MAGISTERIAL.

Timaru Herald, Volume CVI, Issue 16311, 13 August 1917, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

TIMARU, SATURDAY, AUGUST 11. (Before Mr H. S. Russell, J.P., and aii- P. E. Thoreau, J.P. A SERIOL'B CHARGE. Francis Lennie Philip was charged- ' with, knowing the contents thereof, ' sending or causing to be sent, letters '. threatening to do grievous bodily barm, i and to kill the girl to whom the letters • were sent. . ' Mr W. D. Campbell appeared for accused, who was on remand from the 1 Saturday of the previous week. Sub-Inspector Hastie outlined the • case for the prosecution and called, Tho girl in question, who said she , was employed at Soutbhurn. knew , tho aeiused, who was employed at the • same place. She was on friendly terms , with him, often going out for walks , with him. About the beginning of , July he gave her a letter which be said he found at the gate, and asked -, her "if it was hers. She read it, and , gave it to accused to read, but he said he wa-= too busy to read it. Shortly after she. gave the letter to her em- , plover to read. The accused went to , her a couple of days later and read it. ; Ho told her to take no notice of it. She wont home, -tnortly after, and stayed then., five days. 'When she came back she went out with the accused again, but he did not mention, the letter. The next day he brought a letter to her, and she read it. Accused said he received it the day before she went home. Before she went away she gave him permission to open any letters like the first one if they came. Accused said he took a copy of the original, which she did not see till the police showed it to her. On the following Sunday she went for a walk with accused, and he mentioned about the second letter, and asked her what she thought of it. She said she did not know. The writer of the letter asked the accused and witness to meet him at Glenie's stables on the follow- ' ing Saturday. They did not go. as she said the writer would nob appear in the streets. On July 30 her employer . gave her a letter, number three. The writer said he was going to blow her head off, ond the accused's too. She gave it to her employer, who gave it to the accused. He told her it was i dreadful, and said he would keep the letter to find out tho writer. On August 3 she was in the kitchen when the accused fame in. with the police. Acr.sed said they had found him guilty of writing the letters, as the notepaper and tho writing proved it. Tho girl's employer said that the accused had been with him for two years, and the previous witness had been employed for about a year. The ( two had been very friendly. About the middle of July accused said something about a letter he had picked up at the gate. Ho (witness) read tho letter and said it was a peculiar affair. The girl gave him tho letter. When the second letter arrived the accused said the letter-writer had appeared again. He (accused) handed a heap of papers across tho table to him. Accused said it was a copy of tho letter, and said he would keep the original and find but who wroto it. Witness did not see the original till the day before ho went to tho police, on July 31. Accused handed it to him in his (accused's) hut. Witness picked tho third letter up at the gate. That was on July 30. Witness took tho letter to the girl who read it, and then gave it to witness to read. Witness handed it to accused later on, and he (accused) kept it. When they were talking about the matter accused said it was time, they made a move. He said he had a clue as to where the first one came from. That letter had been written on tho fly-leaf of a book which accused said had witness's name in. He said he was sure the leaf fitted into the book. Accused said he had all the letters down in his hut, and witness said ho would go down and see them. Witness saw the book and satisfied himself that the leaf fitted into it exactly. Accused said he took the book from the house to read it, and that the letters were written by the people in the house. Anybody could have taken the book as there were plenty lying around the house. On August 3, Detective Fahey took accused into the kitchen, when accused said something about tho gentleman having bowled h:n> out. and something about being guilty. He said he had written the three letters. Ho said he did not know why he had written them. He was sorry for having done so, and did not wish anybody any harm. About 9 o'clock on thy night of August 1 something was thrown on tho roof of the house. Jt made a good rattle. He knew it was a clod or something like that. He went outside and let the dogs loose, but he found nobody. He went down to accused's hut, and after waking him up, told him to bo on the lookout. To Mr Campbell: Accused had been an extra, good worker. Witness did not know the accused and the girl were to be married, nor did he know that tho parents of the girl were against such a marriage. It did not occur to hiii-. that accused would write such letters. Detective-Sergeant Fahey said that I iri consequence of a complaint re- ! coived he and Sub-Inspector Hastie j went to the farm in question and interviewed the accused, to whom

witness showed the letters, the copy, and the book. Accused said tho copy was his writing. He said lie picked up the two first letters at the gate. He. had the book in his possession. Witness then arrested him and lie asked to he laken to the bouse of his employer. At the house accused said that he. had written the three letters, adding that lie was sorry and that he did norTmcan any harm.

To Mr Campbell: Accused did not say that unless the girl took action, net liing could be done. Sub-lnspo-tor Hast-io gave evidence corroborating that of tho previous witness.

Constable Thompson said that shortly alter accused had been locked up, one of accused's brothers went to see him, and ihe following conversation took

The brother: -AYed, Frank, tin's is awful : you are the first of the family ii> get over tho border. What have y.iu In en doing;-'■' Accused. --Don'r you worrv, I did it, and 1 have admitted it. Therj is no use trying to get out of it.' :

At- noon the same day witness wonti 1 the eel', and accused said, "1 could do a week in hero easily, and no matter \\i,ai becomes of me afterwards, I havo 1 satisfaction of knowing J did it, an-: ! am saving some other poor devil who should be in here with me."

I lie accused, sworn, said that between :le girl and himself there \wis an understood thing that- they were to be married. I hey were of different religions, but he <hd not know of anyone who voiild 1,.- against the marriage. Me Sound the first letter at the gato and e.:ive ii ,„ i|„. j,j,.| ]| o ro . u i' - tlu . e() day--, a', ter, and said if was a. strango tiling, lie did not write that letter.

Shortly afterwards the girl went away o-i a holiday, and before she went she authorised him to open anv letters that might cine. Before she went awav the -ecoml h-n.-r arrive,!. 11,- made a eooy of it. intending 10 keep the original and to give her the copy.

[ His intention was to try and find out who wrote the letters. He did not write that letter either. When the girl returned ho gave her the copv. He showed tho letter to his employer and told him that he (accused) thought the first letter was written in his house. Later on his employer handed him the third letter, which again he said he did not write.- Not one of the original letters was in his handwriting. He knew nothing of the letters before they appeared. _ He was under the impression that if he owned up to the offence the matter would drop. That was why he had written and signed the statement saying that he had written and sent the letters. To Sub-Ispector Hastie: He got the book in question rrom the house before the girl went on her holiday. He was in a hurry when the girl asked him to road the first letter. He noticed where the leaf was torn out of the book, and ha tried the letter to see if it fitted into tho book. He did not know whv he had told his employer that he had found a clue. ?Ie did know why he had said that there was "some poor devil who ought to be in with him." Ho did not remember saying anything that the constable had stated. ■ The Bench said that there was really nothing in the affair. It was very trivial. Either the accused must he it very silly man, or else he was not sound in his mind. As the ease was so trivial the information would be dismissed.