THE ALLEGED MURDER AT KAIWARRA.

Press, Volume XLVI, Issue 7362, 15 July 1889, Page 6

THE ALLEGED MURDER AT KAIWARRA.

ADDBESSES OP COUNSEL.

[PSXSS ASSOCIATION TELEGRAM.] WELLINGTON, July 13. In the murder trial this morning two witnesses were recalled before counsel began their addresses. Edwin H. Bradford, Government Armorer, in answer to his Honor, said that a gun was brought to him to examine on the 4th. He inspected both barrels. The left was very foul, and had the appearance of having been lately fired off, and put away in a cover. It could not have assumed such an appearance from being fired off on Friday, that is four days previous. Witness said that when he examined the gun in the E.M. Court the left nipple was covered with white stuff, and when he saw the gun in the Supreme Court it was gone. The Crown Prosecutor handed the witness the gun to examine again, when he 3aid " Yes, the wiiite stuff is there'now, but upon my oath it was not there when I last gave my evidence. His Honor—Do you sncfgest anything ? Witnessi—l suggest nothing. This stuff has appeared since. The Crown Prosecutor said that fortunately the gun was handed round the jury while the witness was giving his evidence on Wednesday. By the Crown Prosecutor—There was no observable difference in either barrels at the breech; looking down the breech, both barrels had the same appearance of being caked with powder. Had he not felt the barrels he could not have judged when they were hist fired off. By Mr Bunny—Heating the barrels would not have altered the appearance as regards the caking , of the powder. I Dr. Cahill, re-called, stated, in answer to his Honor, that he sent out a message from the morgue that Hawkins had been stabbed. He remembered two messages being sent to him as to the cause of death. When the first came in he had not dis covered the gunshot wound. By his Honor —He first saw the datjeer on the Saturday night, when the sheath was open. There was nothing to show that the blade had been used. Had it been used the probability is the person so using it would have cleaned it by putting it in the ground, or else by washing it in hot water. There were no scratches on the dagger and verdigris still remained, and witness' supposition was that the instrument had not been cleaned either one •way or the other. It would have been possible to have cleaned the blade without removing the verdigris, but great care would be required. By the Crown Prosecutor—The Sagger was used in the morgue, and cleaned in warm water by a constable. By Mr Bunny—This dagger was inserted by witness up to the hilt in some of the wounds on the deceased's body. This concluded the case for the prosecution. In addressing the jury the Crown Prosecutor said that convictions in cases of murder weie generally founded on circumstantial evidence. He asked them to consider particularly the circumstance of the piece of paper taken from the wound of the murdered man, saying that the gun of the

murderer was loaded with that piece of paper of the 23rd May. At this point he aaked the jury to pause and consider how the corresponding fragments of that paper fitted together. Mr Bell strongly criticised the evidence of Bradford. The jury would probably believe the statement of Joseph that he saw a man on the hills on the afternoon, but pointed out the improbability that the man would have allowed himself to be seen so plainly had he been going there to lie in ambush for Hawkins. It was no doubt a hardship for prisoner not being allowed to place his wife in the box to state where he was that night, but he was somewhat surprised that Ms children had not been called for the purpose. In leaving the case in the hands of the jury, he urged that the evidence showed , that the murder was committed by the man who owned the gun. The gun waa loaded in prisoner's house, and the man was stabbed by the man who fired the gun. If the jury were certain that the paper was traced from the murdered man's body to the prisoner's house, then there was only one issue, and he asked them to fulfil the duties which their country expected from them. The Court adjourned till 3 p.m. His Honor announced that he would sum up on Monday. Before addressing the jury, Mr Bunny called the following witnesses as to character.

W. A. Pitzherbert, Engineer to the Hutt County Council, gave the prisoner an excellent character, saying that he had lately promoted him from an ordinary laborer to foreman. By Mr Bell—He had never heard of his using'threats to anyone. He did not know if he was violent. William Bergin, settler, a resident of Kaiwarrawarra for twenty-five years, had known the prisoner for twelve years. He formed a good opinion of him aa to moral character. By Mr Bell —He never heard of him as a violent man. Mr Bunny sp.'A ?♦■■ *rould be his duty to point out the wc;«S: points in the evidence adduced by the Crown. That a foul murder had been committed nobody would deny, and statements were made which were highly prejudicial to prisoner. He begged the jury to dismiss from their minds any reports they had heard, but be guided eolely by the evidence brought before them. He asked the jury, first of all, to be satisfied that only one man committed the murder, and not more. The Crown had endeavored to show that the prisoner had a motive. He would ask the jury if a mere lawsuit was at all likely to be the cause for such a crime as murder. There was nothing in that lawsuit calculated to enrage any man. As to Tucker's evidence he asked the jury tolookuponitwithacertainamount of suspicion, because the conversation between Tucker and the prisoner had taken place seven months ago, and no notice was taken of it at that time. In reference to the witness Burrell, the butcher, counsel said that his whole evidence was biassed against prisoner, and he hoped the jury would consider it well. He contended that the proof of any motive against the prisoner had utterly failed, and said that Hawkins was not a man generally liked by his neighbors. He would ask the jury to consider whether it was likely a man would take a gun and stiletto to commit this murder when he had a five-chambered revolver in his possession, which would have done the deed go simply and well. In reference to the stiletto, Mr Bunny said if it had pierced so far as Dr. Cahill said, the verdigris would have been removed or covered with blood. No blood had been found about the sheath, and this fact he asked the jury to note. He severely ctitici&ed the conduct of Mrs Hawkins and Bowlee on the night of the murder, and thought there was a certain amount of mystery about it. He said the police were made aware of the murder on the night of 31st May, but took no action till the following afternoon. He characterised the conduct of the police as alow and dilatory in the extreme; in fact, all through the investigation it had been strange that not one of the police could identify any piece of paper found by them, while other witnesses who picked up fragments did. He thought the bit of paper wrapped by Dr. Cahill as coming from the wound had not been •atisfactorfly explained, and urged upon the jury how necessary it was for them to ewe the prisoner the benefit of the doubt, j |sgfta«s£ftteft£i ggSsgSg