CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 10587, 18 October 1910, Page 2

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

ON A CHARGE OF THEFT

Before Mr T. Hutchison, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court yesterday afternoon hearing was continued in the case against Amy Hamilton, charging her with breaking and entering, the dwell-ing-house of George Tomkins and stealing therefrom five £1 notes, the* property of George Tomkins. Jane Tomkins, wife of George Tomkins, continuing her evidence after the Mail went to press, said that on Friday, September 30, she showed accused how her purse had burst and accused remarked that she had too much money. Thereat witness opened the purse" and accused could see the notes inside. Accused asked witness if she were going down town that day, ana she replied that she was not going" till Friday. Witness saw accused once aga.in in the morning, and again in the afternoon at the fence. Accused asked her if "she were going to the cemetery, and she said no. When witness came out with her baby accused said to; her that 'she should go to the corner and see "how flash Hensleigh's place, looked." .Witness-wont down the street and met Mrs Eddy Tomkins. With ' her she 'stayed talkiug for about half an hour, i During tho whole of this time sho could | have seen anyone go into her gate, i When she had been talking about five minutes she saw Mrs Hamilton come to her gate, look down the street, and go in again. She may have been five minutes oirb of sight of the house from '2.15 when sho went out to 3.15, when she ' got back. She saw nothing new or flash in Hensleigh's house. She had left the back door open and shut the -door between, the porch and the kitchen. '. His Worship here remarked that it the porch door were open there could be no breaking, though there might be entering. ■ By consent of the prosecution and defence tho charge of breaking, entering, and theft was therefore dismissed /without prejudice; and defendant being charged with theft elected to be 'dealt with summarily. She pleaded not guilty, and the evidence taken on the major charge was accepted as applying to tho present case. Mrs Tomkins, continuing her evidence, stated that on examining the drawer where she had left her purse sho saw that it was still locked and the key was where she had left it; but the fivo £1 notes and the two receipts had been taken out of the plirse. The previous week accused had borrowed the' key of witness' duehesse, as she said her husband had lost his own. She returned the key, saying that it fitted; 'and later Mr Hamilton told witness that he had had the key in his pocket all the time. Mrs Hamilton knew that witness kept her drawer locked. The receipts produced had been found by witness —one in the passage and the other inside the gap of Mrs Hamilton's fence.

To Mr Ongley: Witness did not stand talking round the corner. She offered to lend her key to Mrs Hamilton. To the Magistrate: Mrs Hamilton did not know where the key of the drawer was kept; but she could easily have found it, as it was in a vase just on the top of the duehesse chest. Witness intended to be out only a few minutes; but Mrs Hamilton knew she would be longer, as she saw her talking in the street.

Annie Elizabeth Dalgleish, aged twelve years, said that some time between twenty past two and twenty to three on Friday afternoon she saw Mrs Hamilton come through the gap from Mrs Tomkins' section.

Constable M'Gregor stated that in company with .Constable Macartney he visited Mrs Hamilton. Constable Macartney told her that Mrs Tomkins had lost five pounds, and that sha was suspected of the theft. Accused asked why and she was told, "You were seen to' leave the premises." Accused said that she was only in the premises in the forenoon, when she went in to look at the clock. She stated further in reply to questions that she had be/Sii flown town in the afternoon and'called at the Farmers' Co-op. and Aikenhead's. She asked them if they-"would like to search the house and.-Showed them her purse with 2s t inv She also said that she had -B0 + 6-' livid much" money since they had shifted into their new house.

Win. Aikenhead, draper, said that during the afternoon of the 30th Mrs Hamilton came into his shop and paid him £l.

Thomas Cooney, clerk at the Farmers' Co-op., said that about 2.30 p.m. on the 30th Mrs Hamilton came, in and paid £1 by bank note. Mr Onglcy submitted that the: case was n6tbing but a case of suspicion. Mrs Tomkins had suspected her neighbor and had filled in with this allthc details of the conversation at the hedge.

His Worship said that the only point Wuifc appeared to want clearing up was where accused got the money with which she had paid the accounts, as she had said before that she had no money. \

John Watson Hamilton, husband of .accused,, said that the beginning of September he gave his wife £4. There was nothing particular to be paid out of that, as he himself always paid the grocery account. On Friday, September 30, witness had the key that fitted his tlrawer in his pocket. Accused giving evidence on -her own behalf denied that she told Mrs 'Tomkins to go and see Hensleigh's place. She went down town about two o'clock and passed Mrs Tomkins on the way. In addition to the bill mentioned she paid 12s 6d to Irving. . His Worship said that the only point that he could have gone on —the fact of accused having money when a short time before she had none—had been explained. The information would bo dismissed.