TRIAL FOR MURDER AT INVERCARGILL.

Otago Witness, Issue 740, 3 February 1866, Page 9

TRIAL FOR MURDER AT INVERCARGILL.

The Southland News of the 25 th instant has the following summary of the evidence in the case of Regina v. M'Connell, for the murder of Mrs Farrar, in Spey street, Invercargill, in November last. . The trial took place before Mr Justice Richmond, and resulted in the acquittal of the prisoner. Mr T. M. Macdonald conducted the case ior the Crown. ]^fr Harvey, with whom was Mr Macas«ey, of Bunedin, were retained for the defence.

The first witnesses examined were simply questioned regarding matters 6t detail. A model (constructed by Mr Smith) of the vrhare in which the murder was committed, was submitted' to the inspection of the jury, and which showed the position in which the body was found, and the different articles of furniture in their places, and materially assisted in the elucidation of the points brought forward in evidence. Dora Walker and Mrs Buckley, who were the first persons present at the discovery of the body of deceased, gave evidence respecting the position of the corpse, and the state of the room. In their opinion, the appearances presented were not such as to induce the belief of violence having been perpetrated. They agreed in their evidence as to the main points. Neither was able to state definitely the position of the stick which was found under the body ; the one witness (Mrs Imckley) stating that she only saw the point projecting a few inches on one side of it. The evidence of the police as to the appearances presented by tbe body was also inconclusive. In fact, it did not appear that at first any suspicion was entertained of foul play, the impression being that deceased had died of apoplexy ; and it was only after the discovery of the stick by Mr Middleton that it was considered necessary to call upon the authorities. The result of their investigation did not at first bear out the impression of violence, inasmuch as Detective Thompson and Sergeant O'Keef, when questioning M'Connel, did not think it requisite to give him the usual caution, believing that the ca«e was one of sudden death only, in which his evidence might be required. The discovery of a hat, which (with the stick) was known to be ong to M'Connel, aroused. a suspicion, andla post mortem examination by Dr Monckton, in the presence of Dr Deck, the coronor, pointed to the conclusion that death had resulted from violence. At the examination just concluded, the evidence of the witnesses did not in the slightest degree connect M'Connel with the crime, beyond the finding of the hat and stick at deceased's residence. His own statements to different townsmen were singularly contradictor)', but, as his Honor remarked in summing up. they were not to be regarded as evidence of his perpetration of the crime, but rather as indicative of a desire to screen himself from the imputation of having been in deceased's house for an improper purpose. The evidence of the medical witnesses was conclusive as to the cause of death, not differing materially in any particular. The counsel for the accused was apparently successful in an attempt to establish that death had resulted from apoplexy, either serous or common. No rebutting evidence was brought forward by the counsel for the accused. His Honor, in summing up, which occupied an hour and three-quarters, gave a most elaborate resume of the evidence. The, weak points of the case on the part of the Crown were most impartially commented on, the inferences favourable to the accused being with equal prominence stated.

The Jury retired at about 5 o'clock, and after remaining ia deliberation until half-past nine, returned a verdict of " Not Guilty."