MEWHINNEY CASE.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1084, 24 March 1911, Page 7

MEWHINNEY CASE.

' DRAMATIC CLOSE. ACCUSED TO STAND HIS TRIAL. In (lie Magistrate's Court yesterday morning, before Mr. W. G. Eiddcll, S.M., thero was a-further hearing of the case in which Oliver Mcwhinney was charged with breaking into the house of Nettie Lena Mcwhinney, at Seatoiin, on or about l'ebruary i' 3, and stealing therefrom two drapes, fourteen photographs, several negatives, two plates, four pillow slips, two sheets, three towels, <1 bottle of lavendar water, several letters, and a receipt book, of a total value of .£4 the Property of Nettie Lena Mewhinney. Vr tective Broberg prosecuted, and Mr. T. Ji, Wilford appeared for tho accused. At the outset Mr. Wilford asked whether his Worship had noticed a case reported in the morning papers by .telegram iroui Auckland. It was something like the present case. . '-t'iie magistrate replied that he had seen it, but had not rend.it. This case, however, must stand on its own merits. Counsel repeated that the case was exactly similar to this one, anil ho would Hke to show, his Worship the report of Hi 3 Worship replied lie had not read it, ,'and lie didn't care if lie never did." It would not ai't'ect the case before them. He had never seen two cases in which the facts were so alike that one case-would decide whether the other was to go to tho Supreme Court or not. "Perhaps you have," he added to Mr. Wilford, "but I have not." This ended the point raised. ; Before witnesses for the defence were called, Chief-Detective' Broberg made an explanation as to the allegation that on Wednesday someone had left the Court during the hearing, and had communicated with a witness for the prosecution. The fact was that Detective Kemp had merely answered a question put bv a female witness, who wished to be directed to a certain part of the building. Mr. Wilford, in reply, remarked that now that lie knew that it was Detective Kemp, he was satisfied that nothing was said about evidence. But he (couusel) had not suggested such a thing. 110 had merely mentioned that it had been reported that someone was comniunicating with a witness. The magistrate remarked that there was nevertheless an inference in what was said, and it had so appeared in the papers. It was. a .pity that each witness had not been asked in the box whether any messago came to him or not'. That would havo cleared the matter up. Mr. Wilford offered to produce the man (one. Williams) who had conveyed tho message. That would be a way of clearing the matter up. The Magistrate: No, I don't wish to hear him. You yourself remarked yesterday that "straws show which way tho wind blows," and they show it in this case. You ought to stand to what you said yesterday. Mr. Wilford: I don't think anybody can say I'm a funk. ■ The 'Magistrate: No, I'll admit that. Mr. Wilford then called Oliver Mqivhinney, civil servant, who stated in evidence that ho had occupied a house in' I'ipitca Street with his wife until she lett him in July, 1!!09. After that date liis wife frequently broke into tho house, mil disfigured tho walls by writing on them. He produced sonic photographs of Hid walls. The paper, an expensive pattern, had been destroyed by the writing._ Chief-Detective Broberg objected to this iyidenc? ns being irrelevant. Mr. /Wilford proposed to' put in tho photographs, and show (hat the evidence Ivhs.relevant. Tho writing oii one:.of the .rails was: "My day will •'come." .Of :ourse, if tho magistrate ruled the evidence mt, counsel would hot go on -with tho joint. Ilis Worship ruled that tho evidence vas not admissible. Continuing, witness said that on February -2a last, Supremo Court proseedings were in progress*, and. they.-were :tilJ: giiing-on. . ; -i? Mr. Wilford: Did you, on that date, revive • these telegrams from your sister oncerning the children?—" Yes, the whoio rouble is over the 'children'."- ■ • - -v Chief Detective Broberg objected again. ?he evidence was irrelevant, and these elegrams were so many pieces of paper— The Magistrate: Oh, you needn't go on, Jhief Detective. I don't intend to allow hem to he put in. Mr. Wilford: Well, sir, I contend that tis evidence. I must ask you.to rule hat it is not. i The Magistrate: I rule that it is not. ■Mr. Wilford: Very- well, then, I won't ive ypur Worship any anore evidence. .- : -Accused Mewhinney-.proceeded -to leave he. box, .but was callcd.back. "Any questions, Chief Detective?" inuired tho. magistrate. "No questions, your Worship." Mewhinney then signed such evidence s ho had given, pleaded not guilty, and as committed to the Supremo Court for rial. Bail was allowed in JESO and one urety of J!SO. [In the report of Wednesday's proceedigs a name, Holtz. should, we are injrmed, have been Hoist.]