THE TAPANUI MURDER.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 13449, 24 November 1905, Page 2

THE TAPANUI MURDER.

THIRD DAY OF THE TEIAT/.

In the Supreme Court yesterday, beforft his Honor Mr Juslicc Williams, the trial of Thomas Stott and George Hill Bromfey, charged with' having, on or about the 21st August, 1905, at Tapanui, murdered Ham Sing Tong, was resumed.

The Crown Prosecutor (Mr J. F. M. Frn?er), with him Mr I'. S. K. Macassey, conducted the case for the Crown.

Mr A. C. Hanlon defended the two accused,

Tho following gentlemen constituted tho jury:—John Packer (foreman), George Robert Jt'Crac-ken, James Crabbe, John Henry Kewish, John William Wildo, William Johnston, Alfred James Smith, Ernest Runaway, benjamin Ellis, George Miller Dawson, Thos. Collier, William Wilson Brown.

A large number of witnesses gave evidence, mostly corroborative, in the, general tonus of that given in the court below.

Robert. Giles, gardener, of Crookston. said that early in November, IflOt, ho sold tlia accused Stott two handkerchiefs.

Mr Hanlon said this was more new evidence he had not had notice of.

His Honor said that Mr Hanlon certainly should liavo had notice of evidence of this nature.

Mr Fraser said the evidence was referred to in the police reporl.

Mr Hanlon said he had had no time to'go round making inquiries, and the cvidenco was entirely new to him. So much now evidence lwd been spring upon him that it now became doubtful whether he ought to be defending the two accused jointly.

Mr Fraser: When did that occur to you? Sir Hanlon: II occurred to me las! night when you handed me the evidence of Charleo Bromley. X have thought of consulting other counsel as lo whero I sland in this case now.

Mr Frascr said he thought llr Hanlon wan aware of the cvidenco.

Mr Hanlon said that- if Mr Fvaser had not had the evidence in time he could understand better the fact that he had got 110 notice of it, but for the Crown Prosecutor to have such evidence and not to notify defending counsel was most extraordinary.

Ill' Fraser said he had assumed that anything known to the Bromleys would naturally be knoQn'ti to Mr Hanlon. ■

His Honor: That does not apply to this evidence we are taking now. Mr Fraser: It is probably an omission 011 my part—a matter for comment.

Mr Hanlon said" it. was much mOTe than that. The accused shouid not he prejudiced on their trial.

His Honor: There is no evidence of that yet.

Witness said the handkerchiefs sold to Stott wore red ones, similar to those produced. Ho now produced two others, which were also in stock at the time of the sale to Stott. They were of tho samo colour and pattern. John Brough gave further evidence as to tho discovery of the "plan!" 011 the Bromleys' place. He had never been in this patch of manuka before. After Charley Bromley spoke to him he went to see Constable Cowan. Had never bean lo bave a look about the scrub on liis own account. As a mailer of fact, lio wasn't troubling about it. He had considered it his duly to go to Constable Cowan. After Charley Bromiey found one plant it was not hard to find the other, because the manuka branches wero broken in such a way as to give a guide. When ho found the second plant he whistled to Constable Cowan. Beforo the constable came up witness had removed the covering of the plant and exposed tho bright key 011 top of the others. lie did not hancTCc the keys before the constable saw them. Had been in Tapanui since July. "Was previously for a year and seven months there, and before that was in Tasmania, bis native piacc.

Mr Hanlon: You are a bit of a boxer, are you not?

Witness: 'Well. I could always beat my sisters.—(Laughter.) Mr Hanlon: A very creditable performance.

Further corroborative evidence was given by Charles M'Donald, jun., of Tapanui; William O'Connor, of Ileriot; Thomas Garrick, of Tapanui; John Downie, of Ileriot: John Grant. Alexander M'Qncon, and William Whitefleld, of Tapanui.

John George Redditt said that it was easy to get anything from Sing Twig at night. Deceased would ask who was there, and then open the door. Witness lent the belt produced to the accused Bromley, audi never saw it afterwards until it was shown to him by the police.

James Kedditt and William Redditt also identified the belt as their brother's property.

Charles Bromley, brother of the accused George Bromiey, said that the two accuscd occupied a hut together, quite close to llic lint of the older Bromleys. Was at Sing Tong's place with George Bromley the Saturday or Sunday beforo the death of tho Chinaman. Deceased then said the on'y tobacco he iiad was a till of Navy Cut, which George Bromley purchased. Witness bought a' silk handkerchief at the samo time. On the night of tho 2lst August accused George Bromley wore ins best clothes; accused Stott bad on a pair of blue dungaree trousers and a grey coat and veet. On the afternoon of the football match at Herioi Stott borrowed 2s Cd from Mrs Bromley, and 4s from witness. Witness gave corroborative evidence as to tho " plant.''

William Henry James Earringtoo deposed that on the Saturday beforo the murder lie paid to deceased a .£1 Bank of Now Zealand ncte, very o'.d, with a gap in it near tho number.

By Mr Hanlon: Any one of several old notes produced might have been the note referred to.

Thomas James Quavle. post office employee, Tapamu, stated that on August Q9 he changed for James Bromley a JSt Bank of New Zealand note, very old. which felt damp.

Mary Elizabeth Bromley, mother of the accused gave evidence. Tho witness was in a highly nervous and hysterica', condition. She had handed to the police ono handkerchief which she believed to be the property o[ Stott: but cculd not identify others. On tho night of the 21st August, Georgo came homo about 9.30, stayed 23 minutes or so in witness's bedroom, and then went out lo his own lint. Witness heard him fling off his boots, and beard nothing more though r.he lay long awake. The court adjourned till 10.30 a.lll. to-doy.