A SINGULAR CHARGE.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3674, 28 November 1890, Page 2

A SINGULAR CHARGE.

Burial of Another Man's Wife.

Thomas Sloan was charged at Mnsterton, (before Colonel Boberts, B.M, to dajj', with a breach of the Births and Deaths Eegistratton Act, 1875, section 44, in that he did on January -IM, 1889, cause to be registered the 1 death of Mary Brassil under the nam b of Mary Ann Sloan. Mr W. G. Heard appeared for the prosecution, anJi Mr C. A. Pownall for the defence, \> ' Mr Beard explained the circumstances of the cas io, and asked that the' accused he comn lilted ior trial, Constable Stacey, of Huntervjllb, deposed that ho had been stationed atHimtervilleabout %\ years, Had previously been i itationed at Duntroon. Knew a man namWjno Brassil, living in Duntroon. /His wife's name was.' Mary. They iJemHying together at the time, Slogan was thou working im the district. /When he (Stacey) left Duntroon he Heft a daughter with Mrs Brassil. Had! next seen his daughter in this township in a house occupied by the defendant. On arriving in Masterton h)8 went to the houseW ' found defendant alono. The body of Mrs Brasail/was there, Had seen it Sloan at that time told him that 1% had taken Mrs Brassil away becaiiF» her husbajid ill-treated her. H (witness) did not takoany notice of the convorsatibn, Took hie danger away at once, ° To Mr Pownall :About two years I elapsed lie had last seonhis daughtor. I He recognised tLebody as that of Mrs Brassil, there was no mistake, Jessie k aiwejr, daughter of last vitnt* stated that ho r . Jther hai left hep Mrs Brass.il on his removal from, Dunrtoon resided with W husband, She> with tlinm auk eighteen, r M & AfterwardsiapcVpanJecH >* months, to Oamarn, Dungj}' Brassil and Master^;J)'- ■•', Wellington under tho. w''' ■ travelled ness was'' .i) of Mrs Sloan. Wither >" ' "> 'he habit of addressing *' ..t "mother" by instruction irom Mrs Brassil. Sloan bad never told hor that Mrs Brassil was to bi> called Mm Sloau.: She had heard him call her Mrs Sloan to other people, She was not in the room when Mrs Brassil died, but saw her when dead. Hud seen ;Mr Jago in accused's house, Did not hear accused montion toMrJagoo.r to any other person who Mrs Brassil was. To Mr Pownall: Could not swear that Mr Brassil was the dead woman's husband. It w.aß only bv repute 'slit know her as Mrs Brassil." Defendant was much put about by her death, and was quite offi'iis .bead for two or three days. Constable Stacey, rivalled.— By Mr Pownall: tyu havo said that Mary Brassil was |l:ho wife of Jno . Brassil, Can you siveai'f it ? Witness: No. I om'y know they wero living together as i ton and wife, Mr Beard hero 'laid before the Court a certificate of marriage. Mr Pownall objecting. I Constable Stacey eaidlhe had no means of knowing that th ! o certificate ■ was that of Mr and Mrs Brassil except that the names corresponded He did not know Mr ! B Brassil's maiden name. i

JauiwAitkea, Deputy of Births, Deaths, and MwrUges, producfid register book of deftlu for 1889 One of thei entries was Ifoj Jano bloun, <]ied t flth January, 1889, agod 22. Had also a memorandum eivinc information from which, particulars were obtained. Thomas S. Jago, undertaker, worn, stated-that he knee the accused. First saw him on the day .of the funeral of his wife the 17th January, 1800. After the funeral agnin saw, the. accused for getting" necessary information for registration. Asked questions,, but did not < Jink he. told. Sloan what '■' hfl required the information for, The .answers wore entered on the paper

iivodwscd us received by'lita tY'im Slim Witness had llion roistered the death in the ordinary course, the hook being signed by Mr Bagre. Subsequently sav accused and bad bald to liim there was something moving and tho police- were laying an information bcoausa ho had buried his" little woman" under an assumed name. Accused then asked- where the information enmo from, hut did known anything but what tho police Imd Bnid. About a' inor.th ago met accused again at Mr Bpackmnn's funeral, On that occasion Sloan came tin to him and said "Imvoyou heard any more about the case," witness replying that ho thought tho whole thing had dropped. To Mr Pownall: On the day of tho , funeral tho accused was excited becauso he considered the woman had been neglected, He (Jago) had 1 nsked the question's while Sloan was | in this state. Could not swear that lie told him it was for tho' purpose of .jjjfcstration, Was not a lawyer, Dimply asked for information to convoy to tho registrar and nothing rl eJsvßecollectcd signing form, Went to thtagistrar in tho natural courso of business as an undertaker, but did I not tell tho accused ho w|fc going to I. tho registrar, and for all accused ! know it might have- been out oi mete 9 curiosity tlmt he asked questions, | Jessie Staccy, recalled, stated that ', the deceased woman had no family \ while living with Sloan. Previously I whilo living with lirsssil alio had Y three boys, This was the case for tho prosecution. I [Left Sitting.]