A Schoolmaster Found Dead.
Mr W. H. Rennie, schoolmaster at Papakaio, was found dead in bed this morning. Deceased had a wound in the temple, but no other particulars are at present available. -Ashburton Guardian, 3/10/1906.
THE PAPAKAIO MURDER.
A Dark, Unfathomable Mystery.
Previous Murder That Was Never Punished.
A deep element of mystery is attached to the death of William Hay Rennie, schoolmaster at Papakaio, near Oamaru, who lost his life on Tuesday, the 2nd inst., but it is now thoroughly certain that he was the victim of an atrocious murderer, who has left not the slightest clue to his identity. Whether the motive of the crime was plunder, or revenge it is impossible to say. If the former, the perpetrator of the foul deed got very little except a gold watch and a bicycle, and perhaps a little silver, because, so far as is known, the murdered man kept very little cash in the house. His dwelling stood in a very isolated position, over a mile from the nearest house, and about a similar distance from the Papakaio school whither he hiked it every day. Deceased sort of bachelorised there, cooking two of his meals, breakfast and tea, a girl named Jane Milne Johnston, daughter of a laborer at Papakaio, turning up at about ten in the morning, doing up the rooms and cooking his dinner. She had been performing these services for the last three years, and latterly received 12s a week. On Wednesday last she appears not to have turned up until eleven o'clock, for some reason or other, letting herself in by the front door, of which she kept the key, Rennie keeping that of the back one. She was extremely surprised to notice that the blinds were down and that the back door was standing open. It absolutely startled her, she says. However, she went in and put the milk in its place in the kitchen, and then went into the sitting room and bedroom. In the latter she saw deceased's bare foot hanging over the bed, and, as he should have been up long ago, she became frightened, and cleared out without waiting to ascertain if he was asleep or ill. Her sister and one Ronald Borrie, returned, and it was only on the latter making an examination of the body and saying
"RENNIE IS DEAD" that the girl seems to have realised the true meaning of the happening. The fact was soon made known, but it wasn't until later on in the day that there was a suspicion of the foul tragedy that it is now known happened. Articles of clothing were distributed on the floor, and it soon became evident that the chest of drawers had been ransacked, and that a gold watch had disappeared. Rennie wore both gold and silver watches as his fancy prompted, but his silver one was found still ticking in his vest, which hung on the wall. As his bicycle had gone from the shed outside, it is presumed that the midnight assassin used this as a means of getting away, but in which direction he went there is no clue. Dr. Whitton, who made a post-mortem at the instigation of the police, found that the bed-clothes were quite undisturbed. There were three wounds on the head, two at the back on the right side, and one on the right temple. There was some brain matter in the neighborhood of the wounds, mixed with blood. The body had not stirred after the wounds had been inflicted. In fact the unfortunate dominie never knew what struck him, passing away in his sleep without a twitch. His arms were folded on his breast, and it was a perfectly peaceful death. There were no stains on the bedclothes. The wound on the right temple was lacerated, an inch and a quarter long, and a quarter-inch wide, and one inch above the right eye. The circular wounds at the base of the head had about the diameter of a garden pea, an inch and a quarter apart. No other wounds were discoverable at all on the body, which was quite healthy. The doctor discovered that only one shot had been fired by the bloodthirsty scoundrel who had done poor Rennie to death, but the bullet had split into three fragments when traversing the brain, and had thus caused the two wounds at the back of the head. It was impossible to tell whether Rennie was asleep or otherwise at the time the affair happened, but he had the natural position of a sleeper.
A SILLY YARN had got around after the schoolmaster's death to the effect that he had suicided by shooting himself, but as there was no gun visible, neither in the room nor about the premises, and as he wasn't known to possess one, the idea was not tenable. The affair caused a great sensation in the district, where deceased was very well known, and police were despatched from all quarters, including Christchurch and Dunedin, to endeavor to track the villain down; but not one of them could pick up any sort of clue to go upon; but all the country districts were at once closely watched, as is usual in such cases, for strangers who might pass for murderers, and who had to give an account of themselves.
Major Keddell conducted the inquest on the remains, and said that an exhaustive enquiry was highly necessary, and consequently the police would ask for an adjournment after a few of the witness had been examined. The deceased's untimely death at the hand of a midnight assassin had shocked the whole community. The theory of suicide was discounted by the absence of the weapon. It was known that Rennie was a mechanical genius, but he couldn't well have devised a weapon which could shoot him while he lay in bed and then totally disappear. He had been killed in his sleep, otherwise any emotion of horror, or rage, revenge whatever; would have been indelibly
STAMPED ON THE DEAD MAN'S FEATURES (question? Mr Keddell), whereas the expression on the face was that of innocent, untroubled, placid sleep. The reason why the deceased had been shot was extremely hard to fathom. He was not known to have kept any cash in the house, nor was he known to have had any enemies. However, the mystery would have to be probed to the bottom. All the particulars narrated above were elicited from the girl Johnstone and Dr. Whitton. A brother of the deceased came up from Dunedin to give evidence, but of course he could not throw any light on how his relative came to meet his fate, as he had not seen him for a year. This brother was James Alexander Rennie, commercial clerk, of Dunedin, He said deceased was not peculiar in his habits, but he was of a somewhat reserved disposition. He knew nothing that would support the theory of suicide, nor did he know about his financial matters, or whether he had anything on his mind. In fact what this witness did know was not worth mentioning. The inquest was adjourned until Friday, the 19th inst. It appears that Rennie dabbled a good deal in photography and kept a dark room near his bedroom locked, but an examination of this disclosed nothing. He also went in for mechanical devices, and even at school the bell tolled at the exact hours shown by the clock for assembling and dispersing. He naturally lived a very quiet life, and read a good deal. A copy of Pickwick Papers was found on the floor alongside his bed on the morning his body was found. He had evidently been reading it on the night previous, when he was seen to cycle towards his house, at 7 o'clock having evidently been out for a spin and lights were said by some passer by to have been observed in the place
AS LATE AS 11 P.M. Deceased was a son of Captain Rennie, one of the old identities of Port Chalmers. His mother is at present domiciled at Sawyer's Bay. She married again, and is now the wife of Captain Thompson. Rennie was in the Dunedin Training School for a while, and had been in charge of the Papakaio school for about 13 years. He had been a member of the Masonic fraternity for some time. There are many theories and rumors afloat, but they are mostly the work of amateur Sherlock Holmeses. The fact of the bicycle being missing points to the dark deed being the work of a man, but in this writer's opinion that does not always follow. A man of Rennie's reserved disposition would take few into his confidence, and it is just as likely to have been the deed of a female as of one of the sterner sex. And at time of writing he strongly suspects that it is. However, it's a neat bit of work for a murderer, or a murderess. That bicycle may be found in some outlandish spot some day; the watch is a mere detail and also the few stolen cheque forms which are alleged to have been torn out of the cheque hook found in one of the drawers. The mere abstraction of them might have been done in order to throw the authorities
OFF THE SCENT, and to make them believe that boodle was aimed at. But a few cheque forms don't mean boodle by any means, as if they were filled in for any amount the banks, placed on the alert, would put their hands on to the drawer in no time. To steal those cheque forms was foolish anyhow, and that should be apparent to anyone of common intelligence. Thera were a lot of silly rumors in Oamaru each day after the perpetration o£ the crime, one being (a couple or three days afterwards) that the culprit had been collared at Christchurch with the bike and gold watch in his possession. But of course it was all flam. Who starts these rumors when anything important happens never seems to be traceable. This is the second mysterious murderous occurrence that has been recorded in Papakaio. The last was in 1882, and has never yet been elucidated. It was known as the Gully murder, the unfortunate victim being one Sarah Adams. This person had been living with a man named Alexander Beattie as his wife, and they weren't very fortunate in their domestic relations, as a short time before her murder Beattie had been pulled to court and was bound over to keep the peace towards her. There was a good deal of suspicion when she disappeared, and owing to blood being found on his clothes, etc., and other suspicious appearances he was arrested on the body of the woman being discovered buried in the bed of the creek. It was shown that the victim had had her skull fractured by, some blunt instrument. In the end, however, a Supreme Court jury acquitted Beattie of the crime, the scene of which is about a mile and a half from the spot where the latest tragic occurrence eventuated.
(By Wire). Regarding this Papakaio murder case and the strong comments that are being made about a sailor having been seen in the vicinity before the tragedy and also seen cycling away from Papakaio on the morning following it I may say that the police are perfectly aware of the identity of the man and further could put their hands on him at any moment they think it necessary. In fact, he is really under surveillance, although he doesn't know it, but at present there doesn't seem any justification for his arrest.
THURSDAY MORNING. The latest information is that the name of the sailor is John Findlay, aged about 30, and an old Caversham industrial School inmate. He was yesterday at the Steward Settlement, a few miles from Papakaio, and detective Fitzgerald resolved to take him to Oamaru where he was lodged in the police office. He has not actually been "arrested," but is being detained pending inquiries as to his movements lately. It is alleged that on the Monday before the murder, one Stock, a grocer's carter, was driving near Papakaio and overtook a man who asked and was given a lift. He said he was a sailor and had left the Port Stephen at Oamaru. On the day following Stock again picked up the man, this time in the vicinity of Rennie's house, and again gave him a lift, but the cart was going in the opposite direction to that of the previous day. He rode about two miles, and during the drive he asked for half a loaf of bread, saying he had had no dinner. Of course there may be nothing in all this to incriminate Findlay, especially if he was a deserter from a ship, but it is not definitely known whether he was a deserter or not. -NZ Truth, 13/10/1906.
The flock of peelers and detectives who are out on the Papakaio murder curse Rennie. and his slayer both loud and deep, because the pink-eyes run Oamaru, and they can't achieve & drink when worn and dusty and dry. -NZ Truth, 13/10/1906.
THE CRITIC
Among other things found in the house of the murdered teacher Rennie, at Papakaio were some photographs of a decidedly peculiar nature. So peculiar indeed, seeing that Rennie himself posed for more than one of them, that they stamp the owner as having been an individual of extraordinary mind, if not an actual sex pervert. Police Commissioner Dinnie is reported, and only reported, to have said that the pornic pictures had no connection with the tragedy, and had the whole collection burned. No connection with the tragedy? Why, they might be the key to the whole of the dark mystery. Maybe its non-solution is undesirable. Better, perhaps, for the hallowedness of that mysoginistic school-man's lonely grave. -NZ Truth, 27/10/1906.
MURDER MYSTERY.
Dinnie's Dubious Deed of Destruction.
There are some vague rumors floating round in regard to the Papakaio murder, but as what this writer hears comes from an authentic source it may be mentioned that something more important will transpire at the magisterial hearing of the charge of murder at Oamaru this week-end than has yet appeared in print. In fact there has been a suggestion made to this writer that the newspapers didn't get all the news that was available, and that the suppression of that news enabled the police to work better. Be that as it may, it is pretty certain that the accused person, John Findlay, will be committed for trial on the charge of having murdered William William Hay Rennie in (the first week of the present month. The evidence given at the adjourned inquest was colorless, or, at least, very little fresh light was thrown on the gruesome subject. Coroner Major Keddell said at the outset that the only important development since the jury had last assembled was the arrest of a man, but the awful affair was still regarded as a mystery; still no doubt they had formed their own private conclusions on the subject. He thought that from the evidence that would be adduced they had but little option but to return an open verdict. The last person who appears to have
SEEN THE DECEASED schoolmaster alive was Richard Thos. Wilson, farmer, of Papakaio, who saw him in the evening near his residence on his bike after he had been to Dunn and Cameron's shop to make a few small purchases. Margaret Irvine, sister to Jane Johnston, who used to look after Rennie's house for him, said she had known the deceased 13 years, and he had always lived alone. Her sister merely called in the daytime and did up his rooms. Schoolmistress Isabella Dunlop, who had toiled with Rennie for two and a half years, said she lived past his place, and on the day before his murder after school hours, they both biked from the school, and she left him at his house. He was in good spirits, and laughed as he turned in his gate. On the following morning as she passed Rennie's house she noticed the bedroom blinds down, a most unusual thing, but she went on and opened the school. She never saw him alive again. Rennie had no enemies that she was aware of, nor did anyone bear him any animosity. He made few acquaintances, and was rather reserved. Duncan Cameron, of the firm of Dunn and Cameron, where deceased made purchases on the day prior to the murder, said that he visited Rennie's house next morning, I after hearing of the lamentable calamity, and noticed that the bedroom was
IN A DISTURBED STATE; clothes were lying on the floor, the deceased's writing desk appeared to have been ransacked, and a carpenter's chisel was lying on the floor, as well as a bunch of keys. Witness was surprised at this, as Rennie was a very methodical man. He then discovered that the cause of death was pretty obvious — murder. Investigation subsequently showed that the chest of drawers had been prized open with the chisel. In the course of his evidence Sergt. Griffiths stated that no money had been found in the house by the police, although search had been made for it. The jury found that wilful murder had been committed by some person or persons unknown, Major Keddell having previously remarked that according to the investigations made
THE WORST CRIME IN THE STATUTE BOOK had been committed. One remarkable thing about the whole business that has struck this writer is the destruction of the lot of photographs found in Rennie's house at the instance of Commissioner Dinnie, who hurried down to Oamaru from Wellington as soon as the murder was made known. Why did he destroy those photographs? Rennie was an amateur photographer, and naturally had a goodly number of pictures in his room. Were they photographed from nature, or from obscene pictures, or what? Dinnie says in emphatic language that no motive could be deduced from the pictures, consequently he reduced them to ashes. Well, is Dinnie quite satisfied with his action now that he has had time for sober reflection? Why should he have ordered anything to be destroyed; and what right had he to destroy anything, anyway? Were the pictures his property? Didn't they belong to Rennie's family, one of whom, a commercial traveller, gave formal evidence when the inquest opened? No sane detective would have put a match to a single article in the house — and Dinnie comes from Scotland Yard! Well, well! The photos, whether obscene, or not, should have been preserved, there's no two opinions about that. No chief commissioner of police in the world can tell offhand what may or may not have a bearing on a case, and the southern public who know of the murdered man's particular hobby, and have heard of the burning of these photographs, are asking a few questions about them. They would like to know. If there are any fresh developments in connection with this mysterious crime they will be narrated in "Truth" next week. -NZ Truth, 27/10/1906.
THE PAPAKAIO MURDER.
Acquittal of Findlay.
"Whose was the Hand?"
The Christchurch police weren't at all sanguine about placing a noose round the neck of John Findlay for the murder of schoolmaster William Hay Rennie at Papakaio. Ever since Findlay was committed from the lower court 'Tecs Bishop, and Ward had been scouring the district in search of additional evidence, but they weren't very successful in their task; in fact the case as presented by the Crown to the jury was quite inconclusive in every respect. Reliance was placed on evidence of a circumstantial character only, and testimony of that nature has to be as strong as possible before a jury will convict. In Findlay's case they refused to do so. This much is plain now that the case is over. When the murder of Rennie was reported the police looked round with an eagle eye to see what criminals there were in the district, and they spotted Findlay. He had done time on a couple of occasions, and they at once placed him under suspicion. From that out they endeavored to weave a chain of evidence round him, and devoted their whole energies to the job. They adjudged him guilty right off, and the consequence was that any other likely, or unlikely, parson, was entirely overlooked. The word "unlikely" is used advisedly, because it is often the most unlikely persons who commit
GHASTLY, COLD-BLOODED CRIMES of this atrocious nature. "Truth" hazarded at the time that it was the work of a woman, and since then the conviction has grown stronger. Rennie was a quiet, peculiar man, and few seemed to know very much about him. Although avowedly religious he had a fearful taste in photographs, and one cannot help still wondering why the Commissioner of Police had the obscene lot of pictures found in Rennie's house destroyed. The slightest thing may often prove a clue in cases of this sort, and this act of vandalism was unprecedented in the history of the Maoriland police. However, there was really nothing strong in the way of evidence against Findlay, and at this stage there would be much less against any other person, whether man or woman, who might be charged with the offence. -NZ Truth, 29/12/1906.
THE PAPAKAIO MURDER.
Discovery of Rennie's Bicycle
Near Where Findlay Lived.
It was quite natural that great excitement would be caused at Papakaio and Oamaru and its environs by the discovery of the bicycle of the late William Hay Ronnie, the schoolmaster who was murdered in his sleep, and for which murder young Findlay was tried at Dunedin and acquitted. The machine was found in an arm of the Waitaki River opposite the house of one Tomlinson, with whom Findlay boarded, and it was near the spot where the witness, Millen, said he saw a man with a bike the night after the murder, and now they are searching for the murdered man's watch. Well, there is only one thing to be said about this. It must not be stated that Findlay committed the crime; but the locality in which he lived should most undoubtedly
HAVE BEEN SEARCHED FIRST. Why was not that river searched before the trial, especially as it was near where the suspected man lived? Yet, no fewer than forty-two witnesses were called for the prosecution none of whom actually connected Findlay with the deed and consequently lawyer Hanlon did not find it necessary to call any evidence for the defence, and now, though nobody could connect Findlay with that bicycle, he cannot be tried again because he has been acquitted. It might be mentioned that Findlay has left that district and is now walking the streets of Christchurch with a jaunty air. He says he expects to get work shortly. -NZ Truth, 12/1/1907.
Findlay, the man who was acquitted of a charge of murder in the Papakaio case, has been re-arrested and will be charged at Oamaru on Thursday with theft and burglary from the house of Rennie, the murdered schoolmaster. -Southland Times, 29/1/1907.
ALLEGED BREAKING AND ENTERING AND THEFT.
WITHDRAWAL OF COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENCE.
(From Our Own Correspondent.) OAMARU. January 31.
The hearing of the charge against John Findlay of the theft of a bicycle, a pocket watch, a razor, and several cheque forms from the residence of the late Mr Rennie, at Papakaio, was commenced at Oamaru to-day before Major Keddell, S.M. Mr Fraser appeared for the Crown, and Mr Hanlon for the accused.
An application by Mr Hanlon for an adjournment till Monday or Tuesday on the ground that he had had no time to prepare for the hearing was opposed by Mr Fraser, who mentioned that it was desired to bring the case before a sitting of the Supreme Court in Oamaru on Tuesday next. To this also Mr Hanlon took exception, but the application for adjournment was refused and the hearing proceeded.
In opening his case, Mr Fraser said he would mention one new item of evidence, the discovery of the bicycle, which was found in the Waitaki River on the 8th January. The machine was embedded in silt and weeds, and this was the reason why it was not discovered when the police dragged in the vicinity, as they had done thoroughly.
The evidence of three witnesses was taken.
Duncan Cameron, storekeeper at Papakaio, identified the machine produced as the late Mr Rennie's, and was subjected to a long cross-examination.
Frederick R, Dennison, bicycle manufacturer, deposed that he did not see Mr Rennie take the bicycle away when he bought it, but he would say it was his from his recollection of it when brought in for repairs, and also from the specifications which were given with the order for it.
Jane Milne Johnston, Mr Rennie's housekeeper, stated that the machine produced was like that belonging to the deceased. At this stage the hearing was adjourned till 10 o'clock to-morrow.
February 1. The charge against. John Findlay of breaking and entering the house of the late W. H. Rennie, at Papakaio. and stealing therefrom a bicycle, a gold watch, a razor, and blank cheques, was continued here to-day before Major Keddell, S.M.
On the court resuming Mr Hanlon renewed his application for a remand, on the ground that it was perfectly obvious that it would be useless and aimless for him to continue his cross-examinations without knowing the defence. The application was, however, unsuccessful, the magistrate holding that accused was in the same position as others.
Mr Hanlon remarked that the case was being hurried to a conclusion by the Crown with indecent haste.
To this Mr Fraser took exception, and said that Mr Hanlon's appeal was merely an effort on untenable grounds to obtain a remand.
In replying Mr Hanlon said this was really the murder charge served up again to cover up the mismanagement of the former case.
To this Mr Fraser again took exception.
Mr Hanlon said that he did not want the case heard in Oamaru, in consequence of a remark made to him by the head of the department which had initiated the proceedings.
The Magistrate was of the same opinion as before — that the case must go on.
Mr Hanlon thereupon withdrew, remarking that he could be of no further use to his client at these proceedings.
The evidence for the Crown was then proceeded with, a number of witnesses in the murder case again giving their depositions.
The accused cross-examined Thomas Tansey and Nora Ford (proprietor and waitress respectively of the Alliance Hotel) at some length as to whether he occupied a room in the house on the 1st October.
Isabella Dunlop, school mistress at Papakaio, thought the bicycle produced was that of the late W. H. Rennie.
John Tomlinson and Donald Chalmers detailed the circumstances under which the bicycle was found in the Waitaki River on the 8th January. The latter, who dived for it, said it was embedded in silt and nearly covered. It was pulled out with difficulty. It lay in 5ft of water, but the river was lower on the 8th January than for some time previously.
Alice Buick deposed to having seen Mr Rennie using his gold watch on the day before the murder.
Edward Dinnie, finger print expert, deposed that on his first visit to Mr Rennie's house on October 10 he was shown some finger marks on the kitchen window. He carefully examined them, and satisfied himself that they were useless for identification purposes.
February 2. The case against John Findlay, of breaking and entering the residence of the late Mr W. H. Rennie at Papakaio and of stealing therefrom a bicycle and a gold watch, was continued to-day before Major Keddell, S.M.
Minor evidence was called by Mr. Fraser. In the afternoon, and on arrival of the second express from the north in the evening the evidence of Alfred and Edward Millen was again taken as to the visit of a man wheeling a bicycle to their camp, near Tomlinson's, on the night after the commital of the murder. With regard to the bicycle, they said it was bright and shiny, including the rims.
Alfred Millen deposed that the bicycle the man produced had a thing above the front fork which looked like the bookcarrier on the bicycle which was recovered from the Waitaki River near Tomlinson's.
The accused reserved his defence, and was committed for trial at the Supreme Court sittings here on Tuesday.
FINDLAY BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT.
(From Own. Own Correspondant.) OAMARU. February 5. The criminal sessions of the Supreme Court in Oamaru commenced to-day before his Honor Mr Justice Williams. The only case was that against John Findlay, who was charged with burglary at the residence of the late Mr Rennie, at Papakaio. Addressing the Grand Jury, of which Mr E. P. Burbury was foreman, his Honor briefly reviewed the evidence, which, he remarked, proved Findlay's presence in the neighbourhood two days before the crime. After an hour's retirement the Grand Jury returned a true bill. Findlay was then arraigned on the charge of breaking and entering and stealing a gold watch, 12 blank cheques, a razor, and a bicycle.
Before putting in his plea the accused asked for a remand to allow him to obtain counsel. He said that his committal only took place on Saturday evening, and he had had no time to collect money to secure counsel's services. In reply to his Honor, the accused said he only learned on the previous evening that Mr Hanlon would not appear for him in the Supreme Court. Accused gave Mr Hanlon £15 to appear for him in the Magistrate's Court, but he would not appear in the higher court unless his fee were forthcoming. Accused also expressed surprise at the manner in which the case was being hurried on.
Mr Fraser said it was not hurried at all. The facts were almost identical with those of the previous case, and as both counsel were well acquainted with those there was no need for delay.
His Honor remarked that he must give the prisoner an opportunity of being represented by counsel. This appeared to be a case which illustrated the necessity for defenders as well as Crown prosecutors.
Mr Fraser remarked that there was a local Bar. He felt sure that the profession had not fallen so low that the lack of funds would deter one of its members from conducting the defence of an impecunious prisoner charged with a serious offence. Accused apparently desired a particular counsel at a particular fee.
Eventually the case was remanded till Thursday morning.
February 7. The trial of John Findlay on a charge of breaking and entering the dwelling of the late W. H. Rennie on October 3 last, and stealing therefrom various articles, was commenced to-day before his Honor Mr Justice Williams.
Mr Hjorring appeared for Findlay, and was assisted by Mr Onglev.
Mr Fraser opened the case at length, occupying over an hour and a-half in his statement of the facts to the jury.
Evidence was given on the same lines as previously, and the court adjourned at 5.30 o'clock.
JURY DISAGREE.
OAMARU, February 8. The trial of John Findlay, charged with breaking and entering and theft, was continued to-day before his Honor Mr Justice Williams. The case for the Crown was continued, and concluded about 4 o'clock.
In summing up his Honor drew attention to what he called the objectless and frequent lying of the accused, and on the subject of the bicycle and the razor left the jury to say whether they were Rennie's and whether they had been put where they were found by the accused. The jury must be satisfied that the guilt of the accused was a reasonable conclusion from the circumstances disclosed, and that that guilt was the only rational conclusion.
After retirement of four hours the jury returned without arriving at a verdict.
His Honor asked if there was any prospect of an agreement or of the minority falling in with the majority.
A juryman said the minority was a small one.
The Foreman said he could say for the majority that they were not likely to give way.
The jury was accordingly discharged, and after discussion his Honor fixed a new trial for Thursday, 21st, at Oamaru.
COUNSEL FOR IMPECUNIOUS PRISONERS.
Mr A. C. Hanlon. who has acted as defending counsel in the charge .against John Findlay of breaking and entering the residence of the late Mr Rennie, of Papakaio, called on us yesterday with reference to the telegraphed report of the opening of the criminal sessions at Oamaru.
Mr Hanlon said that as far as his connection with the case was concerned, the facts were as follow: — "On his arrest Findlay telegraphed me, asking me if I would appear for him at the Magistrate's Court at Oamaru, and for a fee of £15 15s. I agreed to do so. The fee was paid and I appeared. In Oamaru a discussion took place between Findlay and myself as to the defence in case of a committal. Findlay stated that he had no money himself, but that his people would try to provide the fee. I then stated, of course, that I was only prepared to appear again in Oamaru if the fee were paid, as the case would most likely last three days, and it would take the greater part of a week of my time away from Dunedin. Findlay admitted that I had done a great deal for him in the murder trial for a fee that was paid by the Government, and that he could not expect me (and did not expect me) to appear for him unless he could pay. He then asked me to wire his people to see what they could do for him. I left him. intimating that I would only appear if the fee were forthcoming, and that was distinctly understood. Several telegrams have been interchanged between Findlay's people and me, but a fee has not yet been forthcoming. I considered that Findlay was entitled to an adjournment on account of the second trial following so closely upon the committal, and I wrote my agent in Oamaru asking him to see Findlay and instruct him to apply for the adjournment upon the grounds set out in my letter, in the hope that it would give Findlay's people further opportunity to raise the money required, and at the same time give Findlay's counsel (whoever he might be) a fair chance to prepare his defence. Mr Hanlon added that he did not agree for a moment with the Crown Prosecutor that counsel was bound for the asking only to appear for an impecunious prisoner. Counsel did on occasions appear gratuitously for prisoners, and would do so at any time if assigned by the judge at the trial."
An independent member of the profession (inasmuch as he has nothing to do with the case), whom a reporter interviewed scouted the doctrine, implied by the remarks of the Crown Prosecutor, and continued: "The Crown solicitor appears to assume that it was the duty of every solicitor to appear for an impecunious prisoner without payment, at the risk of bringing the profession down to a low standard by refusal. This doctrine is absolutely wrong, as it would mean that every prisoner would apply to the best criminal lawyer to defend him, with the result that that lawyer would earn nothing at his profession. The true doctrine is that if a prisoner at any time desires it the court can assign counsel (that is to say, nominate some member of the Bar) to appear for the accused, and it is then the duty of the barrister selected to comply with the direction of the court. It is frequently the fact that members of the profession act gratis for the poor, but there is no obligation to do so unless under direction of the court. At the same time, it is not to be supposed, apart from an assignment of counsel by the court, that any member of the profession acted wrongly if he declined to represent a prisoner at any time because there were no funds with which to pay him." -Otago Witness, 13/2/1907.
The jury was deadlocked at the end of Findlay's first trial for breaking and entering, but not after the second.
Findlay Found Guilty
INDETERMINABLE SENTENCE
(Per Press Association). Oamaru, February 23.
At the Supreme Court sittings yesterday the jury brought in a verdict of guilty against John Findlay, charged with burglary and theft of a bicycle, watch and razor from the house of Rennie, who was murdered at Papakaio in October last.
The Judge, in summing up, said that the verdict of guilty was practically to convict accused of the murder of Rennie, of which he was acquitted in Dunedin. It was proved that prisoner's record was decidedly bad, he having served time on charges of horse stealing (2), burglary and theft, altogether 12 previous convictions. His Honor thought accused a fitting subject for the granting of an indeterminate sentence. He therefore sentenced him to five years' hard labour, and adjudged him an habitual criminal, which means he will be detained during the pleasure of the Crown. -Hastings Standard, 23/2/1907.
"detained during the pleasure of the Crown." was, effectively, a life sentence for the murder of James William Rennie.
The conviction and imprisonment of Findlay on the charge of burglary will be no small relief to a large number of the settlers of this district who had only too good reason to fear his depredations. Even if there are doubts as to his guilt of the charges which have been brought against him, it cannot, judging from the criminal records, be questioned that, as Mr Fraser (the Crown Prosecutor) remarked last night, he is a highly dangerous character. Though, according to his own. statement, he is only 29 years of age, his career indicates an irresistible criminal tendency. As a boy he was convicted on six occasions, and finally sent to the industrial School at Burnham. Subsequently, from the years 1896 to 1906, he was convicted of forgery and uttering, theft, horse-stealing and breaking and entering, and spent a large proportion of his life in prison. From bad he went to worse, till he became irredeemable, and, though it was concluded that there was not sufficient evidence to prove his responsibility for the murder of Rennie, a moral certainty is prevalent that he is guilty of the crime. Probably, if he had not been charged with the murder, and his record had been clean, he would not have been convicted of stealing the bicycle, though the jury could not be swayed by such considerations, or he would not have suffered so severe a penalty. On the other hand, it is only reasonable to conjecture that the man who stole the bicycle committed the murder. But, whether Findlay is guilty of either of both of the grave charges brought against him, it is obviously in the interests of public safety, as well as for his own good, that he should be kept under restraint. His former exploits would justify his detention, for clearly he has proved himself beyond redemption. The Habitual Criminals Act, which was passed only last session, enabled Findlay to be dealt with in a manner that will, it it to be hoped, effectually restrain him from adding to the list of his atrocities. By virtue of that Act, even after Findlay has served five years in gaol, he will be detained during the pleasure of the Governor. This legislation will prevent confirmed criminals from being set at liberty after they have been convicted four times for serious offences. Such further curtailment of freedom will not only serve to protect the public from those hyenas which seek fresh prey as soon as they are liberated, but should also serve as a deterrent to those who are not irretrievably steeped in crime. Everything possible was done to release Findlay from his dilemma; but his defenders had a bad subject to champion. Not only was he a social derelict of the worst stamp, but he proved himself to be a prolific liar either from wantonness or design. Whatever be the accepted rights of an accused man, according to the British code, and whatever processes of reasoning may have led to Findlay's conviction, imprisonment, and subsequent detention at the pleasure of the authorities, the result of Findlay's trial is indisputably in the interests of humanity and public safety. -Oamaru Mail, 23/2/1907.
John Findlay may not have appealed to the editor of the Oamaru Mail, but he did, through his counsel, appeal to the court. The appeal was heard, the grounds being that the verdict was not in accord with the evidence - nothing of which positively connected Findlay with Rennie.
Appeal Court
FINDLAY'S SENTENCE STANDS
(Per tress Association). Wellington, April 26. In the appeal, the King v Findlay, who was convicted of breaking and entering the house of Rennie, the schoolmaster who was found murdered at Papakaio, near Oamaru, and sentenced to five years, and declared a habitual criminal, the Appeal Court held that the accumulation of circumstantial evidence against the prisoner was sufficient to warrant the jury in coming to the conclusion that he was guilty, and the verdict was a proper one. The Court refused to order a new trial and the sentence stands. -NZ Herald, 16/4/1907.
A more detailed reporting of the Court of appeal's finding stressed that Findlay was guilty of burglary and that the burglar and the murderer were one and the same person. To put it more fully: “The importance of this case consists in the fact that the prisoner’s conviction upon the indictment of burglary necessarily means that, though by his acquittal in December, 1906, of the charge of murder, he has escaped the punishment for murder, he was the murderer of Rennie. We have anxiously and critically examined the evidence adduced before the jury in February, 1007, and have felt it our duty to give in the fullest possible manner the reasons upon which we have come to the conclusion that this motion cannot be granted." -NZ Times, 27/4/1907.
Details as to the exact nature of Rennie's contentious photographs was not forthcoming until the "Truth" was able to report anew upon the case and, perhaps, felt that the passage of years allowed for more revelation.
"AFTER MANY YEARS."
Missing Links in Papakaio Murder Case.
What Was the Motive?
[From "Truth's" Christchurch Rep.]
On Monday last at Papakaio whilst ploughing a field Mr. Tomlinson unearthed a gold watch, a revolver and thirty-five cartridges. The find recalls circumstances connected with the murder of William Hay Rennie at Papakaio in October, 1908. Rennie, it will be remembered, was a popular schoolmaster at Papakaio. On the morning of the date mentioned he was found lying dead in his bed. Two bullet holes in his right temple indicated that he had been murdered in his sleep, the murderer escaping and taking with him Rennie's gold watch, bicycle, money and a razor. Suspicion fell on John Findlay, who had been living in a room at Mr. Tomlinson's house five miles away, and who disappeared from the district on the day of the murder. On the same morning he was seen riding a bicycle like Rennie's along the Ferry road In the direction of the river.
THE MISSING RAZOR was, subsequently found in a paddock where Findlay had been rabbiting on the morning of the murder. Findlay was arrested, tried for murder and acquitted. Some time later the bicycle supposed to be Rennie's was found in the river some distance from Tomlinson's house. Chief Detective Bishop, with a staff of about 40 men, was unable to find the missing watch or revolver, and the search was reluctantly abandoned.
Findlay, who, after his acquittal on the murder charge, was sentenced to five years' imprisonment for breaking and entering Rennie's house in February, 1907, is at present working out his sentence in gaol in New Plymouth.
Private information received from one who was on the spot at the time points to the fact that there were circumstances surrounding the case not made public by the police. These points were revealed on searching the dead man's rooms — a bachelor abode. Rennie, it is alleged, was recognised, generally, in the district as a womanhater. He was a photograph enthusiast, and some extraordinary pictures were discovered. It is said he had an abnormal desire for photographing himself in the nude, and that he would also get hold of the photos of local girls, and, by faking, place the heads on other
PICTURES OF NUDE WOMEN. When the rumor leaked out that these "fakes" were in existence, the opinion was openly and freely expressed in the district that the murder had been committed, or instigated, either by a father or a brother of one of the victimised girls. It is believed the discovery of the photos damaged the police case against Findlay. In view of the state of disorganisation in which the "Foorce" was in those days — here was a clear motive for the concealment of awkward facts. After the trial of Findlay, no bones were made about stating with the utmost frankness that the two rabbiter witnesses knew a great deal more than they testified to in the court. The equivocation of one of them in the box was patent to the least observant minds. So ends another chapter in a mystery. -NZ Truth, 2/8/1913.
John Findlay was sent to New Plymouth jail. But it seems not to have been to his liking...
HABITUAL CRIMINAL BREAKS GAOL.
(PRESS ASSOCIATION TELEGRAM.)
NEW PLYMOUTH, May 18. John Findlay, an habitual criminal in the local gaol, escaped during last night. His cell door was found open this morning, and there were indications that he had broken the lock and then squeezed through the bars of a window. Search parties are out. Findlay was sentenced to five years' imprisonment, and declared an habitual criminal, for burglary at Oamaru. -Press, 19/5/1915.
A PRISONER’S ESCAPE.
APPEARANCE IN COURT'.
SIX MONTHS’ HARD LABOUR.
John Findlay, the prisoner who escaped from the New Plymouth gaol on Monday night last and was recaptured some thirty miles away on Thursday, made his appearance at the Magistrate's Court this morning before Mr. A. Crooke S.M., to answer for his escapade.
He was formally charged that, being an incorrigible rogue and a vagabond, he did escape from custody.
It was stated that the charge was made in this style, under the Police Act, so as to give the prisoner a chance to plead guilty, which could not he done under the Crimes Act.
Prisoner pleaded guilty and elected to he dealt with summarily by the Magistrate.
Sub-Inspector Fouhy stated that on February 5, 1907, the prisoner was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment on a charge of burglary, theft from a dwelling and larceny, and was also declared an habitual criminal. The five years with conduct remissions expired on November 16, 1910, since when ho had been confined in the New Plymouth prison as an habitual criminal. His name was on the special list to be considered by the Prisons Board., The Sub-Inspector detailed the methods used by the prisoner in making his escape. He had removed the lock with a knife by cutting into the woodwork and then forced himself through a window. He struck out for the bush at the foot of the mountain, and remained there until Thursday, when he came out, and was detained near Oaonui by Mr. Dobbin and arrested by Constable O’Neil.
In his statement, prisoner said he would like to refer to the conviction that had brought him there, and asked for an attentive hearing. “I was,” he said, “charged with the murder of a schoolmaster named Ronnie at Papakaio on October 2, 1906. I was acquitted on that charge, but 27 days afterwards, I was charged with breaking and entering that same man’s house. On this charge the jury disagreed, but I was again tried, and this time, after 4 hours deliberation, the jury found me guilty, and I was sentenced to 5 years hard labour and declared an habitual criminal. I would like to ask what this act means. I have been punished twice for the one offence. Because I was unfortunate enough to have been in prison before, I am punished again. I completed my 5 years sentence, with remissions for good conduct, but the Prisons Board would not give me any chance to be released. In the ordinary course, the average prisoner does 12 months to 13 months as an habitual criminal. While I have been here 141 prisoners of the same class have been placed here, and 96 released. Of these 56 returned. Some have been released a second time, and others a third time, too. Although I put this case to the Prisons Board, they would not give me a chance. Why, they did not give any reasons, and I can only conclude that they were still hanging the murder charge over me. Is it right that I should be held to be guilty of this crime of which I was acquitted?” Prisoner also stated that when his father was dying and his mother was very ill, he asked permission to go down and see them. The under-secretary said he would do all in his power to let him go, but when a telegram came saying his father was sinking fast, the under-secretary stated that he could not go. "I have been detained 8 1/2 years,” concluded Findlay, “and I have never been given any chance at all, while all the time I have been a well conducted prisoner, in a general sense. My parents are dying, and this led me to commit the present offence.”
In reply to the Magistrate the prisoner said he knew he couldn't get away. He only escaped from the prison as a matter of protest.
His Worship remarked that he only had prisoner’s word for that. He might have succeeded in getting on board some ship, and escaping altogether. The maximum punishment was a term not exceeding two years. As the prisoner was an habitual criminal it did not matter very much what sentence was imposed, except as a deterrent to others. He would be sentenced to six months' hard labour. -Taranaki Herald, 24/5/1915.
From here, as far as the newspapers are concerned, John Findlay disappears from history. He might finally have been released, but I doubt it. He complained after his escape that the authorities were "hanging the murder charge over me." Indeed they might have been, as an alternative to hanging John Findlay in reality. I have little doubt that he died in prison.
No comments:
Post a Comment