A FORTUNE-TELLER'S FORTUNE.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CIX, Issue 13114, 30 April 1903, Page 3

A FORTUNE-TELLER'S FORTUNE.

Madame Zillali, a stylishly-dressed young woman, appealed at the Police Court yesterday morning, before Mr W. H. Cooper, J.P., and Mr J. Barrett, J.P., on a charge of practising a subtle craft, with intent to deceive his Majesty's subjects. Sub-Inspec-tor Dwyer conducted the prosecution, and Mr Hoban appeared for the defendant. Detective Quirk said that on the evening of Monday, April 6, lie went to Madame Zillah's house, on the East Belt, in. company with Detective Ward. They arrived at 7.45 p.m., sand, knocking at the door, informed Madame Zillah that they wished to have their hands read. They were shown inside, and Madame Zillali. said she would read Avitness' hand, but she would read for character only." She took his hand, and gave a forecast, from which he- gave the following extracts: —"You have very contradictory hands, particularly the thumb portion. One denotes impulse, and the other the possession of a, strong will. Taking it at a medium, I should say you were strong willed. Your heart line shows generosity, and you are not married. Your marriage line shows an early, attachment, with, perhaps, a disappointment. Another line shows a marriage in late life. Your life lines are peculiar, one showing an early termination or an accident, the other line is contradictory, showing you will live for about seventy years. Taking the medium, I would say that you would be long lived. You are philosophical, and you will have a successful financial venture with 'a fair man and a dark man later on." She then asked witness if he- would like to ask any questions, and he replied that he was quite satisfied. She said her charge was half-a-crown, and witness paid her. Cross-examined: Witness did not believe in palmistry. . So he was not deceived by the defendant's forecast.

Mr Hoban: Now, as a matter of fact, I suppose some- of these particulars were true?

Witness (hesitatingly): Well, yes. Some of them were (true. I would not be deceived by them, though. Detective Ward deposed to accompanying the previous witness. They were in the defendant's' house for an hour.

■Mr Hoban, in defence, submitted that there was no case to answer. To constitute an -offence of this nature it was necessary to show that there had-been an imposition, and tho only witness called was a detective, who had said that he had not been deceived by the forecast, because he did not believe in palmistry. He quoted an authority in English law, in support of his contention, and he submitted that the case ought to be dismissed. Palmistry was a widely used study, and thousands of people believed in it, and followed it up as an honest science. The facts as outlined by the detective were correct, and he would not trouble them with the defendant's evidence.

The Bench decided to convict, and fined the defendant 5s and costs.

The defendant was further charged on a similar information. Mr Hoban said he understood that the evidence and issues involved would be practically the same, and he would plead guilty. He asked the Bench to dismiss this case, as had been done in a similar charge a short while back.

Detective Chrystal strongly opposed this application. Frequent complaints had been made to the police of the influence which, these sort of people exerted upon a certain class of the community. At one house, which had been wale-lied, ten or twelve women had been seen to enter within a short time, and if each of these paid 2s 6d for consultation it could be seen that the seers fattened amazingly upon -the credulity of the public. Women, after consulting these oracles, frequently got strange ideas into their 'heads about their families or friends, causing en dices trouble and unhappiness.

The President said that his colleagues favoured the dismissal of this case to agree with the verdict delivered in tho previous prosecution. He had officiated on the Bench on that occasion also, and had lie known that tho judgment would bo regarded as a precedent it would possibly have

been different. He should certainly hat* increased the first fine had he- thought th*£ the defendant would not be penalised aa. the second charge. Mr Barrett, J.P., thought it wonld ha a good thing if the law could he made to reach the foolish youths and women r:h» created the demand and justified the presence of this class of practitioners. The defendant was then convicted and discharged on the second information. Mr Hoban : It seems to me an «xtraordinary thing, your Worships, tint the- poilca should have been allowed to ask the defendant to commit, an offf-ncc. They might with just as much reason ask a person to set fire to a house or commit soime other crime, and then to arrest h'm or her after wards.