THE COURTS.—TO-DAY.

Evening Star, Issue 7875, 6 April 1889, Page 2

THE COURTS.—TO-DAY.

SUPREME COURT-CIVIL SITTINGS.

(Before His Honor Mr Justice Williams.)

WINMILL V. OALLIE AND OTIIEKS,

Mr J. F. M. Fraser for plaintiff; Mr F. R. Chapman for defendants. 4 This case was resumed at 10.30 a.m. Mr Eraser said: When I called Miss Hill yesterday, your lienor, to examine her as to Cassie's character, I did not press the point —your Honor was against me—and it was withdrawn ; but I should like to point out that it may be urged that her character and behaviour were such as to have an influence on her father, such influence as might induce him to vest tho property in the mother to the exclusion of the rest of the family. Mr Chapman : I may say at once I do not intend to suggest any such thing, His Honor: Ido not suppose for a moment it can be suggested, whichever way it goes, that he made this will for the purpose of cutting out Cassie. Mr Chapman: That never will be suggested. His Honor: It would be absurd to suggest that Gallie in making his will was influenced by Cassie's conduct. It would never occur to my mind. With respect to Lydia it is a different matter.

Mr Fraser: There is nothing in what has been said as to the conduct of Cassie that I need rebut.

His Honor: Ido not think so. It is said that sho was quarrelsome; that is all. It cannot be suggested for a moment that Cassie's conduct, as a girl of fourteen, even if as bad as it could be, would have any effect on Gallie.

Mr Chapman : That was never suggested. There was quite a different object in referring to those internal matters. Emma Yorke (wife of Frederick Yorke), deposed that she came to the colony in November, 1869, and was sister to Mrs Peters. Witness first met the Gallie family in the early part of 1870, when Annie had congestion of the lungs. Witness's sister introduced her to the family. Mrs Gallie complained that Annie would not take food from her, and that she herself was unable to nurso her inasmuch as she had had no experience. Witness used to wash and dress Annie in the morning and take her any little thing sho might fancy. Witness had nursed cases of brain disease at the Great Ormond street Hospital. Witness went with her sister to the Gallies to prepare for Annie's wedding, and was also at the house nursing Annie in her last illness. When witness first saw Mr Gallie she took him to be an imbecile. He slipped about the house, and seemed to have no purpose in life. Witness could not understand a word he said. His manner at table was so peculiar that if she could have turned her back on him she would have done so—it was such as to make one inclined to vomit, Mrs Gallie told witness that Gallie was suffering from softening of the brain, and that there were symptoms of it before they were married; and that she blamed his mother for allowing the marriage, but supposed the old lady was glad to get him off. Thoso were the words as near as witness could remember. Mrs Gallie also said that she had to watch him in the morning or he would put on his trousers hind side foremost. Witness asked her why she got hfm out of the asylum as he was such a handful. Mrs Gallie replied : " Oh, poor old fellow." Witness never suspected that Mrs Gallie drank to excess until the last night of Annie's life. It was only towwds the evening, when Mrs Gallie lay crown and slept on the girl's bed that witness suspected her of drinking. That was some hours before Annie's death. Witness and her sister got Mrs Gallie to bed. Witness would like to explain that the nurso had had very unpleasant duties to perform that night, and to keep the smells off her stomach witness kept giving her nips of brandy. This lasted all night, and the result was that at the last the nurso was intoxicated. It was not the nurse's fault in any way. Witness made her take the brandy. Witness did not know tho nurse's name. Mrs Gallie called on witness after Mrs Ludford left home, and, dropping on her knees, called God to witness that the things Lydia had been saying about her were untrue. No names were mentioned. Cross-examined: Gallie's speech was a complete barrier to conversation, so far as witness was concerned. Joe Gough said that in 1867 and 1868 it was his duty to see after the lighting at the north end of the town. One evening, when it was raining heavily, he saw Gallie standing in his shirt sleeves at the corner of Hanover street. Witness thought Gallie was annoyed with him, and spoke sharply to him, saying that he must be cranky. A person coming by said that witness should not have spoken so sharply, and added: " Don't you know who that is ? That's old Gallie ; he's childish." Gallic was there, and must have heard the remarks, but did not seem to take much notice. Witness often saw Gallie afterwards. He had not a very prepossessing appearance; he was generally untidy. He could never carry on a connected conversation with witness, though he (Gough) had made many attempts at it. At last witness got to take no notice of him beyond passing the time of day; it was only waste of time. Witness believed him to be total'y incapable of transacting any business of importance. Cross-examined : It was from 1867 to the end of tho year that witness used to come across Gallie.

Jane Fairbairn (wife of Andrew Fairbairn) lived on Carr Young's property, next to the Gallies', from the end of 1869 to the latter part of 1872. There was not a great intimacy between the families, but witness occasionally spoke to Mr and Mrs Gallie. John Gallie was a very peculiar man—he used to walk with his arms folded and his head bent forward. One day he came to witness's gate to say something, but she could not understand him, and Mrs Gallie came to explain what it was he was trying to say. Witness could not understand him, and never had conversation with him. On one occasion Mrs Gallie said that her husband caused her a good deal of trouble, and required a great deal of attendance. One of witness's children used to go into Gallie's house, and Gallie gave her swings with his own children. He used to give them twenty swings each. Witness's daughter remembered that. Witness looked on Gallie as an eccentric man.

This witness was not cross-examined. Elizabeth Baxter (wife of Alexander Baxter) had lived in the one house, near the Gallies', since 1803. Beforo he went to the asylum she used to see Gallie in the street, and would bid him " Good day " hi passing. Ho would answer something, but she could not make out what he said. Ho was a silly-looking old fellow. Witness saw no change in him after he came out of the asylum. Mr Chapman had no questions to ask of this witness.

Henry Duncan, settler in the North-east Valley, said that he knew none of the parties to this suit. He came here itilSSO, and saw a good deal of John Gallic infehoso days. Witness considered him a cloveSnan at his business at that time and of average mental capacity. Witness returned here from Victoria in 1863 and met Gallio in George street some time between 1863 and 1870. Witness accosted him in the street, and tried to put him in mind of " the boy Duncan," as he called witness'Mn those days, but Gallie could not remember him. YVitness then tried to recall several things to his mind, but it was no use; he simply fiave a " Ha! ha!" He wasjiot the John Gallie witness knew previously; there was a great difference in him mentally. Witness would say that he was anything but of sound mind. (Vitness had several times seen him get up and look round at the people in church. Dr Stuart, who was the pastor then as now, has a happy way of wagging his hand ; and when ha used to do this to Gallie in church it had a magical effect—Gallie would sit down. Cross-examined : Witness was seventeen or eighteen years of age when he left for Victoria, and twenty-two or twenty-three years of age when he met Gallie in George street. Witness had only one opportunity of testing Gallie'a powers of conversation. Francis Graham had been resident in Dunedin since 1860. It was about eighteen or twenty years ago that he first saw John Gallie. It was at Gallie's house in Leith street. Gallie seemed to be just an imbecile in body and mind; witness never had any reason to consider him anything else.

Witness's visits to the houso were not very numerous. So far as he saw, the family took no notice of the old man.

Cross-examined: Excepting on the first occasion, witness's visits were to flhe younger children in his capacity as a Sunday school teacher. George Driver, bootmaker, knew the late Mrs Winmill by sight. He did not know her before her brother struck her. On that day witness was going down Hanover street with Walter Brown. A young man was walking five or six yards in front of witness, and a young lady was coming towards him. The young man struck the young woman with his stick. It was a blow that brought the girl to tho ground. Had she struck him first witness would have seen it. Witness since knew that the young man was a Mr Gallie—a younger one than John Gallic—and that tho young lady was Miss Gallie. When witness saw the young lady crying he asked her what was the matter, and she said her brother had struck her with a walking stick. Mr Chapman objected to evidence as to conversations between the parties. Mr Eraser would not press it, but would ask witness if he thrashed Gallie, to which witness replied in the negative. Mr Chapman said he did not challenge Mr Driver's statement, but did not draw the inference from it that his friend did. His Honor said it might be suggested that the sister had first struck Gallie with her umbrella.

Mr Chapman said that was just what he inferred.

Mr Fraser said that if necessary he could get the other man from Christchurch. Duncan Macfarlane, carpenter, came to the colony in 1858. Gallie was an eccentric gentleman in those days. He saw Gallie regularly from 1563 to 1867. He was then not able to talk sensibly, and seemed to be very absent-minded, and was not, witness thought, able to attend to business. There was no doubt in witness's mind that Gallie was a different man altogether to what he was in the early days, and that difference could be detected by anyone. Cross-examined : He had broken down quicker than his age would break him down. When the Surat was wrecked witness spoke of the matter with Gallie, and he mumbled away something which witness understood to be "serves her right." Witness concluded that Gallie was going daft. This conversation occurred during the period he spoke of, between 1863 and 1867. That was, to the best of his recollection.—(Laughter.) Mr Chapman asked His Honor to make a note of this answer.

At this stage (one o'clock), Mr Fraser asked whether Mrs Ludford would be wanted any more. She was anxious to return to Wellington, but would not do so if rebutting evidence as to her testimony were to be brought forward. His Honor did not think he had any questions to put to that witness. Perhaps Mr Chapman might lead evidence of that sort, but it might be that he could hardly state definitely as yet. Mr Chapman said that he could not s&y what course he intended to take.

His Honor asked Mr Fraser how long he expected his case to last, to which Mr Fraser replied that at the rate they were getting through with the witnesses Ire should be finished in four or five days more. His Honor intimated that he was not sure what day he would return from Invercargill. •* If he came back on Monday week ha would resume on the Tuesday, and if he came back on the Tuesday they could resume on the Wednesday. The Court was then adjourned until Monday, the 15th, at 2 p.m.

CITY POLICE COURT.

(Beforo Messrs J. Wright and Colin Allan

J.P.s.)

Drunkenness. For this offence John Oillison, with seventeen previous convictions, was fined 20s, in default twenty-foui hours' imprisonment. Stealing.— Alfred Forrest (four previous convictions) was charged with stealing, on or about the 4th inst., two drums of oil, valued at L2, the property of some person unknown.—Sergeant-major Bevin said that the accused, who was arrested last night, had sold the drums of oil to a Mr Mockford for 6s each, and had offered one to another person for Is 6d. Accused said that ho had bought the oil from Mr H. S. Fish, but the latter denied having sold accused any oil at all. The police had an idea as to who belonged to the oil, but as the case was as yet incomplete they would ask for a remand until next Wednesday.— Remand granted.