ROBBED AND BRUTALLY DONE TO DEATH
Stranger Relieves Chinaman of Gold In The Kyeburn Diggings, Then Shoots Him
POLICE ARREST AND CHARGE YOUNG LABORER
(From "N.Z. Truth's" Special Dunedin Representative.) Friend to all men, white and colored, who passed the lonely way of the Kyeburn, Jo Shen, "Chum," as he was affectionately known, has passed the Great Divide — despatched from his solitary existence on the Kyeburn diggings to eternity by the brutally severe and ruthless hand of the murderer.
FOR primitive savagery, the killing of this highly respected and inoffensive Chinaman eclipses the tragic slaying of old Andrew Jose, the Stewart Island fisherman, whose murder last December caused a wave of justifiable indignation to sweep throughout the Dominion.
Whereas, the motive behind the killing of Andrew Jose was never disclosed, the murder of Chum was the lust for gold by some aa yet unknown murderer.
But all the gold that was taken from Chum's lonely hut out on the Kyeburn Diggings was two ounces — poor recompense to quell the mental torment and remorse that the murderer must at present be suffering.
Scarcely had the news reached Dunedin than the detective force spread its net completely around whole district, covering every means of egress.
Within seventy hours of the commission of the crime, William John Hardie, a young man of 23 years, a laborer by occupation, appeared in the Dunedin Police Court to answer a charge of murdering the Chinese prospector.
The combination of Central Otago and gold conjures up in the mind such names as Gabriel Reid, Edward Peters ("Black Peter"), Grogan and Fox, and of the vast hordes who followed up these men were many Chinese and foreigners of other nationalities.
The celestial took a strong hand in the early and adventurous times, but now they are represented by only a few fossickers who seem content to struggle along on the pittance they wash from their fast declining claims.
The passing of the years saw the gold-bearing potentialities of the district dwindle and flourishing townships quickly fell into a state of decadence in which they remain to-day.
The lonely location of this brutal and murderous assault is one which the fiction writers devote pages to describe. The reader who is unable to draw upon memory and personal experience cannot possibly conceive more than a faint idea of the absolute solitude which pervades and envelopes the undeveloped interior of Otago.
Never an enemy had Chum, and few vices had he. Chum dearly loved a gamble, but even in this he tempered his desires with moderation and his spasmodic visits to the city were the only occasions on which he engaged in the favorite celestial pastime.
Early diggers still residing in and around Naseby informed a "N.Z. Truth" representative that Chum's claim at one time returned a good percentage of payable gold, but of later years it has not been such a lucrative proposition. However, it supplied him with a livelihood, and there in contentment, with his dog (up till two months ago his only companion), he eked out an existence in the solitude of the Kyeburn.
With his clothes saturated with blood, and leaving a trail of his blood on his erratic course up the ridge, Chum heroically crawled the half-mile to where Sue was working to tell him of the tragedy.
"He say he kill me unless I give him £100," Chum Informed Sue. "I give him two ounces of gold and then he shoot."
Sue is an old man, sixty years of age, and admits that he was terrorstricken lest he should meet a similar fate.
He assisted Chum back to the hut and laid him out on his bunk, making him as comfortable as he possibly could in the circumstances.
Chum implored him to go for assistance, but nightfall was gathering, and the fear of a violent death overcame the old Chinaman. He left the hut ostensibly to go for aid, but spent a night of terror huddled beside Chum's dog, hiding in the tussocks some distance away from the hut.
Nearest medical aid was some sixteen miles away, and by the rugged nature of the country no assistance could have been rendered to the dying man even if Sue had traversed the treacherous track in the dark.
Sue frankly admitted that he was afraid the stranger would return to the hut and kill him also, thus removing effectively any living soul whose testimony would bring the murderer within the law's grasp.
The anguish and mental suffering experienced by the unfortunate Sue during that awful night, lying out in a heavy Central Otago frost, was very apparent when he arrived in Dunedin on Thursday night.
Throughout Friday he braved the ordeal well as he shuffled from room to room in the police station making statements through his interpreter and assisting the police to identify the man who, Sue asserted, was the stranger who visited their camp on the tragic day.
Though the greed for money was obviously the motive for the murder, the felon evidently hurriedly ransacked the hut once he had dispatched Chum on his way from this world, as he overlooked some silver in a drawer and also some paper money which Chum had in his possession.
It seems apparent that though he had fatally wounded Chum, he was afraid to grapple with him and rifle his pockets.
The three-roomed hut which Chum knew as his home for the past two decades, is a squat, dingy, baked brick and iron structure on a wind-swept ridge overlooking the claim.
It is a typical miner's dwelling, with heavy boulders on the iron roof to stay it against the gales which sweep the ridge.
The front porch was littered with buckets and shovels used by the prospectors in their work, while two pieces of beef hung from nails beneath the roof of the porch.
The interior furnishings are crude — a litter of cooking and eating utensils and all manner of canned provisions, condiments, spices and bagged rice covering the table in the kitchen.
The only decorations are two colored views of the Dunedin exhibition, depicting the dome of the grand court and a bird's-eye view of the whole layout.
These pictures were purchased by Chum at the exhibition, which was the last occasion of his visit to Dunedin. It is suggested that these may play a prominent part in the murder trial.
Sue Pee's bedroom opened off the rear of the kitchen, while a door to the right gave entrance to the murdered man's apartment. It was on a bunk in this room that his body was found at 10.30 on Wednesday morning.
The top of the body was still warm, but rigor mortis had set in, indicating that death had taken place at about 8.30 a.m., or some twelve hours after the unfortunate man had been left by his terror-stricken comrade to his fate.
An oil lamp, lit by Sue before he left Chum on the previous afternoon, was still burning when Dr. Eudy and Constable Fox, of Naseby, first visited the scene of the murder.
Chum was fully dressed, and wore three shirts,'while his body was covered with blankets and coats.
The doctor expressed the opinion that on account of the haemorrhage there was little chance of Chum having survived had help been immediately available to transport him over the rugged country out to civilization.
The problem at present engaging the attention of the police authorities who visited Kyeburn under the supervision of Superintendent J. C. Willis, is the whereabouts of the rifle with which Chum was slain. The murderer made a quick getaway, evidently taking the rifle with him, and it is surmised that he made for the railway by a devious route known as the Back Road, a little-used by-way, as no strangers passed through Kyeburn and Dansey's Pass that night.
A man was seen in unusual circumstances at Ranfurly on Wednesday morning, and on the same morning two ounces of gold were sold to a bank.
What happened to the rifle which sped Chum to eternity will probably remain an unsolved mystery, as there are miles and miles of rugged country into which it could be planted safe in the knowledge that it would never be discovered.
Where the gold was actually given to the stranger is another point on which there is not much light, though it is considered probable that the transaction took place in the hut where Chum's empty chamois gold bag was found on the table in his bedroom.
The aged Sue Pee is a religious subject, and still wears the pigtail. Like many more of his race he is nervous of violence and adheres strictly to his faith in the protection of his own God.
He is the only human who can give any practical aid in bringing a callous murderer to justice.
In fairness to Sue, whose efforts to assist his injured employer might seem rather futile, the police state that at no stage have they suspected him of being in any way implicated with the murder of Chum.
The shooting was apparently accomplished at short range.
Evidently the Chinaman endeavored to protect himself by lifting his right arm against the first discharge, as the bullet entered near the elbow. The second shot penetrated the chest and the third perforated the abdomen.
Goidfields Drama
When the hordes of prospectors, seized by aura sacra lure, had found themselves so utterly deluded in their quest for gold in the El Dorado of the south, Chum went in and by dint of his own labor he established himself firmly in the little known interior.
From poverty to affluence was but a short step, and, at the height of his prosperity, Chum gained many friends, both white and colored, who had lived to appreciate the charitable gestures of this likeable Chinese.
Though the Kyeburn is one of the most isolated of the Otago goldfields, acts of violence were few and far between in the good old days, the most notable event being the murder about forty-five years ago of a Mrs. Young, who was stoned to death by two Chinese, one of whom paid the supreme penalty.
From the chain of evidence now being forged, and as the result of minute investigation of the hut and its immediate surroundings, it is most apparent that the motive for the crime was robbery.
There is nothing to indicate, however, that Chum fought desperately for his life as an athletically-built man of his type would be expected to do.
The hard-baked clay outside the hut and the wooden floors inside give no evidence of a struggle.
The only known witness of the brutal attack was Chum's collie dog.
But before he passed into that happy land beyond the Rising Sun, Chum was able to stagger half a mile to his mate, Sue Pee, and tell him sufficient to lead as he thought to the identity of his alleged murderous assailant.
Chum had lived by himself up to the end of May last, when he befriended Sue Pee, a miner from Waipori, and gave him employment on the claim.
Until the facts of the case are thoroughly gone into, conjecture is not even permissible, so we will let Sue Pee tell his own story. At one o'clock on the afternoon of Tuesday last week (July 17), a stranger, who had visited the camp three weeks previously, called at the hut, said Sue, speaking in pidgin English.
He was taken inside where a meal of pancakes and hot milk was prepared.
During the course of conversation the visitor astonished his hosts by announcing that he was a policeman inquiring about the murder of a man in the district and the theft from him of £200. The stranger astounded Chum, by accusing him of the crimes.
His interrogation shifted from murder to guns and theft, and then centred for a long while on the productivity of Chum's claim, about which many questions were asked.
The stranger asked if Chum had a gun, and the Chinese produced a .22 calibre repeating rifle from his bedroom. This weapon, Sue said, he had never previously seen in the hut.
Having partaken of their hospitality, the stranger suggested that he and Chum might, have a look over the claim and perhaps shoot a rabbit.
So Sue departed for his work, firewood cutting, half a mile over the ridge, and Chum and the stranger left, walking in the direction of the claim. The stranger was then carrying the rifle.
What happened and what conversation passed between Chum and the stranger, from that time until Chum staggered, fatally wounded, up the ridge to his mate, is only told in part.
Hardie Arrested
Fatally wounded, the unfortunate man lingered for about twelve hours till the next morning, when Fate drew the curtain across his eventful life.
And while Chum's life ebbed away, his mate lay terrified, hidden in the tussocks some distance away, lest the murderer should return and silence the only lips which could throw any light on the outrage.
Owing to the inaccessibility of the hut, great difficulty was experienced in bringing the body out, a specially improvised sledge, built to withstand the rough going, comprising the poor Chinaman's hearse.
A pathetic scene was witnessed on Thursday morning when the horsedrawn limber moved off with Chum's body strapped to it. His cortege comprised the police officials and journalists.
An inquest was formally opened at Naseby and adjourned, following which Chum was laid to rest in this country of his adoption.
Hardie, who was arrested, is a strapping youth, 6ft. l 1/2in. in height, of sturdy build, forceful features, and fair, flaxen hair. He has been camped in the vicinity of Naseby for some time, where he has been fossicking for gold.
On Wednesday night he arrived on the Central Otago train and alighted at Caversham, and on the following morning he was accosted in Cumberland Street, in the city, by Acting Chief-detective Lean and Detective Roycroft. He was accompanied to the police station where he was interrogated and detained throughout the day.
Sue Pee arrived from Kyeburn on Thursday night and on Friday morning he attended an identification parade in the prison yard, where eighteen young men, including Hardie, all of similar build, were lined up.
Sue identified Hardie as the man who he alleged visited the camp on the day of the murder, but he would not go near him.
One of the men who volunteered for the parade told a "N.Z. Truth" reporter that Sue, on account of his religion, would not perform the formality of placing his hand on the man's shoulder.
"He kill me, I die," was Sue's only defence for his disinclination to comply with formal procedure. A method of counting from the end of the file was resorted to, and Sue, after some persuasion, glanced along the file and called "Seven,"' which place was occupied by William John Hardie.
Hardie was accordingly arrested and appeared later in the morning before Magistrate Bundle, when he was charged with having murdered Jo Shen, at Kyeburn, on July 17.
The ordinary business of the court was suspended to bring the charge on, but the usual batch of court habitues were outside basking in the morning sunshine and missed a glimpse of the accused man.
Hardie stepped into the box wearing a blue serge suit, light grey socks and black shoes. He had no collar or tie.
He displayed no outward sign of emotion as the charge was read and quietly stepped out of the dock when Magistrate Bundle granted a remand for eight days, till the 28th.
Hardie's mother died two weeks ago in Dunedin, and the accused man came down from Naseby to attend her funeral. -NZ Truth, 26/7/1928.
 |
| Shoe Leung Shum's claim being inspected after his murder. One of the men depicted is a Detective Farquharson - presumably they are securing samples of gold from the claim to present as evidence in the upcoming trial. Hocken Library photo. |
BIG CROWD ATTENDS BURIAL OF JOE SHUM
Per Press Association. DUNEDIN July 23. Joe Shum, the victim of the Kyeburn murder, was buried here yesterday, in the presence of his fellow countrymen from all parts of New Zealand.
A big crowd of Europeans attended the memorial service in the Mission Hall, so that many Chinese wore unable to find standing space.
During the service a warning had to be given to some of the Europeans who stood on forms talking. -Manawatu Times, 24/7/1928.
The fact that William John Hardie was to appear on remand on a charge of having murdered Joe Shum at Kyeburn diggings on July 17 was, no doubt, responsible for what theatrical managers would describe as a “full house” in the City Police Court on Saturday morning. Amongst those present were several Chinese. Mr Hanlon appeared for the accused, Chief Detective Cameron asked for a further remand for a week. He stated that it was not likely that it would be possible to proceed with the case in time for the next sessions of the Supreme Court. The magistrate (Mr J. R. Bartholomew) suggested that a remand for a longer period than a week might be advisable. Chief Detective Cameron stated that by Saturday next it might be possible to fix a date for the hearing of the case. The accused was remanded for a week. -Otago Daily Times, 30/7/1928.
KYEBURN MURDER.
HARDIE IN COURT.
PRELIMINARY HEARING.
KEEN PUBLIC INTEREST.
EVIDENCE OF SUE PEE.
(From Our Special Reporter.) NASEBY, September 5. The tiny country courthouse at Naseby was packed to the doors this afternoon when the preliminary hearing of the charge against William John Hardie of murdering Joe Shum at the Kyeburn diggings on July 17 was commenced before Mr H. J. Dixon, S.M. The accused, Sue Pee (the principal witness for the Crown) and the officials of the court arrived here to-day.
Hardie paid the full price of notoriety. From the time he left Dunedin on the Central Otago train till he took his place in the dock at Naseby there were plenty of eager eyes to follow his course. At Ranfurly the station precincts were thronged with curious townsfolk, and at the courthouse here there was an assemblage that has not often been equalled since Naseby’s gold rush days, many of the anxious watchers having waited for hours. There were more than enough people to fill the courtroom half a dozen times, and all through the afternoon scores cooled their heels in the roadway.
The Crown solicitor (Mr F. B. Adams) prosecuted, and Mr A. C. Hanlon appeared for the defence. Hardie stepped into the dock with an almost jaunty air, and the first thing he did was to treat the crowded court to a very close and steady scrutiny. Throughout the afternoon he listened with apparent amusement to the evidence of Sue Pee, and took the merest interest in everything. When photographed on his way to court he became annoyed and said that if he could get hold of the camera he would smash it.
Mr Adams sad he did not purpose outlining the circumstances of the case at that stage. The evidence would make all the facts clear. He would like, however, to make a formal application for the amendment of the deceased’s name to Sho Leung Shum. This was granted.
DR EUDEY’S EVIDENCE. The first witness was Walter Syme Eudey, doctor, of Naseby, who said he went to Shum’s hut at the diggings with Constable Fox. There he found the dead man lying across the bed, half clad and half covered with bedding. He had apparently been dead about 12 hours. An examination of the body showed a bullet wound in the right elbow, another at the lower end of the breastbone, and one on each side of the body below the ribs. There was also a superficial abrasion on the upper part of the breastbone which he considered had been caused by a bullet which had not penetrated. He removed the bullet from the elbow and handed it to Constable Fox. It was similar to that produced by counsel. Witness considered that the deceased had lived for some time after having been shot. One wound had been bandaged — that on the elbow. Witness said the only indication that the hut had been ransacked was a half open drawer in the bedroom. Witness then gave details of the post-mortem examination conducted by himself on July 20, dealing in turn with the four bullets that had inflicted wounds. It was his opinion that death had been due to haemorrhage and shock, the results of bullet wounds. He had found no trace of disease in the body. Either of the abdominal wounds would have been sufficient to cause death. Rigor mortis had set in when he arrived, but the trunk of the body covered by bedding was still warm. As he was a very strong man deceased would probably have been able to walk a considerable distance after the first shock of the wounds had passed. Witness had been shown the spot where Shum was found by Sue Pee, and he considered that the injured man could have walked the distance from the hut to that spot and back. He knew so little about gunshot wounds that he would not like to express an opinion as to the range, but he thought that Shum had been shot at least once while on the ground. He did not think it possible that three such wounds could have been self-inflicted.
In reply to a question from the magistrate witness said he did not think immediate medical attention could have saved Shum.
Mr Hanlon objected to the witness being asked whether a person so wounded would have been justified in considering himself fatally wounded. Later, when the magistrate asked the same question, counsel again protested, but the court held that it was evidence.
SUE PEE IN WITNESS BOX. Sue Pee, having taken the Chinese oath with the customary lighted match, gave his evidence with the assistance of an interpreter — Mr Jackson, of Dunedin. He said he was a miner employed by Shum, whom he had known since the Exhibition at Dunedin, and for whom he had worked for about seven weeks prior to July 17. Up to that time he had been a market gardener in Dunedin. When he arrived from Dunedin to work for Shum he stayed at the Royal Hotel and spent the afternoon and evening in the parlour speaking to no one but the hotel proprietress. He left for the diggings next morning, where he commenced work. He shared Shum’s hut, each having a room. He said that after dinner on July 17 he heard Shum’s dog barking. Shum went out to the door. Witness heard someone say: “Are you Shum?”
Mr Hanlon interrupted at this stage to ask whether the spirited conversation between the interpreter and witness was simply the question and answer with which the court was concerned. A minute later Mr Hanlon objected to hearsay evidence, and said that witness should simply be asked if the accused was the man. Witness said that the accused told Shum that there was a policeman at the foot of the hill in a car. The policeman had sent him up first. The accused said: “Last week a young man was murdered about a mile from here and robbed of £200. Have you seen the man about here?” The accused then asked Shum if he had a gun, and when Shum said yes, he said, “Have you any bullets?” Shum’s answer was to fetch bullets from the bedroom and put them on the table. Meanwhile witness was getting the accused something to eat. The accused was very interested in the gun, and asked Shum to give him a pair of opera glasses to inspect the gun. Shum was holding the butt of the gun and the accused was looking down the muzzle through the opera glasses. When the accused sat down to eat he placed the gun at his side. The accused spoke to witness and said, among other commonplaces that he had seen witness in Naseby; but witness told him he did not know him. Witness had never seen the man before.
At this stage pictures of the Exhibition that had been in Shum's hut were produced. Witness said the accused had several similar, though smaller Mr Hanlon suggested to the magistrate that the witness did not need an interpreter, as he was answering the questions most intelligently, and anticipating the queries. It was a farce and a humbug, said counsel. The magistrate said that the witness certainly did appear to be anticipating the questions in a remarkable manner.
A minute later, when Mr Adams asked the interpreter a question, witness answered without any translation, causing considerable merriment and a triumphant "There you are." from Mr Hanlon.
Mr Adams then proceeded to question Sue Pee direct, but it was explained by the interpreter that the witness understood more English than he could speak. The answers were thereafter translated by the interpreter.
Continuing, witness said he had again seen the pictures the accused had at the Police Station. Certain pictures produced, he said, were the same sort as the accused had. After he had dinner, having been in the hut for about an hour, the accused took the gun and went to see the claim, asking Shum as he went out whether he was making much gold. Shum replied that it was the snowy season, when not much gold was made. Shum then followed the accused outside. Witness went over the hill about half a mile from the hut to cut wood. On his return to the hut witness saw Shum, who said: “That man shot me. I am dying. Hurry and go to hotel and ask man to send car to take me to doctor."
Mr Adams quoted authorities in favour of the admissibility of the statement which was apparently made under a sense of impending death. Mr Hanlon said he had no objections so long as Shum really said it.
Witness said that when he saw Shum he was lying on a hill with his hand on his stomach. He was groaning and in great pain. Shum was bleeding, and his dog was licking the blood from his clothes. Witness said: “Which man shot you?” and Shum replied: “The man you gave dinner. He wanted ne to give him £100 or he would shoot me.” Shum also said that he had gone to the hut and given the accused all his gold, after which the accused shot him several times. Witness supported Shum to the hut, and on the way Shum said: "I am bleeding very much.” Later he said: “I cannot walk any further," and he lay down on the grass and cried: "I must die. I must die. My intestines are punctured, and I can feel blood dripping into my stomach.” Shum eventually reached his bedroom, where witness removed his boots. Shum urged him to go for help, but witness wanted to wait till dark, because he was frightened. Shum said: “You needn’t be afraid. The gun has been broken and thrown into the tussocks.” Witness said the hut did not appear to be disturbed. Shum was conscious when witness left for the Kyeburn Hotel. He slept in the tussocks that night, and arrived at the hotel early the next morning. Shum had had four wash-ups on the claim while Sue Pee was at the claim. The total quantity of gold obtained was about two ounces. Shum had sold no gold, nor had he been to Ranfurly or to Naseby while witness was working for him.
At this stage the proceedings were interrupted by the production of two sacks full of boots and gumboots belonging to witness and Shum, which witness identified.
Continuing, witness said that when the accused was at the hut he had a cold, and Joe Shum painted his throat with some Chinese medicine. Witness also gave evidence concerning the identification parade in Dunedin at which he had pointed out the accused to the police.
Cross-examined by Mr Hanlon, witness said he had lived alone for 40 years at Waipori, having left there 10 years ago. Asked if it were true that other Chinamen would not live with him, he said no. He had been good friends with them. He said it was not true that he had been driven away from Waipori for threatening to shoot a man.
The magistrate told the interpreter to tell Sue Pee to stop chewing lollies, whereupon witness held out a plug of tobacco, and said: "This no lolly; it tobacco.”
Mr Hanlon could not get Sue Pee to give the name of a single Chinese friend he had had at Waipori expect Pee Cum, a cousin. Witness evaded the question. “Too shrewd,” said Mr Hanlon. Witness then admitted that twice lately he had been to the police station to go over the evidence he was to give. He had evidence read to him each time. When questioned about guns Sue Pee professed ignorance of such things. He did not know why Shum had a gun. That ended the evidence and the examination of Sue Pee, which had occupied over two and a-half hours.
THE EVENING SITTING. Public interest was unabated when the hearing was resumed to-night at 7.30, the courthouse being filled to the doors.
HOTELKEEPER’S EVIDENCE. James Forward, licensee of the Pass Hotel at Kyeburn Diggings, said he knew Shum well, and last saw him alive on July 14. He said he knew Sue Pee, who had to come to the hotel on the morning of July 18 at about 8 a.m. carrying a lantern with news of the murder. He had telephoned for the police. Later he went to the claim with Sue Pee and found Shum dead. Constable Fox and Dr Eudey were then on the spot. Witness knew accused, who had come to his hotel early in the year. He had met the accused on two or three occasions, and understood from him that he was beginning work on a claim just outside Naseby, and was prospecting. He had noticed no strangers in the locality just prior to the murder. Witness said he had been present when Acting-detective Taylor took a cast of a footprint on the claim and he saw the print before the cast was taken. A second print had also been treated in that manner.
VARIETY OF OCCUPATIONS. Michael Kitchen, a labourer, of Naseby, said he had been living at the Little Kyeburn in a camp for about six or seven years. He had known the accused since 1919. He had camped with the accused in Mr Allan Cain’s hut at the foot of the Pig and Whistle Hill about midway between Spec Valley and Deep Creek. He led him to believe that he was in partnership with Mr Cain in a claim. Later be said he was sluicer up the Deep Creek. Later still the accused, who suddenly disappeared from witness’s hut, told witness he was waiting for a job barb-wiring a boundary fence for Mr Allan Cain. He did not then mention either sluicing or prospecting. On July 14 witness saw the accused, who asked where Shum lived. He next saw the accused on July 17 about a quarter of a mile from his hut on the Naseby-Mount Buster road. He was going towards Mount Buster. Witness could not say definitely whether the accused was wearing a collar and tie. Witness went to Naseby and left town at about 2.45 p.m. On the way home he saw a pedestrian on the Mount Buster side of the Pig and Whistle Hill. He could not recognise the man, but there were only three men working in the district who used that road — himself, his companion (Walter George) and the accused. He kept a look out for the walker, but did not pass him or see him again, and had no chance of ascertaining the identity of the man. The road in question was the only road from the accused’s hut to Naseby.
The Magistrate: How far would the accused be from Shum’s hut when you saw him in the morning?
Witness: Roughly two miles and a-half across country.
The Magistrate: How far would this walker be from Shum’s hut?
Witness: About two miles and a-quarter by a rough guess.
DEALINGS IN GOLD. Walter George said he had a sluicing claim near Little Kyeburn, and had been mining in this locality for almost 30 years. He knew the accused slightly, having met him in May. A month later he again met Hardie in Naseby, when the accused handed him a tin of sand and gold, asking witness to value it. On hearing that it was worth £2 10s the accused asked witness to treat it. Witness retorted the gold, and found about 13dwt of gold, which he returned to the accused. The lump of gold was similar to an exhibit produced by counsel for the Crown. Early in July witness again met the accused at the top of the Naseby Hill, and received another tin of sand, which witness treated, returning the gold to the accused on July 16. On this occasion there were 6dwt. The gold produced was definitely that which he returned to Hardie. When witness saw the accused on July 16 he appeared to be in good health though he had a cold. Hardie told him he had been prospecting on Mount Buster. That was the last time he had seen the accused. Hardie asked witness whether it was necessary for him to take out a miner's right. Witness said it was. He had never given the accused any gold, and had treated only two lots. On the last occasion the accused had asked to he directed to Shum's claim, and, on being told where the Chinaman lived, the accused was surprised, and said he nad understood Kitchen to say that he lived on the Buster. Witness had never been on Hardie's claim, so had no idea of the tools the accused was using. Asked how long it would take a man to get two ounces of gold with a cradle on a prospecting box, witness said it would take about 10 years in this locality. Witness knew Spec Gully gold, and could say that the gold produced by counsel did not come from that gully. Four exhibits of gold — P, Q, R, S — were produced, and witness was asked to compare them. He saw no great difference, and it was his opinion that they all came from the same place though it was possible they might not have. Mr Adams explained that exhibit P contained samples of gold sold on the accused’s behalf on the morning after the murder by Mr Cain. The others — Q, R, S — were samples of gold secured from wash-ups on Shum’s property. In answer to the magistrate, witness said the gold from different parts of the district varied, though samples from different claims might be very similar.
THE COURT ADJOURNS. The court adjourned at 9.30 till 9.30 this morning. Only five of the 22 witnesses to be heard here have so far given evidence, but their evidence has occasioned the production of no fewer than 20 exhibits.
THE ADJOURNED INQUEST. The adjourned inquest on Joe Leung Shum was concluded before the coroner (Mr George Reid, J.P.) and a jury of four. Dr Eudey’s evidence, given before Mr Dixon, was taken as given, and the jury returned a verdict — "That the deceased met his death as a result of gunshot wounds inflicted by a person or persons unknown." -Otago Daily Times, 6/9/1928.
MURDER OF CHINAMAN.
KYEBURN DIGGINGS CASE.
HARDIE BEFORE COURT.
(By Telegraph. Press Association.) Dunedin, this day. At the Kyeburn diggings murder case the first witness at Naseby this morning was Constable Fox, who stated that the accused man, William John Hardie, who is out on probation, reported to him on the evening of July 17, stating that he wished to transfer to Dunedin. He looked ill, having a hot hand and head, and a rapid pulse. Witness advised him to lie up for a few days. Accused said he had caught a chill and had not been out of his hut since the previous Sunday. He stated he was going back to his hut that night for his belongings and was catching the morning train for Dunedin next morning. When witness and the doctor were leaving for the scene of the murder, he saw accused riding into Naseby. Accused said he had changed his mind about the transfer and would return from Dunedin when well, and complete a fencing contract.
Witness then related what he had found at the hut of the murdered man. There was no sign of ransacking, and money in a receptacle was untouched.
The evidence given after the tea adjournment last night was that Hardie had asked two persons where the Chinese hut was, and that Joe Shum was the only Chinaman prospecting in the district. -King Country Chronicle, 6/9/1928.
MURDER OF CHINESE.
CHARGE AGAINST HARDIE.
STATEMENT TO THE POLICE.
DENIAL OF ALLEGATIONS.
ACCUSED SENT FOR TRIAL.
[BY TELEGRAPH. — OWN CORRESPONDENT.] DUNEDIN. Friday. Further witnesses in the charge against William John Hardie of the murder of Sho Leung Shum, at Kyeburn Diggings, on July 17, were heard in the Police Court to-day. Mr. F. B. Adams, Crown prosecutor, conducted the case, wlnle Hardie was represented by Mr. A. C. Hanlon. The length and detail of prosecution can be gauged from the fact that the number of exhibits produced exceeded 60, and that the Courtroom during the day resembled a pawnbroker's shop.
Phillip George, an artilleryman, of the Central Battery, said he knew Joe Shum, to whom he sold a rifle in November, 1916. It was a .22-calibre repeating rifle, with an octagonal-shaped barrel. The broken rifle produced was identical in every way with the one he sold Shum. A sling swivel, attached by witness when the rifle was in his possession, distinguished it.
"Would Not Murder Chinese." Detective Lean said that on July 18 he took possession of a sack-swag, addressed "W. Hardie," at the Dunedin railway station. He obtained the swag from the luggage office. At 10.30 on the following day he and Detective Roycroft accosted Hardie in Cumberland Street. Witness asked for an interview, and accused agreed to go to the police station, where he admitted that the swag was his property. In the presence of Detective Roycroft witness told Hardie that a Chinese had been murdered at Kyeburn on July 17, and that certain suspicions attached to him. Hardie laughed and replied, "I would not murder any Chinaman." He said he did not know any Chinese at Kyeburn.
Witness warned accused of the seriousness of a murder charge and gave him the usual warning about making a statement. Hardie said, "I am not afraid of anything I say. I had nothing to do with the murder of the Chinaman." Accused agreed to make a statement as to his movements on the day of the murder, and witness typed a statement, which was read over to him and handed to him to read. Accused then signed it.
The Arrest of Hardie. Continuing, witness said that at 5 p.m. Hardie was told that Sue Pee, Shum's mate, had just left Kyeburn for Dunedin. "The sooner he comes the better," accused replied. Witness told him that Sue Pee might not arrive until the morning, and it would be better to wait for daylight for the examination parade. Witness offered to give Hardie a room — not a cell — at the police station. Hardie agreed to spend the night at the station. The identification parade was arranged on July 20, and at 11.30 a.m. witness arrested Hardie on the charge of murder. After being warned about making a statement Hardie replied that he had nothing to say.
Mr. Hanlon: In view of what the detective has just said, I think, in fairness to the accused, the statement he made should be read.
Detective Lean read the statement, in which accused said he left Allan Cain's place at 3 p.m. when nobody was at home, for Naseby. He saw Constable Fox and told him that he was ill. He had then no intention of leaving for Dunedin. He had tea with Allan Cain, to whom he had shown about 2oz. of gold, which Walter George had given him the previous day. He swore that on Tuesday he neither saw nor spoke to any Chinaman. He had been to Kyeburn Diggings a long time ago, when he was working for the Hon. Robert Scott.
"Not Connected With Shooting." On the night of July 17 he slept in his own hut and rode into Naseby the following morning on Cain's horse. Cain motored him from Naseby to Ranfurly, where Cain sold 2oz. 2dwt. 18gr. of gold, the large piece being that amalgamated by Walter George, while he (Hardie) had himself blown the remainder at Caversham. The train had drawn out while he was talking to a man named Hunter. He had stayed that night at 31, Lee Street, where he often stayed. He did not remember seeing any police on the train. He had telephoned from Caversham for his rug, which he had left in the train.
In the statement Hardie said he had heard in the train that a Chinaman had been shot at Kyeburn. "I swear I was in no way connected with shooting of the Chinaman. I am not in the least afraid of any Chinaman identifying me as the man near the hut or the man given gold." he concluded.
Sub-Inspector Fahen gave a full account of the identification parade. Sixteen young, clean-shaven men, some dressed similarly to accused, were placed in a row. Accused was told he could object to any man and could select his own position. Miss Law, the interpreter, and Sue Pee were then brought into the yard. He told Miss Law to tell Sue Pee to walk up in front of the men and if he saw the man who visited his hut to place his hand on his shoulder. After the interpreter had spoken, Sue Pee stood for some little lime. Witness asked Miss Law to get Sue Pee to walk forward in front of the line.
Attitude of Deceased's Friend. Sue Pee continued to stand in the same place. The interpreter said Sue Pee declared he was frightened to go forward. Witness told Miss Law to convey to Sue Pee that there was nothing to fear. Sue Pee refused to touch any man, saying be was frightened. Sue Pee was looking about and was smoking. After a renewed lapse witness said they could not stand there all day. Miss Law said Sue Pee knew the man who was in the row, and would not go near him. He said the man would not look at him.
Sue Pee was urged to identify the man but replied that the man was standing with his feet apart, he was looking upwards, he was wearing a red striped tie and was seventh in the line from the brick wall. For some time Sue Pee could not be induced to look at the man.
Eileen Law, a student and an interpreter ot the Chinese language, gave evidence regarding the identification parade.
Accused, who reserved his defence, was committed to the Supreme Court for trial. -NZ Herald, 22/9/1928.
Hardie's trial for murder began at the end of October, 1928. The jury was empanelled and the Judge gave them some of the details of the charge and circumstances around it, quoting from the depositions, before the Crown Prosecutor, Mr Adams, opened his case.
A LIFE FOR A LIFE.
“It is a case in which a man stands upon trial for his life," said Mr Adarns. “One life has been taken, and another life is now at stake, and the duty which the law imposes upon you is one that none will envy you. There is no call for sentimentalism about the case, and it presents no difference in principle from any other criminal trial. As always in the criminal courts, the burden of proof is on the Crown, and it is the duty of the Crown to satisfy you beyond reasonable doubt of the guilt of the accused in all matters of which constitute crime.”
It was sometimes said that the accused in a criminal court was entitled to the benefit of the doubt, and that contention was sometimes made in such a way to suggest that the accused was entitled to any doubt whatsoever. Emphatically, said Mr Adams, that was not the case. The doubt to which an accused person was entitled had to be a reasonable doubt. In other words, the gentlemen of the jury had the right to use their common sense in approaching and dealing with the case, as they would deal with any other weighty affair submitted for their consideration. The final question was whether the jury was satisfied upon the evidence that tiie accused had committed the crime of which he was charged.
“You are not bound to give effect to the fancifully-spun theories which might endeavour laboriously to explain away a host of facts,” said Mr Adams. “However, if doubts suggested can be made which leave you in a state of doubt, then you are bound to give the accused the benefit of such doubt."
COMPLEX, BUT NOT UNUSUAL. While the case was a complex one in view of the mass of material that had to be dealt with, it was not one which presents unusual features or any unusual problems. The jury’s unremitting attention and anxious care were called for throughout the trial. His only function was to present the facts clearly and fairly, and he hoped that at the end of the proceedings he would not have betrayed anything beyond the presentation.
“The Crown asks you simply to do your duty faithfully, and return a verdict in accordance with the dictates of your conscience, remembering your duty to the community, and that the prisoner’s life is in your hands,” said Mr Adams.
PECULIARLY ATROCIOUS MURDER. Although, he said, he did not think for one moment that any such question weighed in their minds, he pointed out that the fact that the deceased Shum belonged to an alien race had no bearing whatsoever one way or the other. The fact that the murder may have been a peculiarly atrocious one also had no bearing. The question was simply whether the accused committed the murder. The case was bound to be a long one, as the depositions taken in the lower court covered many pages of foolscap, and there were many exhibits and a certain amount of expert evidence.
In the indictment there was the single count of murder. According to the law, the offence of killing any human being was murder, if the person meant to cause the death of the person killed. They were familiar with the old phrase “malice aforethought,” but that had been superseded, by the more modern phraseology. Killing was murder in the event of bodily injuries being likely to cause death, even if severe bodily injury only was intended. The count of manslaughter was not required in the indictment, but the jury could bring in a verdict of manslaughter, if necessary. In cases where there was provocation or killing under circumstances not regarded by the law as murder or where there was no direct evidence of killing or eye witnesses, the question of manslaughter or murder must be one of inference from the facts. The facts might be such as to leave no doubt whatever that murder had been committed. Again the facts must leave no doubt whatever that only some chance quarrel between the parties had resulted in the killing if the case was to be one of manslaughter.
In this case, Shum had met his death by bullet wounds. Two of the four wounds could have caused his death. It was clear that the killing of the deceased was what the law regarded as culpable homicide. There was no possibility of evidence showing that he was killed by a person acting in self-defence. The jury could rule out any such line of defence at the start. It was a case of culpable homicide, which was either murder or manslaughter. If intent was not established the case was one of manslaughter. The onus throughout would be on the Crown to satisfy the jury that the offence had been committed by the accused. If the jury was satisfied that accused killed Shum, its duty was to bring in a verdict of murder or manslaughter.
LARGELY CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. Mr Adams went on to say that the evidence would he largely in the nature of what is known as circumstantial evidence. It was evidence which was intended to prove some part, but was not the evidence of persons who actually saw the part. The Crown could not produce anyone who actually saw the Chinaman killed. Such was the case in a great many of our criminal cases. Murder was not commonly committed in the presence of eye-witnesses, nor was burglary or other serious crimes. In this case, however, there was some direct evidence which would take them very close up to the time of the commission of the crime. He referred to the evidence of the old Chinaman Sue Pee, who was in Shum’s hut when the murderer arrived, and who saw him leave the hut in company with Shum to visit the claim. Circumstantial evidence, continued Mr Adams, might he so weak that the proverbial dog could not be hanged upon it, or it might make a mountain of proof that would carry conviction and demonstration to any reasonable mind.
ACCUSED’S MOVEMENTS. Mr Adams proceeded to describe the district to the jury, and displayed numerous plans and photographs. He pointed out that the locality was sparsely settled, and that Shum lived in a lonely locality. Learned counsel said it was important to know the movements of accused before the time of the murder. For some time Hardie had been on probation. He did not mention that to prejudice the accused, but the fact had to be mentioned in explanation of the movements of accused. He had been some time in the district, and it was important to know what opportunities he had of getting gold, because on the day of the murder accused was found in possession of two ounces of fine alluvial gold. At this stage the court adjourned till the afternoon, the judge informing the jury that they would have to be kept together during the progress of the trial, and warning them that they must not talk of the case to anyone. -Evening Star, 30/10/1928.
The first witnesses for the prosecution were Dr Eudy, who described the injuries inflicted upon Shum, and James Forward, of the Kyeburn Pass Hotel, who described the arrival of Sue Pee and his (Forward's) ride to the nearest telephone, four miles away, to alert the police.
The next day's proceedings began with the evidence of Sue Pee.
THE KYEBURN MURDER.
TRIAL OF WILLIAM JOHN HARDIE.
YESTERDAY’S PROCEEDINGS.
The trial of William John Hardie, who in charged with having murdered Joe Leong Shum at Kyeburn on July 17, was continued in the Supreme Court yesterday before Mr Justice MacGregor and a jury. Mr F. B. Adams conducted the case for the Crown, and Mr A. C. Hanlon appeared for the accused.
Sue Pee, who gave his evidence through an interpreter, stated that he was 68 years of age. He had been a miner, and also a market gardener. He had worked for Joe Shum for seven or eight weeks before the death of the latter. While he was on his way to Shum’s claim he spent the night at the Royal Hotel in Naseby, where he had spoken only to the wife of the licensee. No one had shown him any pictures at the hotel, and he had not seen any exhibited. He remembered a man calling at Shum’s hut about 1 p.m. on a Tuesday, but he could not remember the date. The witness was proceeding to give evidence regarding a conversation between Shum and the man when it was suggested that he should give his own narrative. The witness proceeded to state that on the day of the murder Shum went into the bedroom and handed a gun to the man who had called at the hut. The man then asked if Shum had any bullets, and Shum brought out bullets, which were placed on the table. The man examined the gun, and then asked Shum if he had a pair of opera glasses. Shum did not understand what was meant, and witness explained what was wanted. Shum then got a pair of opera glasses, and handed them to the man, who looked through the muzzle of the rifle with them. Shum was then asked to cook some pancakes. The man showed witness some pictures of the Exhibition and one of a man with a large mouth. The man then sat down at the table to eat the pancakes, and placed the rifle, or gun, by his side. The man asked Shum if he had made plenty of gold, and Shum replied: "No; this is the snow season, and the days are short.” After Shum had stated that he was not getting much gold the man said he was going to see the claim. The man picked up the rifle and went out, Shum following him after putting his boots on. Witness washed up the dishes, swept the floor, and then went away to chop firewood; a bundle of which he carried back. When he was halfway towards the hut he saw Shum lying on the ground with his hand placed on his stomach and crying out in an agonised tone. ,
At this stage Mr Hanlon stated that what was said by the deceased to Sue Pee was not evidence unless it could go in as a dying declaration. He did not think it could be treated as a dying declaration because the deceased had not given up all hope.
His Honor: Is it desirable to argue the point before the jury or in my private room?
Mr Adams: I do not think it should be argued before the jury.
His Honor informed the jury that there was a question whether what the witness heard from Shum was legal evidence against the accused. It was purely a question of law, which did not concern the jury, and he was going to ask counsel to discuss the matter in his room.
On returning to the courtroom Mr Adams said he proposed to ask the witness questions direct, and the interpreter could then put them again and give the answers.
His Honor agreed that that was the better way. He said it was rather awkward having the evidence elicited by an interpreter, because they really did not know what the interpreter was asking the witness.
Sue Pee said that shortly after he had left Shum and the accused at the hut, when he had gone to cut some manuka firewood half a mile away, he had heard Shum calling to him. The witness demonstrated the heavy manner in which Shum was breathing, and showed how he had his hand to his stomach when he came up to him. Shum then said to witness; “I am dying — that man shot me.” Witness asked which man had shot him, and Shum had replied: “The man to whom I gave the dinner. He demanded £100 from me, and said that if I did not give it to him he would shoot me.” Witness walked with Shum back towards the hut, and Shum had said he had given the man all his gold, and that the man had then fired at him several times. “That man has no heart," had stated Shum. When witness first got to Shum he was lying on the ground and bleeding very much. This would be about 3 o’clock in the afternoon or a little after.
Witness detailed the difficulty he had in getting Shum back to the hut, but at last he got him there and put him into bed. Shum urged him to hurry to the hotel, secure a car, and take him to a doctor. Witness left Shum when it was dark. At that time Shum was conscious. Shum told witness to hurry as he was dying. Witness lost his way going to the hotel, and had to remain in the tussocks all night. He reached the hotel about half an hour after daylight.
Who was the man who came to the hut? asked Mr Adams.
Witness pointed to the accused in the dock.
Witness was then shown a number of photographs found in the accused’s possession, and identified them as having been shown to him (witness) in the hut. He said that Shum had had four wash-ups, and had secured slightly over 2oz of gold. Shum had not sold any gold while he was with him, nor had he gone to Naseby or Ranfurly.
Witness was called on to identify the boots worn by himself and Shum at the claim.
Witness added that the pair he was now wearing belonged to Shum, and he was directed to stand out in front of the jury and show them the soles and heels.
Sue Pee then gave evidence regarding the parade in the court yard, when he was called on to see if he could identify the accused.
The interpreter was requested to ask the witness if the accused was in the row of 17 men.
“What does he say?” asked Mr Adams of the interpreter.
The interpreter replied, he says, “If he was not there how could I pick him out?” Witness said that the accused was No. 7 in the line. Witness did not point him out; but had asked Miss Law to do so, and she had touched him. The accused was dressed the same now as when he came to the hut.
Witness was asked how Hardie was standing in the line, and he replied by gazing up to the roof of the court and swaying his head in a kind of “circling” manner.
To Mr Hanlon: The accused showed him four pictures of the Exhibition and some others. There were one or two pictures of returned soldiers, but witness did not take particular notice of them. The weather on the day of the murder was cold, and no work was done in the morning. The accused called at the hut about 1 p.m., and left it about 2.30. Witness left the hut a few minutes later, while witness was cooking the dinner the accused was examining the rifle. At times he used the opera glasses. Shum held the butt of the rifle, and the accused looked down the barrel. The rifle was not loaded then. Witness had not seen the rifle until that day, and did not know previously that Shum possessed it. Several cartridge boxes were put on the table, and witness saw several bullets. Witness did not see the accused load the rifle. He did not know how to load the rifle, but he had previously seen such a weapon loaded. He did not know whether the rifle was loaded by Shum or by the accused. When Shum and the accused left the hut some of the bullets were still on the table. He thought there were still some bullets in the box that was opened. Witness did not touch them, and they were still there next day. Witness did not see the accused go into either of the bedrooms. When Shum weighed his gold he told witness what the weight was. The first wash-up yielded a little more than seven mace, the second about seven mace, the third one mace seven candereens, and the fourth one mace four candareens. These were Chinese weights.
The interpreter explained that eight maces were equivalent to an ounce.
In reply to Mr Hanlon, the witness stated that if he had not been friendly with Shum he would not have been working for him.
Michael Kitchen, a labourer, residing at Naseby, stated that he had also resided at Little Kyeburn. He camped at Allan Cain’s hut from May 5 till May 21, and then went to Walter George’s hut. Walter George was then living there. Witness camped with the accused from May 5 till May 24. The accused left about 1 p.m. on May 24, and returned about 6 p.m. the same day. On July 17 Walter George, the accused, and witness were the only people living on the Buster road, but two miles off the road towards Kyeburn, and across country there was a dredge.
After the luncheon adjournment the witness continued his evidence. He said that while he was camping with Hardie, the latter told him he was in partnership with James Cain. He also said he had been sluicing in a creek. On Saturday, July 14, he asked witness where "the old Chow” lived. Witness understood he referred to Shum, and pointed out Shum’s camp in the distance to him. On Tuesday morning, July 17, witness saw Hardie near his hut. They spoke for a few minutes, after which Hardie went on. Witness rode into Naseby and stayed there till 20 minutes to 2 in the afternoon. He then returned to his home, and on the way called in at Roland George’s place, staying 10 minutes, to see about some chaff. Afterwards witness continued on his way. While proceeding along the road he saw a man walking in the distance, going in the direction of Naseby. The time was then between 4 p.m. and 4.15 p.m. The road on which the man was walking led from the Chinaman’s hut into Naseby.
By Mr Hanlon: He saw Hardie on the Tuesday morning between half-past 9 and half-past 11. In Naseby he had no drink. When he saw Hardie in the morning Hardie was between the camp and his claim, and the man he saw in the afternoon was in the same position. The man was about a quarter of a mile away.
Walter George, gold miner, said he had a sluicing claim at Little Kyeburn, seven miles from Naseby. He had been mining for 17 years. On July 17 last witness was camped at his claim with Kitchen, the last witness. Hardie was living in Allan Cain’s hut in the neighbourhood, but there were no other people close by. Witness knew Hardie, and had been told by him he was working at a claim. About the middle of June witness met Hardie in Naseby. Hardie produced a tin of sand containing gold, and asked witness to treat it for him. Witness did so, and later on gave Hardie the gold, amounting to 13dwt. At the end of June he treated other sand in the same way, and gave Hardie the gold on Monday, July 16, amounting to 6dwt. Hardie was then coming from the direction of Mount Buster. He asked witness how far back “the Chow” lived, and witness said, “He doesn’t live there at all.” Hardie said, “I understood from Mick (Kitchen) he lived at the Buster.” Witness said “No,” and pointed out where the Chinaman lived. Witness was familiar with the nature of the country around Naseby.
Mr Adams: How long would it take a man with a prospecting box to get 2oz of gold? — It would take him a long time. In some parts of the locality ho would not get 2oz in lifetime.
Would you expect to get 2oz in a week? — No.
Would you get payable gold at all by means of a prospecting box? — Certainly not.
Further examined, witness compared samples of gold from different localities around Naseby. Two samples were shown to him — one taken from Shum’s claim by the police and one sold in Naseby by the accused on the day following the crime, and the witness said they were very much alike.
By Mr Hanlon: The gold in the Kyeburn and Naseby districts varied in colour, coarseness, and weight. Though it came from different localities it was very much alike.
Is it not a fact that you cannot say that any particular sample of gold came out of one gully or another? — In some cases I could.
You told the magistrate that gold from different parts of the district varied, but sometimes it was very much alike? — That is so.
And if a man can pick up 1oz of gold it is possible to pick up 1oz in the same locality? — Yes.
Or, with a bit of luck, 2oz? — Yes.
Kathleen Louisa Fox, wife of Constable Fox, Naseby, said that Hardie called at the police station at 6 o’clock on the night of Tuesday, July 17. He asked for Constable Fox, and witness told him where to find the constable. Hardie was suffering from a cold, and his voice was very hoarse.
Constable Fox, of Naseby, said that on the morning of Wednesday, July 18, he went with others to Shum’s hut, which was reached about half-past 10. The body of the Chinaman was lying on a bed in a hut. The hut had not been ransacked, as far as witness could see. In the bedroom there was an open drawer, and in a box in the drawer there was a sum of 3s in small coins. The bullet produced was taken from the Chinaman’s body by Dr Eudey. Another bullet was found in the body at the post-mortem examination. Witness left the hut about a quarter past 12 for Naseby. On May 25 Hardie called on him to report, as he was on probation, and saw him at intervals subsequently. Witness also saw him on the evening of Tuesday, July 17, at the courthouse in Naseby. Hardie asked for a transfer of his probation to Dunedin, adding that he would go to his aunt’s place, and that his aunt would find a job for him. Witness said, “You are better in the country, Bill.” but Hardie replied that he would rather go to Dunedin, as he was not doing any good there. Witness saw that Hardie did not look well, and told him so, and Hardie replied that he would be all right when he got to Dunedin, as he would go to a doctor. Witness offered to get a doctor at once, and Hardie said he had no money for doctors, and would go to Dunedin, where he would be all right. Hardie was in a shaky condition. Witness felt his pulse and found he was shaking all over and very hot. Witness said to him that he should not be out at night in such a condition, to which he said again that he would be all right. Hardie also said he had been in bed since the Sunday, and had had nothing to eat. Witness said, “Had you anything to eat to-day?” and Hardie replied, “I got out of bed to-day and made some tea, but could not eat anything.” Witness said, “Are you stopping in town tonight?” and Hardie said he would go back to the camp on horseback, and that he would catch the train on the following day for Dunedin. Witness saw him next morning, about a quarter past 9, and had a conversation with him, during which Hardie said, “I have changed my mind about staying in Dunedin, and as soon as my cold is better, I will come back and do a job for Allan Cain.” Witness said to him, “Write to me and tell me what you are going to do. At any rate, call on Mr Garbutt (probation officer).” and Hardie said he would call on Mr Garbutt next day. Hardie was much better in health that morning. At a later date when witness, with Detective Farquharson, was looking for something at some distance from the camp he saw footprints of a heavily-nailed boot, the prints indicating long steps.
Allan Cain, sheep farmer, said he had a run at Upper Kyeburn. The accused occupied a hut on witness’s run, about four miles and a-quarter from Naseby. Shum's claim was four miles and a-half from the hut. Accused was working on James Cain’s claim, and at times did prospecting on his own. At the end of June witness met accused in Naseby. Accused asked him to sell some gold for him. Witness did so, and it realised £2 18s. Witness understood from Hardie that he got the gold at Deep Creek. On June 30 Hardie came to Dunedin, as his mother was ill. Witness met him on his return, and Hardie told him he thought it would be only a matter of time before he lost his mother. Hardie's mother died a few weeks later. Witness saw accused in Naseby on the night of Tuesday, July 17, when accused told him he was going to Dunedin next day. The accused spoke in a husky voice, and said he had a touch of the flu’. Witness invited him into his house to have a meal. Inside the house witness saw that Hardie was white and slinky, and gave him a drink of whisky. The accused made a good meal. Witness offered to put him up for the night, but he declined, saying he wanted to get back to his hut for his collar and tie. After the meal, accused showed witness two pictures of the Dunedin Exhibition and some loose gold wrapped up in brown paper in a tobacco tin. Witness said it was a fine lot of gold, and asked him where he got it. The reply was “Out there.” Witness asked. “How long did it take you to get it?" but accused did not reply. Witness put the question again, and accused answered, “The best part of five weeks hard slogging.” When accused again said he would go to his hut, witness lent him a horse and, at his request, 5s to get brandy for his cold. The time was then about 8 p.m. Next morning accused returned with witness’s horse, and had breakfast in witness’s house. Witness motored him to Ranfurly. At the bank there witness sold some gold for him, receiving £8 for it. The gold was of a reddy brown colour. Witness handed the money to Hardie, together with the “blowings” from the gold. Accused said, “Now I’ll pay you for the rent of the hut.” Witness said, “You’ll do nothing of the kind. You are going to Dunedin with a cold. You may be there for a week or two, and £8 won’t go far in Dunedin,” and he did not take any of the money. Hardie did not take the “blowings” with him. He handed them to witness, asking him to take charge of them until he came back. They had a drink together, and the accused then left for the train. Subsequently, witness handed the “blowings” to Constable Fox. Before they left Naseby, Hardie mentioned that he had seen Constable Fox and Dr Eudey going over the hill, and he wondered where they would be going. Witness said he did not know. At that time witness had not heard of the tragedy.
Thomas Robert Kennelly, labourer, said he was in charge of Mr Smith’s hotel at Naseby on the night of Tuesday, July 17. Hardie came in shortly after 8 p.m. and asked for a glass of rum. He stayed in the hotel until about 10 o’clock.
Frank Butler Bill, manager of the Bank of New South Wales at Ranfurly, gave evidence as to buying gold from Mr Cain.
Richard Frater, manager of the Bank of New Zealand at Ranfurly, said he had been buying gold from the deceased for 14 years. The most recent purchases were: December 6, 1927, 8oz 5dwt 18gr, value £3l 14s; May 18, 1928, 11oz 4dwt, value £42 16s 9d.
James John Cain, miner, said he had a claim on Deep Creek, about halfway between Naseby and the Buster. The accused worked for him for between four and five weeks, for which he received £l0. On July 5 the final payment of £6 was made. Accused was never a partner of witness, and had no interest in witness’s claim, nor did he at any time get gold from the claim. Hardie subsequently worked with a prospecting box — an out-of-date way of finding gold. Witness had handed to Detective Farquharson samples of gold taken from his claim.
At 6.5 p.m. the court adjourned until a quarter-past 10 this morning. -Otago Daily Times, 1/11/1928.
The third day of the trial featured a number of different samples of gold - that found at Sho Leung Shum's claim, that found at the accused's claim and that sold by the accused to the bank in Ranfurly. Henry Gardner Black, of the Otago University's school of Mining, testified that, after comparing the colour of the samples, and assaying them, that the sample of gold sold by the accused matched that from Shum's claim. Mr Hanlon declined to cross-examine. Hanlon did, however, cross-examine Charles Edward Hazard, whose expert testimony related to the murder weapon. He was not gentle with him. The word "slipshod" was used.
Main evidence on the fourth and last day of the trial concerned a plaster cast of a footprint, taken outside Shum's hut, which was declared to fit the boot of Hardie and not that of either of the Chinese miners. This put Hardie at the scene. The jury retired after summing up by Prosecution, Defence and Judge and took two hours and twenty minutes to find Hardie not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter.
HARDIE GOES AWAY FOR LIFE
(From "N.Z. Truth's" Special Dunedin Representative.)
AS the bell on the Dunedin railway station announced, the departure of the 11.34 north-bound express last Thursday morning there was hustled aboard a special passenger — William John Hardie, the man who, for a paltry two ounces of gold dust, slaughtered a hard-working peaceable Chinese prospector at the Kyeburn Diggings on July 17.
Handcuffed to a constable, Hardie was hurried across the wide street from the police station to the waiting train, and installed in a reserved compartment. Fortunately for the young criminal few of the public were aware of his departure from Dunedin an hour after his facing Judge MacGregor, and receiving a life sentence.
Ringing in the man-killer's ears, as he took his last fleeting glance at the streets of his boyhood freedom, would be the sting of the learned judge's final remarks — "I think that on the same evidence they might equally have convicted him of murder!"
Pale and drawn of cheek — the obvious signs of reaction after prolonged and pent-up stress of mind, Hardie faced the judge when the court opened on Thursday morning.
Delay in the delivery of sentence had been occasioned owing to the question of the rightful admissibility as evidence, of the dying statements of Sho Leung Shum to his bosom mate and fellow workman, Sue Pee.
Lawyer Hanlon intimated that he had consulted the accused in regard to the matter, with the result that the matter of appeal had been abandoned.
"It might well be said that in returning a verdict of manslaughter, the jury took a lenient view," observed the lawyer.
"Not having convicted on the murder charge, it might be contended that the jury found they were unable to conjure up in their minds exactly what happened at the time the deceased was killed."
Hardie, continued counsel, was a little over 22 years of age, and it was hoped that his honor, while inflicting a sentence which would give full protection to the public and offer itself as a deterrent to such crimes, would see his way clear to make the penalty one which would not shut out all hope of release for the prisoner.
In echoing defending counsel's remarks regarding the leniency of the verdict, Crown Prosecutor Adams stated that it would be hard to imagine a more "heinous crime," and deserving of the maximum penalty. It was, said counsel, very hard to reconcile the jury's verdict with the facts of the evidence.
While it could hardly be suggested that Hardie was in any degree insane, the police files disclosed an element of abnormality, and it seemed that Hardie was more or less incorrigible when in an Industrial School.
"The prisoner was convicted by a jury, on the most clear evidence, of manslaughter," pronounced his Honor, into the deep silence of the court. "It was quite plain from the evidence that he killed the unfortunate victim in most brutal circumstances, the motive being apparently to steal the gold which Shum had, or the gold which accused thought he had.
"A young man of only twenty-two years, and a native of Dunedin, he seems to have been in and out of industrial schools from an early age. He seems to have been incorrigible and dishonest, and has been convicted of forging and uttering, two offences of theft, breach of probation and then theft again. It appears that he was on probation when this last crime was committed.
"The jury, of course, had the right to convict of manslaughter," his honor continued, "but on the same evidence I think they could equally have convicted for murder. The penalty then, of course, would have been hanging . . . After careful consideration, I find myself unable to inflict a less penalty than that provided for under Section 191. There are no extenuating circumstances to my mind which would lead one to impose anything but the maximum penalty ...
"If the accused shows any signs of reform, then no doubt it will be left to the Prisons Board to take whatever steps are considered advisable in the way of releasing him or otherwise.
"The sentence of the court is that the prisoner be imprisoned with hard labor for life."
Hardie threw one thrusting glance at the judge — his lips parted in mumbling conversation with his escort — then, with a cynical smile, he stepped below. NZ "Truth," 15/11/1928.
The question, of course, needs to be asked: was the jury's verdict influenced by race? Was, in their collective opinion, the life of a European man worth more than that of a Chinese man?
The jury's right to bring in a verdict of manslaughter over murder is an absolute one, as is the confidentiality of the deliberation which ends with their verdict. The Prosecutor, Mr Adams, had made it clear in his opening that the actions of Hardie showed that, in the absence of evidence of self-defence, murder or manslaughter were the correct verdicts.
Some clue as to the prevailing attitude can be found in the following extract of an account of the objects on display at the "Black Museum" at the HQ of the Criminal Investigations Board:
Detective work of the schoolboy fiction type is evidenced by a pair of hob-nailed boots and plaster casts, showing impressions corresponding exactly with each little irregularity of the boots. They played an important part in the conviction in 1923 of a man named Hardie, who shot a Chinese at the Kyeburn diggings, and was sentenced to imprisonment for life for manslaughter. Hardie's unmistakable footprints were his undoing. -King Country Chronicle, 12/7/1934.
There we have it - Hardie is "a man" - Sho Leung Shum is "a Chinese."
For reasons that are not known at this time, the Prisons Board saw fit to release Hardie in July, 1939.
 |
Andersons Bay Cemetery, Dunedin.
|
