John Edhouse and his family first arrived in New Zealand on March 12. 1860, by the ship "Walker," from Melbourne. He was accompanied by six children but apparently not by his wife, Mary Anne. Later that he year he advertised for stock to "depasture" on his well-grassed run in the Jacob's River/Riverton area.
Resident Magistrate's Court, — (Before M. Price, Esq., Resident Magistrate). The Court sat on Wednesday. The only case was that of Edhouse v. Edhouse, and it was a truly painful one — Mr. Edhouse (who resides at Mount Pleasant, in the Riverton district), charging his wife with two separate attempts to murder him by shooting him with a rifle. The principal witnesses called in support of the charge were the eldest daughter and second son, who deposed to hearing the two shots fired, and being told by their father that their mother had fired them; also to their mother having sent them out of the house on both occasions shortly before the shots were fired. The other witnesses were P. C. McKay, Mr. Aldred, and Edward Norris, a sawyer, to whose hut prosecutor went after being wounded a second time, who deposed to being told by prosecutor that his wife had tried to kill him, and his giving her in charge; the two latter stating that prisoner went with them voluntarily to Riverton, after being allowed to go home by herself and change her dress. The wife, by the questions she put, seemed to imply that her husband had inflicted the wounds on himself) and a statement made by the second son as to a remark of Mr. Ward, a neighbour, for whom he had been sent, led the Resident Magistrate to remand the further hearing of the case till next Wednesday, when both Mr. Ward and Dr. Monckton could be in attendance. Mr. Price has informed the prisoner that he would accept bail for her appearance, in £100, by two sureties of £50 each. — Ibid. -Otago Witness, 9/3/1861.
Escape from Gaol. — On Sunday night, about eight o'clock, the man Allen, who was convicted at the late sitting of the Supreme Court; of man-slaughter, and sentenced to three years' imprisonment, and the woman Edhouse, whose trial was postponed, escaped from the Dunedin gaol. They were assisted in their escape by persons from without, the gaol having been broken into through a part of the building not yet finished. — A further attempt was made on Tuesday night to break in and liberate the prisoner Johnson, convicted of robbery on board the Prince Albert. Allen and Johnson are both convicts, and it looks much as though we had others of the same class in the Colony. A reward will be offered for the apprehension of Allen. -Otago Witness, 24/8/1861.
Escape from the New Prison. — On Sunday night, about 8, Mr, F. Monson, the assistant gaoler, locked up the prisoners under confinement, including Allen, recently sentenced to three years' imprisonment for shooting a man in Stafford-street, in their cells for the night. On opening the outer door on Monday morning, he was surprised to see the door at the further end of the yard open, and on going further he found that the door leading to Allen's cell had been opened, and that the prisoner had escaped. This had been effected by accomplices from the outside, who had entered through an unfinished part of the outer wall, and found a door open, the key of which was still in the hands of the contractors. The next door was locked, and they pulled down some of the brickwork to open it; they then proceeded to unlock the doors leading to the prisoner's cell; this was very easily done, the fastenings being the common rim locks, not at all suited to the present purpose. Mr. Monson immediately gave information to Mr. Shepherd. On going to Mrs. Edhouse's cell, she was discovered to have also escaped, taking with her all the clothes, &c, in her box, and leaving a letter addressed to Mr. F. Monson, entirely free* ing him from blame, and giving as the reason for her escape, that Mr; Justice Gresson had refused to lower her bail to £100, which sum was forthcoming. She had made up her mind to escape, to effect which she had been assisted by friends outside, and were only waiting for a favourable opportunity which had now arrived. The locks leading to her room presented the appearance of having been picked from the outside. The prisoner had made his escape some 5 weeks ago, but was taken shortly afterwards in the old survey office; this was not brought against him at his trial. He had been heard to say before his trial that if he got a long term he would escape and would not be taken alive; that he had shot two men and would shoot another before he was taken. A man and woman had been seen to go down the river in a boat about 1 o'clock on Monday morning, but the efforts of the police to discover the runaways have hitherto proved unsuccessful. -Wellington Independent, 27/8/1861.
Capture of Allen and Mrs. Edhouse. — The prisoner Allen and Mrs. Edhouse, who lately escaped from the Dunedin gaol, were retaken at Mr. Baker's Hotel, Oamaru. Mrs Edhouse was dressed in male attire, which attracted suspicion. They were brought back to Dunedin in the Prince Albert on Thursday. -Otago Witness, 7/9/1861.
SUPREME COURT.
Thursday, January 10, 1862. (Before His Honor Judge Gresson.)
EXTRAORDINARY CASE.
Mary Anne Edhouse was charged with shooting her husband, John Edhouse, with intent to murder him. A second count made the charge to do him grievous bodily injury.
Mr. Howorth prosecuted and Mr. Cook appeared for the defence.
The prisoner, a respectable looking woman, was neatly attired. She has been waiting eleven months-in prison for trial. She succeeded_ in preserving tolerable composure throughout. She seemed a little moved when her daughter appeared to give her evidence against her.
Mr. Edhouse, whose face exhibited the marks of the shot, deposed that he resided at Jacob's River, near Riverton. I had determined to sell my run, and was in treaty for the sale. Sent my son to Invercargill on 6th February with the necessary documents. I and children and wife dined as usual together. My eldest son was absent. After dinner I gave permission for the children to play for twenty minutes. I laid upon the sofa with a book in my hand and fell asleep. Was awakened by the report of a gun about ten minutes after. I sprang up and asked my wife what was the matter. She did not know. Asked her i if she had heard anything. She said she had heard something, but could not tell what it is. I found I could not see out of my right eye and put up my hand and discovered blood on my fingers, then looked to the place where my rifle usually hung and found it was not there. I then exclaimed "I am shot," and looking I detected my wife attempting to hide the rifle behind her back. I said, "What, to murder me thus, and in my sleep, too? and not give me a moment to call upon God?" I then took the looking-glass to examine the wound. My wife laid down the rifle at the foot of the sofa, and left the house. On examining wound, found face from mouth to forehead completely charred and burnt, and the sight of my right eye apparently destroyed. My eye-brow and eye-lashes were burnt off. The wound was in the socket of eye, above eye-ball. Inserted finger, and extracted, portion of wadding of the gun, and burnt powder, and part of bone cut away. The first person I saw was our son Richard, and I sent him to my neighbour Ward to come immediately, as I was shot. After washing, and stanching, and binding the wound I took hold of the hand of my daughter Isabella, who had just come in, and held the discharged rifle in the other hand, and tried to walk to Ward's, but could not. I requested the prisoner to go herself to Ward's, as I wanted to get rid of her, so as to be able to be alone with my eldest daughter to tell her what had happened. The prisoner went immediately. She afterwards returned with Ward and my son Richard about 8 in the evening. Mr. Ward examined the wound as I lay upon the sofa where I had been shot, and enquired of me in the presence of the prisoner and my children if I had been shooting pigeons that day. I replied that I had been working in the garden with my children for six hours. I asked Mr. Ward to send for a doctor as fast as he could, and return with him, and he left for that purpose. After Mr Ward left I lay on the sofa until midnight, but no doctor came, nor did Mr Ward return. I then requested the prisoner to assist me into bed, which she did. Before then I had requested my eldest daughter and her sister to sleep in the same room at the foot of my bed, my bed was not in the same room as where I had been shot. I had kept the rifle at my side while waiting for the doctor's arrival, my daughter remained in the room with me until next morning. The prisoner was not in the room after I had retired to bed, at least I did not see her during the time my daughter was in the room. My daughter left in the morning without my perceiving it. I was at this time almost in an unconscious state through the agony of the wound which I thought was mortal. The first thing that awoke my attention in the morning was a loud crack of the rifle. I saw my wife with it pointed to me, she standing over me with it in her hands. I then seized the rifle and we struggled together out of that room into the sitting room, and I possessed myself of the gun. My eldest daughter came up to the house shrieking, "You have killed him at last! You have killed him at last!" I had received a fresh wound across the forehead, laying bare the skull and cutting a grove in my forehead up to the root of my hair. My wife then said repeatedly, "Let me have the gun to shoot myself that I may not be hanged for what I have done this morning."
By the Judge: This was said in the presence of my daughter. I refused to give her the gun, and I then went, out with my daughter and bound the wound. The prisoner then left the house. I secreted the gun, and then proceeded, taking my gun, to some sawyers about a mile off. My wife and daughter followed. I arrived first. I told the sawyers what had happened. I first saw Edward Norris, and when my wife came up I told her in the sawyer's presence, she was a prisoner, and I gave her in charge to the sawyer, who took her away. I once stayed after this occurrence on my return from the magistrate's court at Invercargill, at Bastion's Hotel, for one night, my eldest daughter and my son Richard being with me: I was in the room in company with two persons of the name of Tyshurt and Dods.
By Mr. Cook: My eldest son is about 13. I had had the run about half-a-year, which was adapted for either cattle or sheep — about 3000 or 4000 acres. I had no stock of my. own upon it, but had Ward's cattle on thirds. The Commissioner was satisfied with the returns of the number of stock. I had not borrowed any cattle to stock the run. I was not apprehensive of losing the run on account of its being indifferently stocked. I did not send the children out on the 8th February, but had given them leave to play. When awakened by report of gun prisoner was standing between the table and the right-hand wall of the room, about a yard and a half from me. She had the gun behind her back, as if trying to secrete it. The dining table was the ordinary height. I was lying on a couch, the pillow end facing the door. My head, when on the pillow, was lower than the top of the table. The impression on my mind is, that she said she did not know what had happened. She was not hiding the rifle to prevent my getting it. I secured the rifle. I did think of securing the ammunition which I had in the house. I never said to my wife the devil tempted me sorely, and to keep the children quiet. My wife went immediately and almost ran for Mr. Ward when I requested her. The children took their tea outside the house that evening. The prisoner put me to bed. She did not remain with me, nor did I sleep. Do not remember her making tea in the morning. Nor her making coffee for the doctor when she expected him. I left the rifle on the sofa, which my wife must have occupied that night. I did not hear the children get up in the morning. There are only three rooms in the house. I am quite sure she asked for the gun several times to shoot herself, fearing she would be hanged for what she had done. Have been married to the prisoner for twenty years. We have not lived happily together. Have had a family of eight children, six of whom are living. At the time of my marriage I was in the army in India. In the year 1844 I had a fall from my horse, and have had many such falls, but never sustained any material injury. I have had a broken head many a time from a fall. I never had medical advice for the injuries. The army surgeon never examined my injuries. I do not recollect adopting a little girl in Calcutta named Capsule. Do not remember a person of the name of Wilson, an apothecary's wife. I do not remember any person kicking out his wife for impropriety committed with me. My wife and self were appointed master and matron at Paddington workhouse in 1848. I was not ejected from office. I resigned in consequence of my wife's drunkenness. Do not remember any particular individual inmates during that time. In 1851 I went to Moreton Bay. Don't remember running after my wife then with a loaded gun. I remember going a drive with the prisoner to her father and mother when we were in Sydney. They did not request me to leave the house in consequence of my behaviour there. I never walked through the house naked with a drawn sword. I never said to the prisoner's father that she had been guilty of incest. At the time of the shooting my wife hesitated considerably to go down with me to the sawyers, saying I never could forgive her for what she had done. On the 6th February, prisoner was washing plates and dishes on the table near the sofa where I was lying. I had no angry words' with her that day. Things went on very smoothly that day, my wife being unusually kind to me, especially on the last day. She had so treated me since the last time I returned from Invercargill, about three months previous, when she had been looking for some arsenic, and asked me for it before the children. I had no sheep on the run, but had bought the arsenic in expectation of having some. She had not treated me kindly before this time. She did not say what she wanted the arsenic for. It struck me as something strange, and I consequently refused to tell her where it was. When the first shot was fired, I was lying on the sofa on my left side. My head was slightly raised on the pillow. The shot took a direction from the cheek bone across the eye, cutting away part of the bone against the nose, taking an upward direction.
By the Court. — The direction of the shot was upwards, after striking the face.
By Mr. Cook. — The sofa was a fixture to the wall. I had my back to the wall, and my face to the table. Judging from the direction of the shot, the person firing it must have been either kneeling or leaning over me, and the muzzle must have been close to my face; the person, who fired must have been at the foot of the sofa. I generally kept one gun loaded — and this one was usually kept loaded. I loaded it the previous night in my wife's presence, to shoot a wild boar that had alarmed her a few days before this. I never saw her load or fire a gun, except when she fired on 7th February. The case was investigated before the magistrate about a fortnight after this occurrence. I had not stated to Mr. Ward that my wife had shot me. I distinctly swear I never inflicted those wounds myself. I saw my wife standing after the second shot, and saw the flash. The bullot produced I found on the pillow, and I never put it in the gun. The shot produced were all shaken from the feathers. I saw the children pick up these bullets (produced), which had passed through the partition from my bedroom, into the boy's room, the hole in the partition was just above the pillow. I was not at this time unhappy about the state of my pecuniary affairs.
The Court then adjourned for half an hour.
By the Court. — I sprang up instantly on hearing tlh report of the gun, and saw her standing up about a yard and a half from me, at the foot of the sofa. I think the gun must have been depressed at the time of shooting. It was impossible for the gun to have been brought, to the shoulder, and from the charred condition of my cheek, the muzzle must have been close to my cheek, and a person firing under such circumstances must have possessed the greatest coolness, to be able to be in the attitude I saw the prisoner in. When I seized the gun, after the second shot, it was still levelled at my head. Prisoner leaned with her back against the children's bed.
Isabella Edhouse was then called on behalf of the prosecution, and deposed — My name is Isabella Mary Edhouse. The prisoner is my mother. I remember my father being wounded. I dined at home with my father and mother that day. After dinner, my mother told my brothers and sisters and myself to go down to the creek to bathe. The creek is about 30 yards from the house. We went to the creek. When there, we heard the report of a gun. We were in the creek bathing at the time. My mother came down and said my father was shot in the eye, and was bathing it. Mother told my brother and me to come out of the creek directly and come up to the house. I went up, and saw my father outside washing his eye. Father told me to go for water. When my mother went to Ward's, my father told me mother had shot him, and told me I was not to leave his side for fear she should shoot him again. Mr. Ward came up to the house about 4 or 5 o'clock that evening, and father asked him to go for the doctor. I remained in the house with my father until bedtime. Father slept in his own bed that night. Mother assisted him to go to bed. I and two sisters slept in a little bed in the same room with my father. Mother slept on the sofa in the sitting room. In the morning, mother came to take my little sister out of bed, and asked me to get up. It was just after daybreak. When I got up, mother sent me to the creek to fill a tub of water. I went to the creek. I heard the report of a gun, and I ran up to the house; just as I was coming close to the house, I saw my father and mother coming out of the doorway holding each other, and when I got into the room, I heard mother ask Father for the gun to load for herself. When I was getting up to the house, I asked my father who had shot him. I said "Papa, who has shot you?" I did not say this more than once. Father was bleeding very much at this time I only heard mother ask for the gun once, and she said nothing more than ask for it to load for herself. My father said, "your mother has shot me again." Mother cried, but made no answer. My brothers and sisters were down the hill gathering sow-thistles. I asked my father to dress, and I went, with my mother following father, to the sawyers. Father carried the rifle. When I was returning with mother from the sawyers, as she was going to dress to go to Riverton, I said to her "Father has got two awful wounds on his forehead." I asked her why she did it; she answered that she did it that we might go back to Melbourne.
By Mr. Cook: Father and I have not talked over what I was to say here to-day. I have bean for some months' living with my father since that time. He has never told me what I was to state in the court. My father has said my mother was a foolish woman to do it. Father and mother have always appeared kind to each other — never heard them use any harsh words, and we all lived happily together. I slept in the same room with father the night after he was first shot. He did not sleep that night. I had just gone to sleep when my mother came in in the morning. I was not in the habit of getting up so early. Do not recollect mother making coffee for the doctor that morning. When I first saw mother and father that morning my father was leaning on her arm. When mother asked for the gun she was half crying. Father said, "No, you would shoot me again." When one of my brothers asked her at the house if she had shot my father, she said, "No, I didn't do it, but he shot himself." Mother did not attend to my father's words, but I attended to them. I remember her offering him tea, she told me to ask him if he would have a cup and he said no could not drink it. Father sometimes complained when we made a noise in the house. Mother deserted Father and us children when we were in Melbourne, and when leaving Bendigo to go to Melbourne she would not get into the waggon to go with us. When we were going down to the sawyers, she told Father to leave the gun at home, or else she would be hung for what she had done. I never heard her say anything about being hanged at any other time. I never heard her speak of my Father's madness. [This closed the case for the prosecution.)
Mr. Cook having addressed the Court on behalf of the Prisoner, called —
Edward Tyshurst, who deposed: I am in the mounted police. I remember being at Riverton, at Bastion's Hotel, in the month of February last. I saw Mr. Edhouse there, one or two children were with him, also a person named Dods. I had seen Edhouse once before. I asked him what was the matter with his face; he said it was a gun-shot wound. I said, "how on earth did you come by it?" he replied "I did it myself," "I did it myself," twice. This conversation took place in the parlour. I am perfectly certain he used these words; he seemed quite sober. I had seen him once, or perhaps twice before, and had thought him rather eccentric, and had remarked it to a gentleman at the time. On the first occasion his conversation was of such a nature as to lead me to form this opinion.
Cross-examined by Mr. Howorth — I had never seen Mrs. Edhouse when I first saw Mr. Edhouse. I was slightly acquainted with Mr. Dods.
Mr. Edhouse recalled — I remember calling with my children at Bastion's Hotel, in returning from the examination at Invercargill. I have seen the last witness casually two or three times. Tyshurst came into the room where I and my children were seated. Dods was there also. Dods was in sometime before Tyshurst came in. Dods was my servant at one time. Tyshurst asked me how my wounds had occurred. I then replied that he and all the district knew that my wife had shot me twice, and that these were the wounds. I never said either to him or any other person at any time that I had shot myself.
Richard Edhouse, son of the prisoner, was then called. In answer to the Court, said — I remember being at Bastion's Hotel with my father. I and my father came down in a bullock-dray. Mr. Tyshurst, Mr. Dods, and my sister Isabella, were in the same room. I recollect Mr. Tyshurst asking father something about his wounds. Father said he had been shot twice, and Mrs. Edhouse had shot him. -Otago Daily Times, 17/1/1862.
Mary Anne Edhouse was found not guilty of attempted murder. I find it amazing that the words of one of Edhouse's daughters - which one, it seems impossible to know - were not the subject of probing questioning from the prosecution. "You have killed him at last!" At last? After what? Does this indicate previous, failed attempts? And why the need to rid the world of husband and father? Are the denials of naked sword-wielding and incest claims significant?
\
NOTICE.— I will not be responsible for any debts not contracted by myself. John Edhouse. -Otago Daily Times, 27/1/1862.
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT
Cook v. Edhouse. This was an action brought by Mr. Cook, Solicitor, against John Edhouse, for the recovery of the costs of the defence of the defendant's wife on the charge of attempt to murder. Mr. Cook cited several cases to prove that the husband was liable for the cost of her defence, although the offence had been committed against the husband.
Mr. Howorth appeared for the defendant, and contended that Mr. Cook had been assigned as counsel for the defence by the Judge of the Supreme Court, and that even if he had not been, he was not entitled to recover from the husband. Mr. Howarth said he had heard the Judge assign Mr. Cook as Counsel for the defence, which Mr. Cook did, stating that the Judge had never appointed him, or even spoken to him on the subject in Mr. Howarth's presence. Mr. Howorth also objected that the month's notice of Mr. Cook's action, which was required by the "Law Practitioners' Act" had not been given. The Court held this objection to be good and dismissed the case, Mr. Cook stating that he would renew the action at the expiration of the month. -Otago Daily Times, 8/2/1862.
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT
(Before A. (J. Strode, Esq., R. M.) Monday, 27th Oct.
Drunkenness.—Mary Ann Edhouse and Jacob Miles were fined 20s and costs, or, in default, 48 hours' imprisonment. -Otago Daily Times, 29/10/1862.
MELANCHOLY DEATH OF A WOMAN.
A woman named Mary Ann Edhouse died on the night of the 2nd instant, under circumstances which have led to an inquiry by Vincent Pyke, Esq., J.P., and a jury. The deceased, it maybe premised, was well known to the police. It may be recollected by some of our readers that about 12 months ago she was charged with shooting at her husband and readers of the police reports must have several times noticed her name, in connection with charges of drunkenness or vagrancy. For a long time she has lived but little with her husband; but of late they have been living together, most unhappily, in a house in Leith-street.
On the evening of New Year's Day, Mrs Edhouse returned home somewhat tipsy, and having a bottle of brandy with her. This her husband took from her; but on Friday morning, when he was starting for work, she abused him violently, and threatened if he did not give her the brandy, she would leave him again. He unfortunately yielded; and according to the statement of the eldest daughter, a girl 13 or 14 years of age, the wretched woman soon drank the contents of the bottle. A man called to see her during the day, and between them they drank a bottle of whisky for which he sent. In addition to this, she sent the daughter at three different times for a pint of colonial ale, and drank the whole of it. When the husband got home from work he found her helplessly drunk; and soon afterwards she was seized with what he thought to be a fit, but he took no special notice of it for a time, in consequence of the son stating that he had seen his mother similarly affected on previous occasions. But now, however, she grew rapidly worse, and both father, and son started to call a doctor, leaving only the daughter in the house with the sufferer. When Edhouse returned with Dr. Wilson, they found the woman dead. The rigidity of the body caused Dr. Wilson to suspect that strychnine, or some other poison capable of violently affecting the nervous system, had been taken by the deceased. He accordingly communicated with the police, and young Edhouse also went to the office and stated the circumstances attending his mother's death.
The result was that on Saturday afternoon an inquiry was commenced at the Albion Hotel by Mr Pyke, and that Mr Edhouse was present in custody, the fact of he and the deceased having led a wretchedly quarrelsome life whenever they were together being notorious. The son and daughter were examined, and the substance of their evidence is stated above. A post-mortem examination of the body had been made by Drs Wilson and Hocken. The former gentleman, in his evidence, adhered to the opinion that strychnine could have caused the unusual rigidity. Dr Hocken, however, thought that the appearances described by Dr Wilson were not inconsistent with the conclusion that they resulted from rapid and excessive drinking, as the effect therefrom, on the nervous system, would be very powerful.
The jury agreed that further evidence was desirable, if it could possibly be obtained, and the inquiry was therefore adjourned to four o'clock on Tuesday afternoon, with a view to having the contents of the deceased's stomach analysed.
Mr Edhouse has been liberated. -Otago Daily Times, 5/1/1863.
MELANCHOLY DEATH OF A WOMAN.
The adjourned inquiry touching the death of Mary Ann Edhouse was held yesterday afternoon, at the Albion Hotel, Great George-street, by Vincent Pyke, Esq., J.P. The substance of the evidence taken at the first sitting was published in our Monday's issue.
Mr Pyke informed the jury that Dr Hector had declined to undertake the analysation of the contents of the stomach of the deceased, because he had no data to guide him, and also because of the insufficient quantity of fluid found in the stomach.. He (Mr Pyke) proposed to take the evidence of Dr Hulme.
Edward Hulme, Provincial Surgeon, said that he had seen the evidence of the medical men, relative to the death of Mary Ann Edhouse. The post mortem appearances described by them indicated death to have been produced by congestive apoplexy, and such as would result from alcoholic poisoning., The post mortem appearances were not those that would be produced by poisoning by strychnine, which produced death by asphyxiation. The rigidity of the limbs, as described by Dr Wilson, would not be evidence of. death by strychnine, as this rigidity sometimes took place immediately after death from other causes. Alcoholic poisoning would not always cause such rigidity; it could sometimes. It depended upon the irritability of the muscles, and the vital state of the system at the time of death. Rigidity was very uncertain as to the time of its duration. In poisoning by strychnine, the symptoms would be much more violent than any described by the medical attendant of the deceased and of her children. The post mortem appearances were not those found in death by asphyxia. There was nothing to lead him to suppose that the deceased died from strychnine. The description of those appearances referred to congestion of the brain, and effusion of serum into the ventricles of the brain, and were such as would be found in cases of poisoning by alcohol. It was unusual for rigidity to go off in so short a time as described, in cases of poisoning by strychnine.
By the Jury: Strychnine would have an effect in a quarter of an hour. He meant that the convulsions would commence in about that time after the administration of the poison. He had read the whole of the evidence. From the small quantity of fluid found in the stomach, it was evident that the deceased could not have drank nor eaten anything for some time. If she had taken any oyster it would have been found in her stomach. It would have taken four hours to digest.
Mr Pyke summed up; and the jury returned a verdict to the effect "that the deceased died from the effects of excessive drinking." -Otago Daily Times, 7/1/1863.
Mary Ann Edhouse lies in an unmarked grave in Dunedin's Southern Cemetery.
MAYOR’S COURT.
This Day. (Before his Worship the Mayor, and E. B. Cargill, Esq., J.P.)
DRUNKENNESS. George Thompson was fined 5s, and a similar penalty was imposed on David Robinson for using language calculated to provoke a breach of the peace,
INDECENCY. George Edhouse and William Edhouse were charged with this offence, but as they did not appear, a warrant for their apprehension was ordered to be issued. -Evening Star, 18/8/1870.
At the time, the charge of indecency was also laid for public urination. The newspaper stories offer nothing more specific than the charge itself.
MAYOR'S COURT.
Thursday, 18th August.
Before His Worship the Mayor, and E. B. Cargill, Esq., J.P.)
Drunkenness and Disorderly Conduct. David Robinson was fined 5s for having, in a right-of-way off Walker street, behaved in a manner calculated to provoke a breach of the peace. George Thomson was fined 5s, with the alternative of 24 hours' imprisonment.
Non-Appearance. — George and Edward Edhouse were charged, on information of the Market Inspector, with indecent exposure in the Octagon market, on Saturday evening last, and with assaulting him at the same time. As they did not answer to the charges, warrants were ordered to be issued for their apprehension. -Otago Daily Times, 19/8/1870.
FUNERAL NOTICE.
THE Friends of the late Mr John Edhouse are respectfully invited to attend his Funeral, which will leave Cumberland street, near Hanover street, To-morrow ( Thursday), at half-past three o’clock, for the Northern Cemetery.
WALTER G. GEDDES, Undertaker, Octagon. -Evening Star, 8/9/1875.
John Edhouse died at Dunedin Hospital of heart failure.
No comments:
Post a Comment