MR SEDDON INTERVIEWED.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1332, 9 September 1897, Page 36

MR SEDDON INTERVIEWED.

Melbourne, September 1

The Right Hon R. J. Seddon, interviewed by a Press Association representative, said the hospitality shown to the colonial visitors, from Royalty downwards, was very geuuine. In reference to tho Conference between the Premiers and the Colonial Office, he stated that it would ultimately have a most useful effect, and he was sure the British Government was exceedingly glad for pressure to be brought to bear upon them by the colonies in denouncing the German and Belgian commercial treaties.

Sir Wilfrid Laurier and he were the foremost in urging this course. Asked as to what New Zealand was propared to do, Mr Seddon said that was a matter for future consideration.

Asked as to increasing- colonial duties on foreign goods, he said ho thought it might b 3 done, but the creation of unfriendly feeling should bo avoided. The revenue, at the same time, would not suffer if British imports took their place. The whole matter was a complex one and required careful arrangement. They would probably expect consideration from the British Government for any differentiation in her favour. A large section in England favoured such a course, but at present the majority was not prepared to impose duties in order to increase the colonial trade.

Mr Seddon, in his interview, said it had been stated that he had pledged New Zealand to an increased contribution to the Auxiliary Squadron and the New Zealand land defences, but he had given no such pledge. What he desired to convey and actually said was that having regard to the mcrease of the naval armaments of America in the Pacific, Japan and other nations, it became necessary to increase the British fleet in the South Pacific, and, as the Imperial authorities were unprepared to strengthen the Australian squadron unless the colonies would increase their contributions, the New Zealand Parliament would then have to consider the question and decide. Mr Seddon leaves Sydney by the Waikare on Saturday, and he expects to reach Wellington on Wednesday afternoon. Melbourne, September 2. Mr Seddon, in his interview with the New Zealand Press Association’s representative, said that as a result of the Conference the colonial Governments were now in closer touch than ever before with the Secretary of State. They would now be consulted more often, and greater

respect paid to their opinions. The probable outcome would be the creation of a consultative council of colonial representatives and members representing the British Cabinet for the purpose of considering Imperial questions. Its members should be in touch with the Governments of the day, and retire with them. The time was not ripe even for this, however. Mr Seddon was asked as to his impressions of the Old Country. Ho said that, apart from St. Paul’s Cathedral and the Parliament Buildings, the public buildiugs did not compare favourably with those of America, while street locomotion was behind the times. He realised, however, the impractibilit.y of running trains in narrow streets. He admired how wonderfully well the enormous traffic of London was managed. After visiting the ancient public buildings he understood how much more attractivo to the British race were historical associations than mere architectural beauty. Mr Seddon thought a great deal of Mr Chamberlain, Secretary of State for the Colonies, although not agreeing in every respect with his policy. Unquestionably Mr Chamberlain was a statesman of exceptional ability, and had raised the Colonial Office to the highest of any in the Mother Country. Dealing with the question of commerce, Mr Seddon said they all knew how foreign goods were supplanting those of Great Britain in the colonial markets. That was largely due to the independent attitude on the part of the British manufacturer, who now, howover, seeing the need of meeting his customers on their own tsrms, was doing his best to please them. Foreign manufacturers were found to deal directly with the retailer. The foreign system of paying freight, insurance, &c., was better than the British system of putting goods aboard f.o.b. Trade with Britain might be assisted by the Imperial Government increasing and extending the mail subsidies, and, like some foreign countries, Britain might subsidise the lines of steamers running to her possessions. Asked as to what was thought of the colonial troops in London, Mr Seddon said he did not think it in keeping with the spirit of democracy that the Premiers should have body-guards, as suggested in Mr Chamberlain’s despatch. It was a question whether the colonial militarycontingents were not more in favour with the British public than the colonial Premiers themselves. Mr Chamberlain himself expressed this opinion. The colonial troops won the highest opinions on all sides. Visitors from all parts of the world, ' after seeing the colonial military representation in the procession,

examined the Accused and found him suffering from a similar complaint. George Morris, brother of the prisoner, who was brought up from the Burnham Industrial school, gave evidence considerably at variance with that alleged to have been given to the police at the time of prisoner’s arrest. This closed the case for the Crown, and Mr Gully briefly addressed the jury. For the defence, Prisoner called Mrs Elizabeth Free, of Adelaide road, who was called to nurse an inmate of the house of Morris. It transpired, however, xhat she knew nothing about the conduct of the accused or where he slept at the time mentioned in the information, she having loft the house before that period. Accused assured the jury of his innocence, averring that his sister’s statements were quite untrue. The jury returned a verdict of guilty after a quarter of au hour’s retirement. Prisoner was remanded for sentence until 10 a.m. the following day. THE CASE AGAINST CRIPPS AND BROWN.

Charles Cripps was charged that he, on the 24th May last, at Wellington, did unlawfully carnally know one Ida Emily Whittaker, who was over the age of 12 years, tQ.wit, 13 years, and under the age of 16 years i also with attempting to carnally know her on the same date, and further with indecently assaulting her. The woman Brown was charged with, being an accomplice. There were also., three indictments against the prisoners; of a similar nature in respect to one Margaret Annie Noonan, or Wills, a girl of the age of 13 years and under the age of 16 years. The prisoner Cripps was defended by jDr Findlay. The female was unrepresented. Before the empanelment of the jury the prisoner Brown asked the Bench to have her case tried separately from that of Cripps, but His. Honor said ho saw no reason to adopt that course. The jury could discriminate, and any evidence applicable only to the male prisoner would, of course, be not considered in her case.

Mr Gully said the facts were very simple. On the evening prior to the 24th May the man Cripps met the two girls in the street, struck up an acquaintance with them, and made an assignation to meet them on the day following at the house of the woman Brown. Next day the girls appeared on the scene before Cripps, and were allowed in the house. It would be stated that Cripps, Brown and the two girls were in this house the whole day, except on occasions when someone went out to buy some liquor. This was consumed in the house, the result being that one of the girls got somewhat intoxicated. 1 he offence was alleged'to have been committed in the bedroom. It was only a small cottage, situated in North street, and contained but three rooms. The offence would be sworn to definitely by one girl, and rather indefinitely by her companion. The jury would bear in mind that the indictment contained three counts, and that the female prisoner was practically an accomplice of Cripps. The first witness was A. Harris, clerk, employed by Baker Brothers, ■ who gavo evidence in reference to the lease of the house.

Elizabeth H. Whittaker, of Cambridge road, mother of the girl Ida Whittaker, stated that on the Queen’s Birthday her daughter was away from home all day, and witness never saw her until after 10 o’clock that night. Witness had then been making enquiries of the police about her. She stated that her daughter would be 14 years old in December next. Dr Findlay asked a number of questions of witness relative to the character her daughter bore, the company she kept, &c. Pr Teare, who examined the girls Whittaker and Noonan (or Wills), testified that both had been tampered with. Constable Kolly produced tbe clothing the girls wore and stated that ho arrested the woman Brown, who said witness needn’t have arrested Percy Bundle (who rented her house), because he had had nothing to do with the affair. She also said the girls had been with men before, that they were little —s, and that she would tell the Magistrate so. Ida Whittaker, one of the girls alleged to have been assaulted, detailed how herself and the girl Madge Noonan, or Wills, met Cripps one evening as they were going to tbe Salvation Army meetiug. Cripps started the interview by saying “ good evening,” and then asked Madge Wills if she knew Minnie Brown, Madge replying in tbe affirmative. He said he had a pair of boots that would fib her if she went to Brown’s next day. He gave Madge a shilling and wont away, the witness and her companion spending the money. They went to Brown’s next morning, and after the arrival of Cripps she went out for a shilling’s worth of whisky and a couple of bottles of lemonade. Witness drank lemonade, and Brown, Cripps and Madge Wills took whisky. Half an hour afterwards witness got another 13 6d worth of whisky and a bottle of lemonade, and later on Will 3 went out for more liquor. Witness was asked what her favourite drink was ? Wills replied for her, saying, “Port wine and brandy.” Minnie Brown then gave her sixpence to get some, and witness drank it all on return to the house. Subsequently Brown told Wills that she had better go and lie down. Madge was showing tho effects of the liquor. She went in and witness followed. They both lay on the bed, Cripps going after them subsequently. Witness here detailed the assault which she said was committed upon the bed. Her evidence had very little relation to the girl Wills, however. In cross-examination, witness said she

had been with men repeatedly. Sho went • about at night with Madge Wills, and the latter gave her sumo of the money she got. Dr Findlay asked her a number of questions relative to the occurrences in

their order in the house. She was stupid iu her head afcer partaking of the port wine, but knew what she was doing. In answer to His Honor the witness, wh.6n describing what happened in the room, gave an answer to an important question which lather discounted some of her previous evidence. The next witness was Ellen Evans, who in May last lived/in Haining street, bub who said she had now left that locality. On the 24th she left Minnie Brown’s in the morning, returning after 12 o’clock. Brown was then in the kitchen, and witness asked who was in the bedroom, being told in reply that the two girls and Crij>ps were there. Witness opened the door and saw that Whittaker was asleep, and the other two awake. She stopped in the house until 6.30 o’clock, prior to which time she went out for some shandygaff. The girl Whittaker did not have any, but Wilis did. Then Whittaker went into the bedroom and Cripps followed. They did not stay very long. Witness went away and returned at 7.30 p.m., when the girls had gone. She only went a few times to see Minnie Brown altogether. Did not know what kind of a house she was keeping. Cripps was drunk on the day iu question, the two girls were stupid, but Minnie Brown was not so bad.

To Dr Findlay : Cripps was in a helpless condition. Had heard Madge Wilis representing that she was 17 years of age, but had not heard Whittaker say she was 16.

Ida Whittaker (re-called) said that when she left Minnie Brown’s house on the night of the 21th the woman asked her to come round next day and she would give her some boots and clothes. To Dr Fiudlay : Tho girl Wills had told men that she (Wills) was over 16, and that witness was 15.

Margaret Annie Noonan (otherwise called Madge Wills) next entered the

box. She gave evidence similar to the girl Whittaker as to what led up to their visit to Brown’s hous9. Liquor was procured, some of which sho drank. After taking port wine and brandy she remembered no more until she awoke, finding herself on the bed. Ida Whittaker was with her, but the latter subsequently went out. On going into the kitchen she saw there Evans, Brown, Cripps and Whittaker. Cripps said to witness afterwards “ I will give you a tew shillings presently.” More drink was sent for, but she did not remember having any. Something was said about a bank book,and Cripps went out with Bundle (who had returned home after being absent all day) to raise cash. A woman catue to the hous-o for her, bub sho. did not go home until afterwards. To Dr Findlay: Had no whisky at all, but had port wine and brandy. She was a chum of Ida Whittaker’s once, but not now. She loft school a year ago and used to work, but her mother kept her now. She had never represented to men that sho was over 16. People would take her to bo over that age, however. To His Honor : Was not conscious of anything being done to her in the house. She knew nothing at all except what Ida Whittaker had stated.

At 5.15 p.m. the Court adjourned until 10 o’clock the following morning.

Friday, September 3. (Before his Honor the Chief Justice.) INDECENT ASSAULT.

On Friday morning the hearing of the caso against Charles Cripps and Minnie Brown, of immoral behaviour in respect of two young girls, was continued. Evidence for the prosecution was gi’. T en by Christina Dobbie, William Corley, George Y. Dennis, Constable Cassia and Sergeant Briggs,

On behalf of Cripps, Dr Findlay called Wm. Collins, builder, who gavo the prisoner a good character. The Crown Prosecutor and Dr Findlay then addressed the Court, and His Honor summed up at some length. The jury then retired and came back in an hour with a verdict of guilty against both prisoners on the count of indecent assault upon Ida Whittaker only. The prisoners were remanded for sentence until next day. A SIMILAR CASE. Alfred P. Westbury was charged with on or about the Ist July indecently assaulting Everilda May Bowden. In opening the case Mr Gully said the prisoner was living in a house by himself. Two girls named Bowden and Howell went there, and the Crown would prove that Westbury committed an indecent assault on the former in a bedroom in the house, where the two girls slept on a mattress ail night. Bowden gave evidence detailing the alleged assault. Under croso-examination by Mr Wilford, who appeared for the accused, the witness gave evidence that she was 14 years of age. She had been a prostitute for two years, and had had connection with dozens of men. She hau earned considerable sums of money by prostitution. Her average was four shillings a week. She had often slept in sheds and fowlhouses. She had visited other men at their houses for indecent purposes. She had recently been committed t<~> the Industrial School at Burnham as being uncontrollable. She had slept on the Penguin for three or four nights while the vessel was alongside the whai'f. She had told Westbury lies to get food. On one occasion she had broken into Westbury’s house, eaten up all the food in the house, and stolen tram tickets and money from his pockets. One night she slept in a fowl-

house afc the rear of Westbury’s house and several times irtthe shed. Her father and mother lived in Wellington. Her sister, eight years of age, had slept out all night. Sbo learned to do so from witness. She herself invited Westbury to commit the assault. He said she was too young, but she said she was not. She was only in the room with Westbury about four minutes. She had frequently called at Westbury’s house for food, and he had never endeavoured to take advantage of her. Westbury had often advised her seriously and decently to go homo and live a different life. Once he told her that if she came about there again he would give her in charge of the police. It was the practice of the girls to club together their money, earned by prostitution, and buy lollies and ginger ale. Ite-examinod by the Crown Prosecutor, tho witness said that on the night of the alleged assault Westbury had slept in a bed in the room on which they had slept on the mattress, yet he did not "attempt to molest them. He often gave her pennies and sixpences to buy food. She spent the money jin lollies. Westbury had behaved indecently to her on a former occasion, some months before ; she didn’t know whether it was in the day or night. Witness first made Westbury’s acquaintance by going to the house for a drink of water. She went there afterwards on her own account. When she was sleeping about Westbury’s place she told him her mother was in Wanganui, which was a lie.

To Mr Wilford: When she said she had not been indecently assaulted by Westbury previous to tho day of the alleged assault, she meant she had not been indecently assaulted by him since that time. Edith Howell deposed that she went to Westbury’s house with the girl Bowden. She tried to peep into the room while

West bury was there with “Bowden during the time the alleged assault was committed, but Westbury came and shut tha door and she went back to the kitchen. Witness detailed her movements subsequently. She said eventually she was caught by young Bowden on the wharf and taken, home.

Mr Gully •. Were you whipped ? The witness: No, we i\as going to get whipped. Cross-examined by Mr Wilford : Everilda had told her how to earn money with men. Everilda Bowden had got a key from her place on oue occasion and let witness out of the bedroom in which her mother shut her up. E verilda tried to get her to slide down a pole from her bedroom window, but she hadn’t been game to do that. She bad slept away from home for several nights in company with Everilda Bowden or her younger sister. She had helped Everilda Bowden to break“into Westbury’s house when the tram tickets were stolen.

Mrs Bowden, mother of Everilda Bowden, gave evidence that she went to Westbury’s house on three occasions looking for her daughter. On one occasion Westbury told her he would give the girl in charge if she came back there again. This concluded the case for the prosecution.

The prisonor then entered the witnessbox aEd denied that he had ever taken any liberties with Everilda Bowden. The girls bften came there begging. He had bought watercress from them. He knew the girls bad slept in a fowl-house and in a shed at tho rear of his house. He let them stay there at their request on condition that they did not come near the house. A man caruo to him • and asked him if he had seen the girls. He said, Yes, they had.been about the place. The man said they had been in the house and that it was a serious charge. He told, tho man to speak to the police about it,

and if he didn’t he would. The witness then went on to detail the state of the house at the time of the robbery, and conversations which he had afterwards with the mothers of the two girls. Mrs Bowden as good as charged him with having the' girls in the house. He showed them round to prove the girls were not there. Mrs Bowden and Mrs Howell had a row, both accusing the other’s girl of leading her own astray. Mrs Ilowell stayed in the house with him waiting for her children. He went outside and saw the girls, and came back and told the mother, who then went away. , To Mr Gully: He distinctly said that the girls had never slept in his house. He suggested that the parents had put the girls up to falsely charging him with Tim offence. Ho didn’t doubt their characters when they came round the house lirst. lie thought they wero hard up, and that’s why he gave them food. To His Honor The parents of the children asked him not to give the children in charge for stealing his things. They saw witness on the night of the robbery, and Mrs Howell said she -would pay the damage. Frederick Clare deposed that he had known Westbury four or five years. During that time his conduct was exemplary. The Rev Mr Galway, Church of England, Newtown, said ho had known Westbury since the beginning of the year. As far as ho knew Westbury was a man of good character.

The Court adjourned at G. 30 p.ra. On resuming, Silvester, who had .been living with the accused for some time, gave unimportant evidence. Counsel for the accused and the Crown Prosecutor having addressed the jury, the Chief Justice summed up. After a lengthy retirement the jury

r failed to come to a decision and "was locked up for the night.

'Saturday, September 4. (Before His Honor the Chief Justice.) A JURY DISAGREES. On the Court assembling at 10 o’clock, the foreman of the jury in the case o£ Alfred P. Westbury, charged with having indecently assaulted Everilda Bowden, announced that they were unable to agree. They were, therefore, discharged. FORGERY. A. D. Harper pleaded guilty on a charge of having committed forgery, and applied for probation. The application was granted, provided he obtained one security of .£2O for the payment of <£l7. INDECENT ASSAULT. Charles Cripps and Minnie Brown came up for sentence on a charge of indecent, assault. Dr Fitchett, on behalf of Cripps, pleaded for leniency on the ground that the accused had been in gaol for three months awaiting trial, and also of his good character. He informed His Honor also that the female prisoner was in a delicate state of health, and asked for leniency on her behalf. In sentencing the prisoners the Chief Justice said: —As I said yesterday is reference to the case about which the jury has disagreed, if there were no men who were prepared to assault these) young girls there can be no doubt these young girls would not conduct themselves in the way in which it appears many of them do. Tho punishment that I have to inflict therefore is not so much in regard to this particular young girl as to the injury done to her—if any has been done to her—in your particular case, but it is intended as a deterrent to prevent persons—although the young females are willing to go with the men —it is to impress upon men that it is a great crime, as well as a great wrong to society and to children generally, that men should be allowed to go with such young children. At the same time I am not prepared to pass an extravagant sentence, because in, the present state of tha colony I have to take into account the particular circumstances of particular cases, and to take as nearly as possible the same view as the jury seems to have taken. The jury, I believe, thought that you had made this assignation with the elder girl, and that you had reasonable cause to believe she was over 16. That is possibly the view the jury took at the commencement of this case. This other girl, just under 14, went with her. I don’t think that either of these two girls were drugged for the purpose for any purpose. I don’t, from the evidence, think that there was any great amount of effect, produced by drinking upon either of them, nor ha* it anything to do with the case. There can be no reason for doubt the two girls were ready to have done to them anything that was done to them. I don’t attribute much importance to the drinking. Ifc seems to be a part of what always goes on. in these houses —I don’t know -why itshould be so —it is what one experiences in this Court that what does first happen is drinking. I take into count that you. are a young man, apparently of good character, and that except for the age of the child it would not be a case for the consideration of this Court. It is not necessary to refer to the child’s conduct —I mean, of course, the young girl’s conduct—l don’t know why I should call her a child, although she is a child in ago. As I say, I have many matters to take into count. If I were to pass upon you a very sever© sentence, 1 expect that that would have a bad effect in your particular case with regard to the other cases because of your character and because of all the circumstances of the case. The sentence of tho Court is that you be kept in the Terraco Gaol for 12 calendar months, with hard labour. On you, Minnie Brown, I pass a similar sentence. If there had been any [evidence that your bouse had been used for meetings of young children your sentence would have been very much more severe. The police say that they have no reason to think so. The prisoners were then removed. A FALSE DECLARATION. Robert Hamilton Needham pleaded guilty to having made a false entry on n birth certificate. The prisoner was living with a married woman, whose husband had left her for some years, and he registered the birth of a child, born as the result of tho connection, as if the former husband was its father. Needham asked for probation, and liis request was granted provided, he found a surety for payment of .£5 for expenses. This be promised to do. A WEARY WAIT. David Elder, charged with theft, was remanded owing to the illness of a material witness for the prosecution. He protested against the delay, as he had already been in gaol for six months awaiting trial. His Honor said he had no alternative but to grant the adjournment. Monday, September G. (Before llis Honor the Chief Justice.) ALLEGED ILL-TREATMENT OF A CHILD. John and Margaret Healey were charge d under the Children’s Protection Act with having cruelly ill-treated Bertie Green, a boy under 14 years of ago. Mr Wilford asked for an adjournment of tho case to enable him to obtain from England specific information as to the age of the hoy Bertie Green, and said he had already written Home tor that purpose, lie produced a let lev wiitten by a person in England in 1>94. in which ifc was stated that tho boy was 11 years of age .at that ti iue.

1 1' r, Honor, after c gambling Ihe letter and questioning the boy’.-? older brother, a witness in the case, said it seemed ns if it would turn out that the boy was over 14years a couple of months at the time of the alleged ill-treatment, lie did not think he could do otherwise than grant an adjourn-

Some of the Midland Bail way work at the Springfield' end. Mr Cadman replied that he took ove" the constructed line 3 when completed, but he had nothing to do with the question of construction. The completion of the line rested entirely with Parliament. The Minister said that he could carry out all the reforms if supplied with money. If more engines, carriages and trucks could not he found by next year, the railways could not do the work.

Mr Roper, president, thanked the Minister for the interview, and Mr Cadman replied that he could not promise to remedy all the existing defects, but would tackle them one by one.