THE WEST COAST TRAGEDY.

Otago Witness, Issue 3336, 20 February 1918, Page 19

THE WEST COAST TRAGEDY.

TRIAL OF EGGERS CONCLUDED. VERDICT OF GUILTY RETURNED. SENTENCE OE DEATH PASSED. ( CHRISTCHURCH, February 12. The trial of William Eggers M'Mahon, otherwise Eggers, charged with the murder of John Couithard, near Greymouth, in November; also with the attempted murder of William Hall and Isaac James, and with the theft of £3659 16s Bd, was continued.

' Mr S. G. Raymond, K.C., prosecuted on behalf of the Grown, and accused was deby Mr W. J. Hunter. William M'Kay, medical practitioner at Greymouth, gave evidence that on the morning of November 9 Mr James came to his room. He wound in the left thigh. _ Witness extracted the bullet, which was similar to the one produced. The cartridge was of low grade, or Mr James had been hit from a distance. There was also a, small contusion on one hand, which might have been caused by Mr James's hand catching the door of the motor car. " Peter M'anderson, deputy at the State . mine, and a witness of the tragedy, said that when he and his son rounded the bend they noticed a box on the road, and at - the_ same time saw a motor car approaching. The car crashed into the box. A man immediately sprang from the bushes at the side of the road, wearing a mask, besides something tight across the skull. The man made a jump into position, with a revolver in each hand, calling "Hands up I," Witness and his son got off the road a few yards, turning as a succession of shots took place. Witness then moved to watch at the corner of the road. He noticed the same man on the railway as had stuck up the car. The man had a bag in his left hand. Witness went to the motor and found Coulthard lying at the roadside, dying, and Hall on the back seat of the car. About a minute elapsed after the shooting had stopped before he saw the man again on the railway line. Witness went to Runanga for a doctor, and on returning saw a ladder on the road, j He had not seen it before. Mr Hall's i pocket was on fire when witness reached j the car. j William Leonard Manderson, a son of i the previous witness, corroborated- his evi- I denco. ; . Hugh Steele, miner, gave evidence that ho was going to Greymouth an the morning of the tragedy. Near the scene Manderson signalled to stop. He and his brother pulled up near the motor. Coulthard was lying on the side of tho road, but died a few minutes later, Mr Hall being in the car and groaning. One of Oonlihard's pockets j was on fire, also a lying across his chest. Witness put tho fin?* ont. He saw an empty cartridge case on the road in a clot of blood near Coulthard's head. On ■ the rise near by witness found a billhook.

Adolphus Anderson Shannon, grocer, gave evidence as to receiving a cartridge case (32'calibre), which he handed t othe police. Charles Parfitt, clerk in the State mine at Dunollio, described accompanying Hall to the hospital. While witness wao looking at the car at the hospital Jama», nicked up four cartridges and two bullets. Witness • found that the revolver under th*'* seat belonged to the State mine. # It was of 33 calibre. Hall took It with him on leaving for Greymonth. When he saw the revolver, which had been recently fired, there were in it four empty shells and one live cartridge. There was a largy holo in the upholstery of the car, and one in th<> hood. The latter looked as if it had been fired from Detective-sergeant Ward said N h<3 met James at Grcymouth on the morning of November 9. He after-Yards went to the scene of the tragedy, and found a place in the bushes whore there was evidence that someone had recently crouched. In a neighbouring empty house he found that a firo had recently been lighted, and there were marks, as though someone with nailed boots had been walking' about. He also saw another place ~ of concealment, from which a person could obtain a {rood view of the cutting 900 yards away. Ho saw jnd-f-* cations of someone having recently been there. Witness described the identification of Eggeiis by certain people. On being taken to Greymonth. at the magisterial inquiry the accused said that from the point

on the railway embankment from which James said he had seen the car and shots fired by a masked man, the car could not be seen. Eggers had also pointed out a spot from whioh a car could be seen. He waa more correct than James, as the car could not be. seen from the spot mentioned by James. Alexander Cruickshank, inspector of police at Greymouth, gave evidence as to receiving four cartridge shells from James and two bullets, all of 32 calibre. Witness did not go to the scene of the tragedy till two days' after the occurrence. About 17 members of the police and detective force were engaged in investigations, and the State miners assisted in the search. The accused asked on November 21 if he might have counsel. Witness explained the conditions under which counsel could be secured. It was after Eggers had consulted Mr Joyce that he .objected to attend the taking of Hall's depositions. Mr Joyce was sent for entirely at the request of accused. Witness characterised as absolutely falsa the suggestion that the police offered to find counsel for Eggers for taking depositions, but not for the magisterial proceedings. The matter was fully explained, Eggers quite understanding the whole position. Dr Usher, superintendent of the Grey River Hospital, Greymouth, detaued the injuries from which Couithard and Hall died, and produced bullets extracted from their bodies. After Hall was shot in the forearm he might have been able to shoot, but not with accuracy. Walter Brook Taylor, traveller, of Wellington, said he had known accused for two years. 'On October 23 he met him on the Christchurch Railway Station. Accused was on his way to Arthur's Pass, and even- ■ tually went on to Greymouth. Accused had a bicycle, a small bag, and a big bag with him. He saw him three times in Greymouth between October 23 and November

9. •John Pender, of Dunollie,, said he bad had two conversations with accused—the first in connection with some valuable papers accused said he had lost on the road between Greymouth and Dunollie. Witness referred him to Mr Hall, as the pay gar had come in, and those aboard might have picked the papers up. In the second conversation accused told him he was buying land for a Christchurch firm. j Joseph Garvey, miner, of Dunollie, de- i posed to visiting: Alcock's cottage on November 9to get some tools. There was a man in the cottage, whom he identified as\ accused. ", \ Osmond Alcock, bootmaker, of Runanga, ' owner of the cottage, said he visited it on ,

November 3, and found a man in one of the front rooms. In reply to«wi'tnes3, the man said he had come from Blackball, and was going to work at the Rewanui mine. He told the man, whom he could not identify as accused, to make himself comfortable. Timothy Saunders, labourer, of Greymou'th, stated that he had known the accused under the name of M'Mahon for 15 months. He understood him to be a commercial traveller. He _ saw and spoke to him on the Cobdcn bridge on October 24. Witness expressed surprise that he was still in the district, and said: "You must have a of a good thing in your line of business." Accused replied that there was' lots doing in his business between Brunner and Runanga. On November ,8 he again saw accused on the Cobden bridge, and drew the attention of M'Gnire to accused's presence in the district. On this occasion accused had a carrier on Ins bicycle.

February 13. The trial of William Eggers M'Mahon, otherwise Eggers, charged with the murder of John Conlthard, near Grcymouth, in November ; also with tho attempted murder of William Hall and Isaac James, and with the theft of £3659 16s Bd, was continued. \ Mr S. G. Raymond, K. 0., prosecuted on behalf of the Crown, and accused was defended by Mr W. J. Hunter. Evidence was given by George Roberts (an employee of Kettle Bros., storekeepers, Grcymouth), Thomas Maguire (labourer), Christian Nissin (hairdresser), Uraino Mundy (restaurant-keeper), Archibald Arrol Stewart (brewer), Alexander Brown (aged 10), and William O'Neill (aged 13), tho witnessee identifying the- accused with incidents near tho date of the crime. Other witnesses before the luncheon adjournment were Harold William Webb diotelkecpor, Qreymouth), Arthur Percy Butt (ironrrroulder), Anton Falkenbach (manager of a motor garage at Hokitika), William Gerard Keller (hotelkceper,, Christchurch)., and John Watt' Ferguson (evelo dealer, Christchurch), chiefly with regard to identification. Detective Abbott gave details of the arrest of accused at Christchurch on November 15. At the police station accused was fumbling with something in a bag which was found to be a revolver. Detective Connolly, who was with witness, said: "You murderer, you're going to shoot U 3; hold him." Accused was "then handcuffed. Subsequently they went where accused was staying, arid in a bag found notes and. coin' totalling £3451 19s 6d. Accused was acquainted with tho find, but made no reply. He was then

I charged with the crime. On November 19 ' accused applied in tho Magistrate's Court ior permission for Mrs M'Mahon to visit him.' He received permission, and witness j made the necessary arrangements for the visit. Chief Detective M'llveney warned Mrs M'Mahon that anything she said in connection with the case would be taken down, and, if necessary, used. She was advised- not to say anything about the cast> at tho interview. Tho chief detective and ! witness were present. After a slight pause Mrs M'Mahon said: " Oh, Will, did you shoot the boy, Will?" Accused replied: "I cannot say, Macksic; there was someone , else. Mrs M'Mahon asked: "Why can't you clear yourself?" Accused replied i "No, it's no use. 1 have no chance. They have got enough evidence to hang me six times." Mrs M'Mahon said: "Don't talk to me about hanging, Will; you know how it makes me feel. Accused said: "Yes, I know," •» She then asked: "Whatever made you bring that money to our place?" Ho replied: "I don't know. I have made two mistakes. You see the position I am placed in. I cannot go anywhere and do anything. Tho police are dogging me about." Accused then turned to witness and Connolly, and said: "She knows no- ; thing about it at all." Later Mrs M'Mahon : said: "I didn't know that you were over there on the Coast till I got your post- ; card. I thought you were away down • south." ; To .Mr Hunter: The cloth was partly over the pistol in the handbag at the police station. The cloth was not wrapped evenly and carefully round the pistol. Ho could j see the butt of the automatic before it came out of the bag. Accused was .trying | his best to get it out of the bag. "He | made no attempt to hand it out. There was one bullet in the gun ready to shoot. In his cross-examination of Chief Detective James M'llveney, Mr Hunter asked: Did Mrs M'Mahon complain that she was being badgered and bothered -by the police and cross-examined by them, and that they kept her at the police station till 11.30 ! p.m.? M'llveney replied: No. She appeared to be _ satisfied with her treatment by the police, and said the police had been very kind to her. I don't know if she has changed her mind since. Continuing, witness denied that any trap had been set in connection with the interview between <• the accused and Mrs M'Mahon.

j February 14. The trial of William Eggers M'Mahon. otherwise Eggers, charged with the murder of John Couithard, near Greymouth, in November; also with the attempted, murder of William and Isaac James, and with the theft of £3659 16s Bd, was continued to-day. Mr S. G. Raymond, KG, prosecuted on behalf of the Crown, and accused was defended by Mr W. J. Hunter. Elizabeth M'Mahon gave evidence that a watch, chain, and pendant, costing £46, was bought with her money. She gave the aooused a roll of notes when they went out together. The pistol produced,, or one similar, was at her lodgings in Christchurch all the time Eggers was on the Coast. When the accused left on October 23 he had a good bit of money, including a bi<? roll of notes. The pistol was bought for her by the accused, as she wanted' to learn to shoot. She was surprised when she learned that the pistol was in the brief bag with a lot of ammunition, as she never knew Eggers *to take it out, and did not know that he had taken it to the* Coast. A statement said to have been made by Eggers that the police had enough evidence to hang him six times over was not made in hev presence. A pair of nailed boots (produced) belonged to accused, and had been in her room. Eggers did not take them to the Coast. The pistol (produced), or one similar was at her lodgings in Christchurch all the time Eggers was pn the Coast. On the night of the search witness looked for the pistol but could not find it. Two pieces of black cloth (produced) she recognised One was a piece of a black silk- handkerchief, and the other was a piece of crepe do chine material It had been used by witness in the making of a black apron. Accused left on October 24. He had a good bit of money, including a big roll of notes. She remembered seeing a £lO note on the outside. The bundle had an elastic | band round it.

His Honor: Did you know what ac- ; cused's business was? Witness: Just what he told me, I never j asked him particularly. Continuing, witness said Eggers had said he dealt in stock, and had mentioned dealing in land. She had reason to believe that • Eggers received monthly cheques for com- ' mission, and could say for certain that she j had seen letters containing money. She j was always at work, and did not know accused's business movements. She did not know that accused was supposed to be an expert revolver shot. Lucy Thompson, lodginghousekeeper. living at No. 286 Gloucester street, said accused first wont to her house on September 11 last. Accused told her he was working for Anthony Hordern, of Sydney. W. H. Tisdall, gunsmith, gave expert evi- . dence regarding the revolvers, and this conI eluded the evidence for the prosecution.

Mr Hunter said he did not intend to call any evidence for the defence. Mr Raymond (Crown Prosecutor) then addressed the jury. Ho said the evidence showed that it was the second attempt that had been made on' the State mine motor within a fortnight, for on October 26 a fallen tree had been found on the side of the road. Tho highwayman had then learned his lesson. He had found that he required a good lookout, and that an obstruction must be placed in position at the last possible moment. The facts all led to the conclusion that the crime was carried out by one man. The accused was no stranger to the West Coast, and his several visits were enumerated. During those visits, it was shown, accused was constantly on the roads leading to Runanga. The closest habitation to the scene of the tragedy was Alcock's cottage. Alcock saw a man in the houso on November 3, and from the evidence of others there was no reason to doubt that the man was any other than accused'. What was the reason for a man said to bo a land dealer and commercial traveller occupying an uninhabited house? Tho man who" aocupiecl the cottage and the accused were one and the same. He claimed that the identification was clear. "But," continued Mr Raymond, "I come now to a piece of evidence that is overwhelming. I refer to the arrest of the a few days later with the missing money in his possession." Unless Eggers could show how this money camo into his posession, ho moist be accounted responsible for the manner in which it had been acquired—in this case by robbery, accompanied by murder. Yet not from start to finish was a word of explana-

tion given by accused. Counsel said it was something more than a coincidence that tho two classes of ballots and cartridges found on the bodies of Hall and Obuthard and gathered from the scene of th<?> tragedy and those discovered in accused's possession were one airtl tho same—namely, Peters and Winchester ammunition to fit "a .32 calibre automatic- pistol. Mr Raymond, in conclusion, said that no obstruction had boon placed in accused's way in respect of obtaining counsel. The a! tack on the police was a side issue. Mr Hunter, in his address for the defence, referred to the disadvantages accused had been under since his arrest. Ho pointed out that it was only a week and a few days before his trial in _the Supreme Court that he was p Vied with counsel. He (counsel) did not env 1 for one moment at the decision of Mr jJuit'ce Denniston that none of the money found in accused's possession should be used for his defence, yet from the evidenco given it was apparent that some of that money was accused's or Mrs M'Mahon's. Counsel then referred to the partial accounts of tho crime given in the newspapers, which made it difficult, for a jury to place themselves in the proper position to try accused, free from prejudice. On the West Coast one newspaper had forgotten the standard of decency which animated the press as a rule throughout the country, and did not scruple to refer to accused as the murderer, his hands dripping with his victims' blood. Counsel asked whether the Crown had proved to the jury'3 complete satisfaction that Eggers was the man who committed the crime. If they had any doubt, then accused was entitled to the benefit of that doubt. He submitted that accused was not the man who committed the crime. The case was narrowed down to a question of identification. Tho Crown asked the jury to presume that the man seen in the empty cottage was the man who committed the crime. No one came before the court and said: "I saw that man commit the crime," or " I saw that man discharge the pistol into the body of Coulthard." To introduce presumption was monstrous in a murder case. Counsel contended that the fact that there was another empty cottage near the scene of the crime further back from the road and a little further away mad© it doubtful -whether the man who occupied the cottage nearest tho scene of the tragedy was the man who committed the crime. It would be more reasonable for any man planning such a crime to hide himself in the cottage_ further back, where he would not be- so liable to bo observed. The evidence of identification was unreliable, and they could not safely accept it. Referring to the weapons alleged to have been used by the murderer, counsel said the pistols produced in court were not identified, and if accused had committed the crime these pistols would not have been found on his person. The jury might ask how did accused, get the money? It was for accused on the present, indictment to,, explain where he got tho money. What would the murderer do with tho money? He would plant it somewhere close at hand in the bush. Counsel contended that no adequate steps were taken to find the murderer, as the police ought to have had a cordon of men thrown out. If this had been done the murderer would possibly have been captured the samo day as the crime was committed. - Counsel suggested that it -was possible that the money had' been found, and that the finder had yielded to sudden temptation and decided to keep it. JUDGE'S SUMMING UP.

Mr Justice Chapman, in summing up, saic that, in the absence of direct evidence identifying Eggers as the person who committed the crime, it was incumbent on the Crown, by means of- cogent evidence, tc show that accused was a. person who participated in the crime or that he alone committed it. The crime appeared to have been carefully planned. PL's Honor emphasised the fact that there was no evidence respecting any legitimate occupation or business of Eggers in the Runanga district, or, for that matter, on the West Coast. Accused's correction in the lower court at Greymouth of Mr James's evidence as to the impossibility of James being able to see the car from a certain point on the railway indicated minute familiarity wjth the locality. His Honor referred to the identity of the cartridges of two kinds that could bo used in an automatic pistol (Peters's and Winchester), whioh had been used to kill the unfortunate man, and somo of those two kinds of cartridges wore found in accused's brief bag. But all this evidence was of secondary importance as compared with the evidence respecting the finding of a large sura of the missing money, in accused's possession. Counsel had made the point that accused was not answering a charge of theft. If that sort of thing satisfied them, well and good; but how could they separate the stealing from the murder? The law expected a man who was found in possesion of property of enormous value six days after it was stolen, if he was an honest man, to give an explanation and some assistance. To that, however, no explanation had been given. That was the whole question, so far as the jury was concerned, and they wore quite entitled to sav that the man who stole the money was the man who murdered Coulthard.

VERDICT OF GUILTY. The jury retired at 6.38 p.m. to consider the verdict. They returned at 8.51 p.m. with a verdict of guilty. When asked if he had anything to say, accused seemed to make an attempt to articulate, but did not say anything. SENTENCE OF DEATH PASSED. His Honor (assuming the black cap) said: "Prisoner, the jury has discharged its duty in tho only maimer in which it could have discharged it in accordance with the evidence. I have to discharge my duty in the only manner in which the law allows." Plis Honor then passed tho sentence of death, Eggers, who showed no signs of emotion, was then removed from the dock. THE POLICE THANKED. His Honor then said: I wish to say before, this court is dissolved that I think tho thanks of the country are duo to tho detectives and the police officer* assisting them for the manner in which they have brought this offender to justice, to Detective Ward for the way in which the West Coast evidence was brought together, and to Detective-sergeant Connolly and Detective Abbott for tho manner in which they conducted the investigation and arrest. No doubt other officers and some of the general public are entitled eo a measure of credit for their assistance." ■• THE STOLEN MONEY. His Honor ordered that tho money found on the person of accused and in his bags be declared the property of tho Crown. "The only things I have any doubt about,"

' I J ho said, "are these three ton-pound notes, which may be a matter for consideration later. I make, the order with this reservation. 1? any application is made to me with regard to those notes I reserve that matter for consideration. As for the rest, j tho whole of the money is declared to bo the property of tho Grown." j The court, then, adjourned till Monday.