AN EXTRAORDINARY CASE.

Otago Witness, Issue 2263, 15 July 1897, Page 23

AN EXTRAORDINARY CASE.

CHARGE AGAINST EDWARD FAVELL. The case Louisa Rollinson v. Edward Favell, a claim for £15, money alleged to have been lant to the defendant when acting as inspector in connection -with the administration of outdoor relief by the Benevolent Trustees, was resumed at the Magistrate's Court before Mr B. H. Carew, S.M., on Pi iday afternoon. Mr Hanlon appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr C. M. Mouat for the defendant. Catherine Benneworfch, residing in Hanover street, Dunedin, said she knew the parties to the action. She had seen them together on several .occasions at her .place, the first time on the 6th of January of this year, as far »s she could remember. Witness heard the last of a. conversation between them. Favell told Mrs Rollinson, " Don't go home any more ; I'll eet you righted." Mrs Rolliaaou said, "I don'd know what to do for the best." Favell then went away. Next time witness saw Favell was when she went with Mrs Rollinson to the Benevolont Institution office on the 17th of February. She remembered that because it was the day on which Favell got notice from the trustees to leave. Witness And Mrs Rollinson walked up and down the footpath on the opposite side ot the street from the office. Witness saw Fave'l in the passage of the office, and Mrs Rollinson beckoned to him, but Faveli took no notice of her. Witness went across to the office and asked Favell to come out, and he did so, standing outside the office door. Witaesa said ths.t Mrs Rollinson "wanted to see him about the trouble he had left her in, and he said, "It is impossible for me to see her ta-day, but I intend seeing her some day through the week." Witness said, " On what day will you ses her ?" Favell said he could not namß a day, but it would be «ome time that week. Witnesa said, " Well, what message will I take to her ?" and h» said, "Perhaps to-mon'ow." He added, " It is impossible for me to go to her house, as her husband is at-home, and I can't have a conversation, in the street." Wjfcness said, "You can come'to my place to see her" ; and added, 4 ' You can't come to-morrow, as I have to go to work at 1 o'clock."" Favell said, "I can't come any other day." Witness replied, "Well, sooner than stand in your light, you may come." Witness then returned to Mr Roll'nson, and Favell went back into the office. When they returned to witness's place Mrs Rollinson wrote a letter to Favell, which ahe read to witness. Witness's litle girl, aged 12, was given the letter to take to Favell, and she went away withit. The girlf etched a message back, andj|ave it to Mrs Rollinson. That night witness and Mrs Rollinson went to the overbridge, and met Favell there about 8 o'clock. It was a moonlight night, and witness seeing Favell coming drew Mrs Rollinson's attention to him. Mrs Rollinson went up to him, and they went round the corner, where they remained between 10 and 15 minutes. Mrs Rollinson then came back to witness. Witness had no doubt about it being Favell. Next time witness saw th«m together was on the Monday following at htr own house. Faveil came and asked witness if Mrs Rollinson was there, and witness said, "No ; she has not come along yet." Faveli said, "I can't wait long. I have to go to Anderson's Bay and Morning ton." Mrs Harris then came in, and Favell left. Witness went to the door to see him away, and he said, "Tell Lou it is all right. I have a little money for her." Witness said, " She will bs in & great state at your not seeing her. You had better go round Castle Btreet to meet her." Favell said he would do so, and went away. Witness saw Favell on the next Friday at her own house again. Favell came in after 10 in the morning, and said, " Has Lou gone mad ?" Witness said, " I think she has enough to make her go mad. I should have gone mad if I had been her." J?avell said, " She wrote and told me she has put it in the hands of a lawyer, and I had better not see her; I had better see her lawyer." Witness said, "I don't think she has done so j^et"; and Favell replica, "Mrs Harris has been to the office and nearly ' blowed the g»ff' on me." He also said, "If Lou wants a witness she can have you, but I won't have Mrs Harris." He asked witness if she would take a message to Mrs Rollinson, and witness said she would. He then asked witness to go to Mrs Rollinson and ask her to meeb him at the Gardens at 3 o'clock that afternoon. Witness said she would take the message, and told Favell not to come to her place any more, as people would ba wondering what he was doing there, seeing she was not getting relief. Favell said he would not like witness's name to be dragged into it. Witness conveyed to Mrs Rollinson Favell's requeit to her to meet him at the Gardens. By Mr Mouat : Her first conversation with Favell was on the 6th January, about 12 o'clock. On the occasion of going to the office with Mrs Rollinson she saw Favell about halM past 2. On the 18th February witness left her house about 1 o'clock and returned a little after 5 o'clock. On the 22nd February she saw Favell about five minutes past 1. Witness wan on the benevolent fund for three months last year, and during that time Favell visited her on the Benevolent Trustees' busioeßs once. After that witness was in the hospital for several week?, and after she came out J?avell again called on her. He visited the house at other times, but she was out. Witness had one Mrs Grant living with her, but Favell never made a complaint to her on that account. While in the hospital Mrs Harris looked after witness's house, and after she came out of tbe hospital her sister was with her and helped her in her work. Ruby Benneworth, daughter of the last witness, said she knew the defendant. She had delivered letters to him for Mrs Rollinson — five or six, she thought. She took them to the benevolent office. The first letter ahe took was

abaut a fortnight before she went back to school after the Christmas holidays. That may nofe have been the first. All the letters she delivered she gave to the defendant. By Mr Mouafc : The first letter she delivered was on the lTt/h-Pebruary. Her mother had told her that was the date. She could not Bay the dats she gave the last letter to defendant. She always'walked into the room the defendant was ! in. There was nearly always another man there ; he had a cardboard with a lot of names oa it. j To Mr Hanlon : The school holidays ended | about the end of January, and it was a fortnight before that that she took a letter to defendant. i This closed the plaintiffs case. | Mr Mouat said the evidence .for the defence i would be this : The defendant would say that, i ifo far from borrowing any money from Mrs RollinsoD, he li&ti nob at any time for any pur- ! pote ever had a single financial transaction with i her, and that he had never for any purpose or any time given her a siagle penny or received i oneirotn her. He woald also deny that he had any social intimacy or improper relations with her. He would also say that, as i'or the storms which had been told by the plaintiff as an excuse for defendant borrowing 'the money — that his daughter was ill and that he had incurred expense with Dr Closs for medical attendance — the facts .were that his daughter was never ill and that ho never owed Dr Closs a penny for medical attendance. His church accounts had never been wrong, and as for having a whisky still in his own house that was almost too ridiculous to require any refutation. He would also say that as far as he oould possibly trace the matter out at this date, relying on bis books and his memory, not on one single date given by the plaintiff to recall the events that &ad taken place bad lie ever met 'her in a house or on the street. Plaintiff had given some 13 dates, and bad fixed not only the date of almost every event, but also the time of the day, and defendant would show thab on each of those dates it was either impossible for him to be where shs said he was at the time, acd that, iv some cases, it was highly anlikeiy and improbable. Of course, he could not fix every-time. His evidenoe on that point would be corroborated by witnesses on three of the dales mentioned. In the firsfc place, Mrs Rillinsou said she met defendant on tb« 6bh March in King street, near Albany street, and lent kin* a £10-aote, which sho had received from Miss Raeburn (now Mrs Hopkins). Mrs Hopkias would say sho never gave &uy money to Mrs Rollinson till the 10th March, and that the money she gave her never contained a £10-note. Mra Uollinnon said she met defendant on the 22nd Pebru&ty iasc wear her houee in Castle street at five or ten minutes past 1 o'clock. Mrs Wills would say that defendant was in har house in Dswling etreet at a quarter to 1 o'clock, and that he lefc some time after 1 o'clock. Then Mrs Anderson wonld s*y that defendant was at her place in South Diraedin at a quarter-past 1 o'clock. Mrs Rollinuon said tha.t on the 26th February she met dafendant at the bridge on the Opoho roitd at a minute or so att«r 3 o'clock. Three witnesses would tell his Worship that defendant was at South Dnnediu from half-past 1 o'clock till after 3 o'clock, and that they had good reason for fixing tha time Defendant did not demy that he had met the plaintiff a number oi times in her house and out of it, and he would say where and under what circumstances he met her. He would tell his Worship he had been acquainted with her for the last six or seven years as inspector for the Benevolent Institution Trnstees ; that when the fire occurred on the 25th February, 1896, he was requested to go down to her honse by the chairman of the trustees to gee whether 6he was in need of any assistance ; and that he went to her house in one of Waghorti'a cottages in a right-of-way off Castle Btreet to see if she needed assistauce. He saw Mrs Rollinson in her house on that day, and there was very little fnrniture there then. He paid her a second visit later for the same purpose, and saw she was plentifully supplied with furniture and was not in need of assistance, which he reported to the chairman of the trustees. About the 19th March he paid a third visit. He was visiting other people in the right-of-way who reoeived aid from the trustees, when Mrs Jlollinson called him in to show him what things she had received since his previous visit. Sha said she was going to buy some more things, mentioning some articles. Defendant recommended her to go to Mr Armgtead's as he thought he could get Mr Arrasfcead to sell her the furniture cheaper. About the 20th defendant was going to Mr Armste&d's for the purpose -of getting him to sell the furniture cheaply, and he saw Mrs Rollinson going in the same direction. He waited for her, and they went to Mr Armstead's together. Defendant mentioned the circumstances of the case to Mr Armstead — that Mrs Rollinson had been burnt out, and that a subscription had been raised for her, — and asked him to let her have the things she required as cheaply as he could. Mr Armstead ■aid he would, and defendant then left Mrs Rollinson there to get what things she wanted. Defendant reported what he had done to the chairman of the trustees, who approved of it. Some time^" after this defendant was in the right-of-way again, visiting other people who were receiving aid, when Mrs Kolliason called him iv to see the furniture she had bought from Mr Armstead. lb "was at this time that - Mrs Rollinßon told him she was buying articles of jewellery, and defendant recomtnanded her noc to spend her .money in such things, but to put it in the Post Office Savings Bank lor a rainy day. Some time after this defatK a. it met Mrs Rollinsoa in Castle street, and as sbe was passing him she held up a Post Office Savings Bank book and said, *'I have done what you told me to do." Those were all

j the visits he paid to her, as far as he} could ! remember, while she .was in Waghorn's house. | Mrs Rollinson moved from there to a house'in Oastle street north ; and behind this house Mr j Rollinaaa'a father and mother lived, and old Mr and Mrs Rollinson were on the benevolent fund. In consequence of that, defendant had to visit them. TVhen going down to visit these old people he had to pass Mrs Rollinson's kitchen-door and back -yard, and sometimes Mr* Rollinson would see him going down and sbop him and say a few words to him. In that house he visited her only twice, and it came about in this way : Old Mrs Rollinson was suffering from a bad leg, and Mrs Rollinson, Jan., one day called defendant in to speak to him about thei old lady, and to ask if a doctor could not'bei sent down to her. On that occasion, there waa a woman and some children present. The woman was not Mrs Harris. In consequence of the conversation defendant got Dr Gloss to call, on old Mrs SSollinson after he had reported the. matter to the trustees. The second time hfi went was in oonneotion with the same business. The old lady was not getting better, and she had run out of medicine. Mrs Rollinson, Jan.,, bailed the defendant up, asked him into the house, and requested him to send some more ( medicine. Ofl.tnafc occasion there were somn | children present, one of them a girl of 14. • Dafendant reported the matter to the trustees, and Dr Closs again called. Those were thw only two occasions on which he had been in tha bouse in Castle street north. Defendant had 1 met plaintiff occasionally since then in the street, but he could not fix any time nor any particular piece ; there -was nothing important: to mark them. • Defendant bad in the course.of his duties to see a large number of women, and even when they were nob on the Benevolent ] they stopped him and had a chat with him. .' As "to Mrs Harris, defendant said he had only met her once at Mrs Rollinson'.s, and that: was shortly after the fire in Waghorn'n cottage, lie had met her three or four timeß at Mrs Bennewortb's when "net j was vißtting -there, and once after thati iin the Btreet. On ° the last occasion ahe ! asked him to get her some relief. Defendant; told her she wonld bave to apply in tno I ordinary way to tho office. Defendant denied j that any conversation ever to:ik place between , him and Mrs Rnlh'nson snoh as had been teiC) - fied to by Mrs Harris. As to Mrs Beniieworbfc , he had oust her in her own house between May • and August-, 1896, in his capacity as inspectoi? ' of the benevolent ; she was then getting relief. 1 OC course, defendant had met her before tha<i time when getting relief, but never since, and j therefore the couversations deposed by her . hetwean him and Mrs Rollinson never occurred. Defendant wonld also deny that he had ever received a single letter from anyone — Mrs Roliinson, Mrs Harris, Mrs Benneworbh, or the I girl, — or that he ever wrote a letter to them or { any of them. Defendant was in the employ of j che Benevolent Trustees for a number of years, J but about March last he left their service and ! made arrangements to go away with a party of I iniuers. ', Mr Hanlon objected to this line of evidence, j Mr Mou».t said he wished to show why I defendant }eft the town ; there was a suggen* tion that he went away to avoid tho woman. The fact was that the defendant left Dunedin to go with a party of gold minors to the interior of Otago. He did not leave his address whan he left, as lie ; did not know what were the postal arrangei raents of the place to which he was going. ! The first time he ever heard of a claim being made against him was when a party went up to him with a letter from Canon King, saying that a charge had been made against him. J He came back and put the matter into his 1 (counsel's) hands at onoe, and counsel wrote a j letter to Mrs Rollinson, which he would [ ash his learned friend to produce. It ; would be seen by it that ifc "was { really the defendant who commenced thu action. Defendant had never boon in want: | of money during 1896, and he had lived comi fortably and happily with his wife and family !at home. Therefore, the effect of the evidence j for the defence was to chargethe three women — I Mrs Rollinson ( Mrs Harris, and Mrs Benneworth — with a conspiracy to bolster up by perjury an attempt at blackmail, either on Mrs ■ Favell or Mr Fa veil. Counsel had looked as 1 far as he could to find evidence of the necessity J of the women and the motive nnder which they I were acting, and he submitted it -was partially | supplied in the statements they made to Mrs • Favell on the 13th March. Counsel was going < on to refer to the statements made, when His Worship observed that it wonld be necessary to make a break at that point, as he had an inquest to attend to. The further hearing of the case was adjourned till f riday next.