A WEST COAST SENSATION.

Evening Post, Volume LXXV, Issue 122, 23 May 1908, Page 9

A WEST COAST SENSATION.

EVIDENCE AT AN INQUEST.

[BY TELEGRAPH. — PRESS ASSOCIATION.] WESTPORT, 22nd May. The adjourned inquest, touching the death of Edmund John Bourke, was continued to-night. Gonnelley, brass boy on the steamer Talune, said he and another brass boy, Wm. Murray of the Rosamond, were together at Quaker's. Hotel. They had had several drinks at different hotels. They saw 'Halimen and Anderson, of the Canopus. Halimen asked witness to go to Ayer's Hotel and bring a man out to whom he had given tobacco, for which he had not received payment. Halimen gave witness .sixpence. He went to Ayers' Hotel and brought Bourke outside. They were then joined by Halimen and Anderson. The former asked Bourke for money for tobacco he had given him., Bourke who had- been 'drinking a good deal, said he had none. The four went over -to M^Laughlin's [ stables where Halimen struck Bourke, who again said he had no money. Witness also struck Bourke lightly with his partially closed fist. Bourke fell down and Halimen kicked him several times. ! Witness called him a coward. Haliman took off one of Bourke's boots to see if any money was in it, and unlaced the other. Witness saw Halimen pass > something to his pocket, but could not say what it was or where he got what he 'had in his hand. He heard Bourke's shirt and hip pocket being torn. Witness, Halimen, and Anderson shortly afterwards left the building, returned to the hotel and had some drink. Later when he heard the policeman ringing up, witness made inquiries, and returned to the stables with two bottles of hot water, putting them on Bourke's chest, but -a doctor arrived who said Bourke Was dead. Witness then went to a fish shop for supper, but- -struck a girl, was turned out and broke a window, cutting his hand badly., He was later arrested and sentenced to" eight days* imprisonment. The witness, who is only eighteen years of age, admitted several previous convictions for being drunk and disorderly. Ho said he had told the sergeant of police a different story to try to shield tho men, and because Halimen had threatened to "do for him", if he told what he knew. His presentj statement was true.

Witness was severely -cross-examined by the jury, but adhered .closely to the account given on oath. '

His statement was corroborated by t