THE ARIADNE CASE.

Evening Star, Issue 11661, 21 January 1902, Page 4

THE ARIADNE CASE.

CHRISTGHTOCH, January 21. The Ariadne trial was resumed at tie, Supremo Court at ten o'clock this morning, when Captain Willis's cross-examination by Mr Skerrett was continued. He said he was not engaged in collecting evidence regarding the wreck at the time of the nautical inquiry at Oamaru, but was subsequently requested by Mr G. L. Denniston, Lloyds's representative at Dunedin, to collect evidence. He engaged Detective Fitsgerald to make inquiries, and when he left Christchurch for Dunedin on the occasion of his meeting Captain Mumford he knew that Fitzgerald wae arranging an interview between him and Mumford. In comnrunJeations between witness and Fitzgerald no reference was made to the means of extracting information from Mumford. Fitsgerald was a detective in the police force. Witness had obtained the consent of the police authorities to make nee of Fitzgerald so long as he was not paying him any money. At the interview with Mumford at the Grand Hotel, Dunedin, on the night of May 28, Mumford wag evidently distressed, and witness was careful not to take undue advantage of him. At the interview next morning, when the verbal confession was made, witness was insistent that no promise of reward or remuneration was made. The statement by him in the lower court that such was the case was not correct. There were tw6 interviews that day, and it was at the subsequent interview that £4OO was promised if Mumford would put his confession in writing. At the first interview (May 29), amongst the matters mentioned by Mumford was a statement to the effect that Warner (cook on the Ariadne) had overheard the conversation, and would know something about the agreement to cast the yacht away. He had not> mentioned that fact in the lower court, or yesterday, as it had escaped his memory. When asked by witness whether he had any letter or document from Kerry, Mumford said he had written several letters to Kerry explaining his conduct, and said he would write another and show it to witness. He had not mentioned the fact that there were two interviews on May 29 in the lower court or yesterday in his evidence-in-cbief, as he did not consider the matter of importance. He would .swear he had no recollection of asking Mumford for any document or letter incriminating Kerry at any interview on May 29. That request was made on the 30th, and Mumford's reply was that he had had one, but had mislaid" it before or after the wreck. He also said he had mentioned the circumstance to Kerry at Oamaru, and Kerry replied that Mumford then had n» hold on him. Witness at the time expressed surprise that Mumford should lose so important a, document. Between the interviews on May 29 witness saw Lloyd'« representative at Dunedin, and from him obtained authority to offer Mumford'up to £3OO for a written copy of the confession. At the interview on the afternoon of May 29 Mumford wrote a letter purporting to go to Kerry, in which it was stated that Kerry did not hold all the trumps, but that others knew of the arrangement between them, and Kerry had better not try on any funny business. The paper on which the letter was written Mumford took from his own pocket. Whilst the letter was being written no conversation passed between witness and Mumford- 'When it was finished, the letter was handed to witnes, who read it, and asked permission to copy it. Mumford went away, leaving the letter with witness, who took it at once to Mr Denniston, and said: "Here's a letter Mumford has volunteeered to write to Kerry. It is an extraordinary document." Mr Denniston perused the letter, and a press copy, typewritten, was at < once made. Witness got the original letter back the same day, and handed it to Mumford the following morning, telling him he had copied it, and suggesting that he should post it. The letted was signed "Kettle," and when witness remarked that it was a strange signature Mumford stated that this was a name known between them. The letter asked Kerry to pay up by return mail, but a postscript was added insisting on Kerry replying by cable. Copies of the letter were put hi as evidence. After tlie luncheon adjournment witnejw said he first saw the agrernent between Kerry and Mumford on June 7, at Christchurch. It did not strike him that the document was remarkably clean to have been ktpt some time in the lining of a coat. The document had been folded up, and the back was somewhat soiled. He liad examined the wording of the agreement under a magnifying glass, and could not see anything pointing to the fact that the same words were written over twice. On June 7 Mumford was staying at the Occidental Hotel, Christchurch, under the name of Captain Stephens. That was Mumford's own suggestion, and it was for the purpose of keeping Kerry from tracing him. He made several money payments to Mumford in Christchurch. When Mumford was arrested, on October 8, witness guaranteed solicitors on his behalf. [Special to the EJtar.] CHRISTCHURCH, January 21. The Ariadne case is likely to last thß whole of the week. Both the examination and the cross-examination of the witnesses is proceeding at great length, and the minutest details are receiving the most careful attention