness, asking him 'to forward tho money he so kindly promised.- - * " Witness said he gave' Mrs Brodie £BO previous to that letter,: and ion' t'ue 14th lie sent her another £8]); tir Wellington, with the consent of Mr J Brodie. .Mr Fitzherbert was the solicitor who advised him to see the Insurance agent in Wellington. Was not aware that it was the same solicitor who had been engaged in a divorce suit by' Mrs Brodie, but believed it to be so. Accused offered him LSO to bum down the stacks, but he could not say upon what date. It was some time.in February. It was' before the stacks were burnt. He said "I would not mind giving you £SO for burning the staoksdown.' Witness said ho would have nothing to do with it. Before that accused offered him money to burn his - Bhed down after the wool had been insured for £BOO. It was on their way home from Masterton that the conversation took place. The shed wasworth to rebuild, £B7, and a press was inside worth £4, The wool was worth no more than £l6O.

A Maori witness, commonly called " Clmrlie"_gttvo evidence through Mr J. J. Frcoth, native interpreter, in reference tabuilding the stacks. ' In reply to His Worship, ApolldJk Solomon said the whole of the were built dose together. _ Alfred Percy, farmer, of Te Ore Ore, knew £he farm recently occupied by accused. In Fobruary last he out the standing crop, and finished about the latter end of the same month. He tendered to out 150 acres, more or less. Mr Caselberg employed him to cut the crop. The crop was a passable one, Considered himself a judge of standing crop. To take the whole of the crop right'through, considered it would run 25 bushels to tlie acre. Knew the bush paddock, It contained a passable crop of about' forty acres. The crop was patchy, ' and would yield about fifteen bushels to the acre. There was a good bit' of undergrowth, Did not see the i grain after it wesßtacked. By Mr Pownall: Was paid by the acre for cutting. Received payment for 115 acres. ■ The bush paddock : had the most undergrowth. Was"'* present when Lyons put up the first Zf' stack. Charley; the Maori, and others, assisted to put up the'" others. Believed Lyons was knocked off building the stacks on account of not putting them lip properly. Heard accused and Lyons have words over the first stack. The sheaves in the bush paddock were short, but had good heads on them. To the Sergt.: Lyons built the first stack near, the house, and assisted to build the others, Lyons ' and the Maori were invariably at wore on the top of the stocks. Saw the first four or five built. " They varied in height, some reaohing fifteen feet. The general ran was about ten feet. Only saw Lyons on the top of the first stack. So far as witness know, Lyons did not finish tho other stacks. These were left to ' the: Maori. At times witness was cutting in tho same paddock while tho stacking was going on. Constable O'Connor spoke to him outside today, and witness told him (tho constable) that Lyons and Brodie had words, whereupon -the former • refused to go on" with tbo stacking.. Heard tliis conversation at accused's J, dinner table. The reason Lyons gave for refusing was on account of - 5 Brodie not approving of his staoking. Did not think Lyons' stack would'" 7keep the rain out, owing to the heart of it not being full enough.* If tho stack had been thatched it would have kept the rain out. By Mr Pownall: If heavy rain had come on, it would injure tho stack built by Lyons, Agustus William Cave, farmer, , residing at Ta Ore Ore knew the property farmed by accused last summer, Know tho bush paddock '• marked No lon the plan. There is a surveyed road line which runs through.the centre of the bush paddock from the main road. It also loads on to another portion of his (witness 1 ) property. Was through the property twice or three times a month during the time the land was • firat ploughed until the grain was cut. The crop was patchy and would average twelve bushels of wheat and fifteen bushels of bats to the acre. Was never in the paddock • aftor tho grain was gathered. The land was ploughed yery well, consider- .jjr ing it was the first timo it had beenj^J ,/ broken up. •' I To Mr Pownall: Should think there were about 35 acres in crop in • that particular paddock. To the Sergeant: Have always been on good terms ijith accused. ; - Do not consider liirn an experienced farmer. . " - ™

James Boss, blacksmith, residing at Masterfcon, remembered the burning, of etaoks belonging- to accused, Remembered accused coming to him about four o'clock in the afternoon. Accused said his stacks were burnt 3own and ho was just off to sea Caselberg. After this witness spoke - of his indebtedness,' when accused said "Although the stacks were burnt down you'll get your money.'' The day after the Carterton stock sale, about six weeks ago, witness spoke to him again re his account. Witness told accused he knew he had money on him, and he must' settle up. This he said lie could not do as the.money belonged to the IT, , Bank, He, insisted on when accused sain," go to Caselberg V■' and tell him you know I set lire to the stacks and lis will pay you," ToMrPownall; Did not go to Mr Caselberg. Told him Caselberg had nothing to do -with, me.. He was the one who owed the money, and ho ■ looked to him for. payment. . said hb would loose nothing by the ■ - fire. Wns up at Brodie's on the morning prior to the fire. Whilst • near tho hush Brodie's pocket caught fire ; He had been sptting fire to A' totara stuns. . . , , To the Sergeant; It wjis fcetweeijK'f^

10 and 11 a.m. when ho was up at accused's. Did not soe any Scotch thistles set on fire, but there was a ■ big burning near the bush. The fire was about a quarter of a mile from , the stacks. William Sellar, commission agent ' and also agent for the N.Z. tfiro liisurauco Company at Masterton was called. Know the property farmed by accusod last summor.: A policy of iusuranco was tulcen out after the grain was stacked. A policy of £4GO was taken out by M. Caselberg and Co. on the grain. The accused had nothing to do with tho application. Tlio polioy was taken out by M. Caselberg & Co. oil account of his having a lien on the property, Proof of loss was put in signed by 11. Caselberg k Co. A statement purporting to bo an affidavit was put in"by Sergeant Price which was hoc attested nor stamped. It was merely signed by accused, and witnessed bj a Justice of the Pease. His Worship said the document would be taken for what itwas worth. It was the usual statement accompanying the proof of loss. These papers were given witness by M. Caselberg. The whole value of the stacks was put down at L 656, and the damage by fire was set down rat LBBI odd. The various statements were objected to by Mr Pownall as not being evidence against the ac- : cused. ( Witness, in roply to Mr Pownall, | said tho statement produced was < purely a statement in reference to the , grain. The statement further showed j that the property belonged to Mr , Caselberg and to no ono elso. , To the Bench: As an insurance \ agent'he took steps to see the stacks, j Mr Chennells and Mr Jacob Bamber , saw the growing crops and were J satisfied as to their value. The , proposal was accopted on condition , that accused erected fifteen stacks of | grain. An estimate of the growing ] crops was taken.

To Mr Pownall: He remarked ou the seven small staoks being together in one paddock, l'liere were to be 8000 acres of wheat, and 1100 bushels of oats iu the lot. Accused 'said they would make fifteen stacks. When accused came into the office with Mr Caselberg he said he had been informed there wero 130 acres, And had paid for cutting that quanand on the strength ol that he made the declaration of loss. Did not know Mr Joseph Lyons or Mr Thouias Adrian Lyens in the matter. Was not aware that tho latter had received payment of any money from the New Zealand Office. This concluded tho case for tho prosecution. His Worship said in the interest of accused ho was willing to adjourn tlie case until the following morning, when he would hear Mr Pownall for the defence, but he would require full bail for the re-appearance of accused at 0.30 the next morning. He wished to release the many witnesses from further attendance. £ great deal of evidence had been given in a most unsatisfactory manner, and he notified the witnesses Lyons, Goodwin, Porcy and Apollo that they would be required to be in attendanee at the

same time. The remainder of the -witnesses need not attend, i" Mr Pownall thanked his Worship |p accepted the adjournment, and was released on bail, himself in £SO, and two sureties (Messrs Cave and Pownall) of 1100 each. The case was resumed this morning (Saturday). Mr Pownall, in addressing the Court for the defence, drew attention to the want of evidence as to the fire itself, and said' had it not been for the presence of the cow at the stack, the fire would never have occurred. From that it would have boen inferred that Brodie must have matured the idea of firing tho stacks suddenly, which was an absurd idea. He referred to the evidence of Lyons, Goodwin, and tho Maori as contradictory, and said it was not likely that Brodie would flourish the fact of his having set fire to the staons, Lyons was au unreliable witness. He had inrerested himself iu Mrs Brodie'a action for divorce against her husband, he had been prosecuted by the acoused in that Court, and was trying to finish his scoundrelism

by trying to collect evidence to imprison Brodie. The prosecution Lad spade a great deal of the Blacks being Skill, and lie. thought thoy were lAjng to show they were stuffed with JBjbbish The evidence of their own Tvitness, Percy, a practical farmer, went to show that what was in the stacks was good solid grain. He said the straw was short and the heads full. Mr Ghemiells, the insurance agent, h ad inspected the growing crops with a practical man, and put an estimate on the quantity. Mr Sellar had also seen the stacks and was perfeotly satisfied of their value. It was not shown that the insurance was made on any misrepresentation as to the acreage by Brodie, and no evidence of it was furnishod, The information set forth that the stacks were the goods and chattels of the accused, but no evidence was brought to support it. On the contrary, it was proved Mr Caselberg was the owner, and as a matter of fact the crop did belong to Mr Caselberg. They thus had Brodie perilling his liborty for another person, which was a very unlikely thing. The only evidence that'he did bum the stacks tthat of Lyons. Lyons said 0 offered him £SO to fire the 1 before, Why Bhould he do so? He had no interest in their destruction. If he wanted to burn the stacks it would have been very easy for him to have done so at nighttime. Was it a likely thing that he t uld have taken a witness with him d in broad daylight have fired them ? The evidence of Lyons was not reliable. Was it likely a man would ■ volunteer a statement that would put him in the power of another? After Brodie's property was sold ho stayed in the place somo two or three weeks, and made no secret of his going to Wellington. In fact, he told Sorgeant Price himself, and also loft his address with him (Mr Pownall), as he received some intimation of a probable prosecution. Such conduct was not ovidence of guilt. The evidence for the prosecution, instead of being convincing, was on the part of the principal witnesses, aoji untrustworthy. Therefore, ho asityhathis Worship would dismiss the case. ■ His Worship said he thought ono of the strong points the prosecution was going to produce in support of their case was evidence of the exaggeration of the contents of the stacks. This thoy altogether failed to establish. In looking through the evidence he.found that r with regard to the area, it was much less than the estimate, and there must have been circumstances that rendered a correct esUnjate difficult, and the fact that #usp.d over-estimated it did not show lw|9nw of fraud,- The Insurance agent

estimated tho area at 130 acres. A great ileal of carelessness was exhibited in taking firo risks, The' posi-

tion and size of the staoks were givou in the returns, wliioh were absolutely incorrect, The answers to the questions in tho schedule put in by the prosecution were all wrong, and showed carelessnoss. Tne evidence of Goodwin was consistent with the entire innocence of accused. It was quite consistent with the fire having passed from the pipe of the accused to tho straw, It showed gross carelessness to approach the stacks with a lighted pipe in a breeze of wind, but that was not the offence charged. The theory of the prosecution was that he threw a match wilfully to ignite the stack, Jt

earned improbable that a man who lad every night and day the opporunity should go with ft witness to ho stack, ask him for a match, and hen in a moment, when his back was irns:!, lire thorn, Such a theory eemed preposterously absurd, unless iy barofacedness ho thought ho ivould lot bo found out, So far as the lurning of the stacks and the evidince of Goodwin went, there was lothing criminatory. Then' there fas the evidence of Lyons, It was of i very remarkable ohuracter—direct, ipsitive, but in minor details contraiicted by other witnesses for the irosecutioii. It revealed personal soling against the acousod. The vidence of Goodwin was that Lyons old him to shove it on to Brodie. .'hat must lead to woaken Lyons' videnee. Lyons again was so ndignant with the idea of being sked to burn the.stacks that he aid nothing would induce him to put iP another sheaf, hut as a matter of :ict lie did assist to build the stacks ■towards. The only confirmation f any part of the evidence of Lyons ras that given by Percy. At the dinner table Lyons did refuse 0 do any more stacking, but 'ercy said it nas in consequence 1 being found fault with—a very iifferent reason than that assigned iy Lyons. With regard to tho other mportant conversations, there was iota word of corroboration, Accused, iter the fire, according to the eviouce, said to Lyons, voluntarily, and without any remark leading up'to it, 1 1 set fire to one stack at the bottom, nd one at tho eves," a voluntary tatement of crime, placing himself ii the hands of Lyons. Personally, lis Worship estimated the evidence if Lyons very -lightly, His antecednts, as far as that Court was con* erned, were not creditable. Tho est of the witnesses were unimpor* ant, Ross' evidence would not help lie prosecution. The fact that ccused told him to go ai-.d tell Mr 'aselberg that he knew ho, (Brodie), ' lad set fire to tho stacks was absurd, mt could not ho construed into an dinission of guilt. In full viow of he facts and contradictions as 'etween witnesses of tho prosecution, s be evidence was of such a remarkbio character that it determined him o send the case for trial. During lis long career on the Bench he had leard very few cases where the evidence had struck him as so remarkable.

The accused was thea formally committed (or trial, and reserved his defence. Bail was allowed in two sureties of £SO each, and himself in £SO.

A boy of 14 named Madderami, while nut Bhooting at Mamldm, near Molong, N.S.W, was blowing doon'the empty Israeli of a double barrelled guu, when bis trousers caught tbe trigger of t-lio loaded barrell. 'J'lio charge entered the boy's mouth and camo out at the back of his head, causing instant death,