MASTERTON MORALITY.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XV, Issue 4566, 25 August 1893, Page 2

MASTERTON MORALITY.

Mm Leßrand Beforethe Court, Janet Feliz alias Madaree Le Brand waß charged in the Masterton R.flJ, Court this morning, before Mr ' i:: Hutchison, 8.M., under the Masterton Borough By-law with (1) keeping a disorderly house (2) keeping a house ofill-fame. Mr W. d. Beard appeared for the ." > prosecution. Mr "Pownall explained that he : >'r appeared for tbe accused under two oharges broughl under the Police ' ; Offences Act, but asA other cases : couoerned the was not appearing for Madame Le Brand in • them, - ' " - ; Mr ""Aoheson said he appeared for Madame Le Brand iri these cases. Mr Beard said he proposed to take the two oharges broughl undo, 1 By' law 88 of the Masterton Borough Council together. < It was admitted that the defendant was theowner and occupier of the house JOannister Street, within the In reply to the Bench Mr Aoheson said he should probably take exception to the By-law, lie did not,, however, propose, to move in the matter until the facte of the oase had come out. It might not be necessary lor him to raise the,objection, . ' : Mr Beard said it would be better • if objections to the Bylaw were to be . ■ raised, to take them at onoo before going into facts whioh would be objectionable todeoent-minded people. , The Bench intimated that Mr Beard had better open bis case. Mr Beard at some length reviewed the By-law and informed the Oourt of the oircumstanoes connected with the conduct of the house ocoupied by tbe defendant. It was, he submitted, perfectly scandalous that the quiet of ' a neighbourhood should be diaturbed by auoh an establishment, There was a great difficulty in bringing a direot , obarge of this nature home, as per- | sonß who frequented such a place , were naturally roluotant, in coming forward, It did not the house bp, it was a menace to sooiety and should be removed. - Henry MoArdle, Sergeant of Police, ! said be knew the house alluded to in tbe inlormation, A paper was in the window with " Madsme Le Brand" ! on it. Had no personal knowledge of . the house, but complaints had been brought to him about it. Mr Aoheson submitted that this , was not ovidenoe. After legal argument, Sergeant \ MoArdle resumed as follows:—The ' house had the reputation throughottt tbe town as an immoral house and s

house of ill-fame. By Mr Aoheson; Did you lay tHo information yourself, or were yon prompted by other persons f Sergeant McArdle: I laid the information owing to the complaints made, I whb not quite ready to take up the matter myself. Idoriotwfttoh the house particularly,. II the building itself were left alone it would not : injure anybody. I have never l seen' ' any house which from its external appearance would lead me to believe it was a brothel. The persons complaining were the Rev. J. Dukes, Mr J. Payton, tho Kev, W. E. Paige, Mr J. Graham, the Rev, R, Wood, and many more, I oannot recollect any more names, Mr C, Hughes was another. Mr Acboeon remarked that there wero principally ministers of religion and persons not residing in the immediate neighborhood of the house. The Court said the counsel should ' confine himself to Questions. Sergeant McArdle continuing said: Mr J. Graham lives in the immediate neighbourhood of the house. The prosecution was not a private one actuated by Borne private perßoa or persons. By Mr Beard : The rev. gentlemen mentioned were ministers in Masterton. The other complainants were business men residing in the Borough. Orlando Prangnell tho next witness saidl know the defendant by the name of Madamg Le Brand, and as a palmist.. I went to her house on the 25th of February last to have my palm read and to accompany a friend. The bouse was nextto Oxford House. When I got inside I saw a table with glasses and bottles on it. My impression was tbat they were beer bottles'. I was accompanied by aMr Wilton. A young lady was in tho room. Soon after we went in a knock camo at the door ahd three or four perßons wero let in, At this I went . out, One of the girls asked us to shout a bottle of beer, The girl was partially undressed. By Mr Acheson ; Knew Madame Le Brand was a palmist by reading an advertisement iu tbe Waibarapa Daily Times, The house the defendant ocoupied now was same as she then ocoupied. When the young womau opened the door I said • " I have come to have my palin rend." The lime was about a quarter or half past ten on a Saturday night. It was within Bix months up to ten to night. I will swear tho woman bad no jacket on. I did not pass any remarks, but went out when tbe baok door opened. By Mr Board: 1 did not have any iilea that tho place was other than a palmist's when I went there. From what I saw I concluded it was not a respectable place, and therefore took the opportunity to slip .out. Daniel Wilton, examined ,!)y Mr Beard, said; 1 went last witness to the Lo Brand on the 35th of .February. ' Mr Aoheson objected to thia evidence as alluding to.another hoasa than the one referred to in tho chirge. His Worship said be should have ' ' objected before cross-examination, and it was his intention to admit the evidence, D. Wiltpn, continuing, said! I wenj to get my palm read. I saw nothing. A young lady came to the door. She was in ordinary attire, as fa: as ,1 knew. I did not take particular notice of her, and could not Bay bow she waß dressed. I remained in the house some little time, I did not leave with Other peoplo came into tMw^fh«y were three young men, and came in by the baok door, I aid not see them leave, 1 might have been in tho tause five or ten minutes.. I saw one other, girl than the oriowho opened the door. Also saw Madame Le Brand. She bsd drees on* It was one fitr'o. have gone outside in. I might have remained half-an-hour,; The second girl oame from another room, .She had I think been reading somebody's pa'm, I have not been to the liouse since nor to the Bannister Street house. By Mr Aoheson: I had my palm read and paid for .it, Mr Pragnell . u.ok fright and bolted. I think it . been mistaken about the girl's attire.. i• j Ido not remember seeing bottles and: vglasses and did ii6V fiWle I w tfcre, v H|

William Boyce Chcnnolls, the next witness, said I am ut commission Agent and act for Mr R. .flare with respect to a house in Queen Street, I let the house to a Mrs Feliz, whom I pfterwards found out was known as Madame Le Brand, _Mr Aoheson again objected to this kind of evidence. Mr Oheunells continuing said I subsequently gave th& defendant notice to quit, as I had seen a notico in the paper of a disturbance at the hooae. This was about three weeks after Mrs Folia took possession. I told hor I could not have disturbance going on in a house for whioli I was agent. 1 also received complaints from Jtveral other people later on. ToTpßeral reputation of the house as I anderstood it, was that it was occupied by an undesirable character. From what I heard the inmates were immoral. I know nothing, however, of my own personal knowlegde. Mrs Feliz never suggested to me that she was keeping a house of ill-fomeoxoept on one occasion when I told lior that Mr Hare was worrying about her -noting the house. Mrs l ? eliz hiSWjestingly remarked " Oh, send the old-miser along to mo and I'll give him the very best," By Mr Beard : What did " very best" suggest? Mr Cbenriellß continuing said be might have been wrong, but it suggested itself to him that Mrs Feliz meant one of her girls. By Mr Aoheson: If I hud not read the account of the disturbance 1 do not think this would bavo suggested itself. Ido not romenibor the parties to the disturbance being prosecuted. I did not see anything peculiar about the house myself. Mrs Feliz was agreeable to b ave but wanted to stop until she got a house. She went out quietly. I have had similar cases to deal with. I thought it better to get her out rather than have a bother,

By Mr Beard: I raised tho rent before she went out. From what I «aw I cannot say the lioust w. s a nuisance, From tlio reports and complaints I have heard I Bl.oulil not havo considered MrsFeliz a desirable HSi^bour.

By the Bench: I understood from reports that other girls resided at tho house.

John Graham, tho next wilness, said; I lire in Bannister-street. 1 lino* Madame Le Brand, I have Been two girls going in aud out o( her house. I object to tho house because it is a disturbance to my home, and it lessens the value of my property, Persons call at my house, enquiring for the residence of Madam,) Le Brand, The house has the roputction of being a house of ill-fame.

By Mr Achoson; My objections are that my property is lessened in value, and that the sanctity of one's home has gone by persona calling at all hours. Beforo Madame Le Brand resided in Bannister-street no one had ever botberid me. From these calls I considered the common report vraa boms out, The property next door was told at a good price, but I bad lo release the person who was about to tako it, became bo cama to me and said he oould not live next to this woman, Madame Le Brand had purchased goods at my store before I knew what she was, but since I found out her charader I have not supplied her. I know nothing ofher from my own personal knowledge,

Jno William Gordon, statedl reside in Bannister-street, I know where Madame Le Brand is supposed to live. There is one house between Iter residence and mine, It is commonly reported that she koepa a house of I haro been annoyed by persons oalling at my house at night asking where tho defendant lived, By Mr Aciieson; Madame Le Brand has lived near me about a month. Three men have called at ray house. One refused to leave when requested. The girls may bo servanto.

J. P. Robinson gave evidence to tho effect that he knew defendant bj sight. The general reputation of her residence was that it was a bouso ef illfame,

By Mr Beard: Tho house had improved externally since the defendant went there. ft E, Hornblow said he knew tho residence of tho defendant and on one occasion on passing tbe house in going from his office, he saw a man and a number of boys opposite the houße of defendant, The boys showed the man the house and he gave them money. Knew tbe character of the house by common report. He would not oare to live in the neighbourhood.

W. Wbitt said he did not remember haying any conversation with Madame Lo Brand about the class of house she was keeping. The defendant in the conversation said the people wanted to make it appear she was keeping a bouso of ill-fame, and remarked that thero houses of the kind in all large towns. By Mr Acbeson: Madame Le Brand did not say she was keeping a house of ill-fame, but it was a matter of common talk in the town. He objeoted to his conversation with the Rev. R. Wood being brought into Court.

Sergeant McArdle, recalled, said ho bad once visited tbo bouso of Madame Lo Brand and found that the house was occupied by the defendant, two girls, and a woman as servant.

To the Bench; To his knowledge the girls bad no occupation in tbe town, Could not Bay tbey were not women, case for the information,

Mr Acheron for the defence said that he would contond there wag no evidence to convict under the Borough By-laws, There was no power given to a Borough (o make & By-law such bb the present one, This was not a nuiaanco as implied in the term in the Municipal Corporation Act. Mr Aoheson referred to the C,D. Aot, and said it was a provision for such persons. The law recognised the necessity of the evil, and provided for it by statute.

Mr Hutobison; I am surprised at you, Mr Acheson, a member of the bar, making suph a statement. Mr Ache'jp'continuing, said that he the By-law was ultra vim, because it was too general, There was no proof of the By-law, There was no proof that Masierton was a borough. A house of ill-fame properly conducted was not a nuiaanco. The police had no power to ley an information under Buob a Bylaw, which sbofli« have been done by an oflicor of the Council and under the authority of the Council. Mr Beard replied, upholding the : . validity of the By-law, and the power of the Council to make such By-law, and cited a decision which he contended was exactly similar to the point at issue, After furiher argumoot His Worship said it wan quite clear the police bad a perfect right to lay the information. He upheld the By-law,and said that a bouse of ill-fume mus lb e Jxjlfl to be a putlio nuisance, The l|' : '

question, and the main one, was did any law exist to deal summarily with these oases? With respect to this onse there was no question in his mind but that-the by-law wps valid, With regard tu the ovidence it was co far only that of reputation. There was no direct evidence, and in this oase he would admit evidence of reputation. At the same timo he would hear evidence for the defence. Mi Acbeson said that he did not ( propose to call evidence.

_ His Worship said he would adjourn 'big decision until to-morrow (Saturday) morning, and would go through tho eyidence carefully in the meantime.

On the Oonrt resuming at 2 p.m. His Worship convioted in the first | By-law case and fined Madame Le Brand £1 and costs.

Notice of appeal was eh en bv Mr Acbeson.