Catherine Ryder was charged by the Inspector of Nuisances with neglecting to clean her premises, and also with allowing water supplied by the company to run to waste. For the former offence she was fined 2s, and the latter 1s, together with costs. -Evening Star, 17/12/1872.
VAGRANCY
Catherine Ryder alias Cameron, and Mary Thomson, were charged with being vagrants, and having no lawful means of support. Sergeant Calder said the accused were prostitutes, and kept a brothel in Pall Mall; they were continually causing disturbances, and at the time of their arrest they were calling out and conducting themselves in a most disgusting manner. The Bench sent them to gaol for a period of three months. -Otago Daily Times, 12/12/1873.
CITY POLICE COURT.
Thursday, 21st August. (Before His Worship the Mayor, and A. J. Burns, E5q.,.1.P.)
DRUNKENNESS. John Hunter was fined 5s. George Alexander, an old offender, was fined 10s, in default, sentenced to 4S hours' imprisonment.
DISREPUTABLE CHARACTERS. Martha Lorton and Catherine Ryder, two women too vile for the Refuge, were sent to gaol, the former for 48 hours, and Ryder for a fortnight. Emma Lane was sentenced to a month's imprisonment. -Otago Daily Times, 22/8/1873.
Theft of Jewellery. — Frank Thomas was charged, on the information of Catherine Ryder, a woman of ill-fame, with stealing a gold mounted greenstone brooch and pair of earrings, valued at £4 10s. Prosecutrix stated that accused, in company with two other men, called at her house in Clark street on Saturday evening, and being refused admittance broke eight panes of window-glass, besides doing other damage. She went for the Police, and on returning discovered that a box in her bedroom had been opened, and jewellery articles (produced) extracted therefrom. Witness gave her evidence in a very confused manner. Mr Bathgate: What countrywoman are you? Witness: Scotch. Mr Bathgate: From the Highlands? Witness: From Ross-shire. Mr Bathgate: I suppose you know Gaelic better than English. You can stand down. John Donoghue stated that prisoner gave him the stolen articles to pledge for 10s, adding that they had been given him some time ago. On. taking them to Mrs Davis's pawn shop he heard they had been stolen. John Samuel, pawnbroker, carrying on the business of Mrs Davis, deposed to the last witness bringing the articles to pledge, and on being told they were stolen said they belonged to his wife, but after further questioning, admitted that prisoner had given them to him. Constable Bain apprehended accused in company with Donoghue, when he stated that the jewellery had been given him by a boy named Thomas, but this Thomas denied. The further hearing of the charge was adjourned until next morning, to allow prisoner to call witnesses. -Otago Daily Times, 22/8/1874.
The name of the woman who fell over the embankment in Clark street yesterday was Catherine Ryder, and not Mary Thomson, as stated by us. Last night she was not expected to live, but to-day is a great deal better. -Evening Star, 15/1/1875.
Catherine Ryder, who sustained serious injuries by being thrown over an embankment in Clark-street by a man last week, died in the Hospital this morning. The police are unable to find the man. -Evening Post, 21/1/1875.
A married man named John Miller, recently employed at Sparrow and Co.'s Foundry; was arrested yesterday on suspicion of being the person who threw Catherine Ryder down the bank in Clark street. She died from the injuries sustained. A verdict of manslaughter was returned, and £25 reward offered for the arrest of offender. Accused, at the R. M. Court to-day, was remanded until to-morrow, and admitted to bail, himself in £100 and two sureties each of £25. -Star, 8/2/1875.
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.
Tuesday, February 9. (Before J. Bathgate, Esq., R.M.)
Drunkenness. — Isabella Oswin alias Kid was fined 20s, with the option of three days imprisonment; David Tuppin L5, or fourteen days’; James Mahon 40s, with a like alternative. On a further charge of habitual drunkenness, Mahon was discharged with a caution.
Obscene Language. — George Davis, for this offence, was fined L2, in default thirty davs’ imprisonment; James Wynyard 20s, or a week.
Maintenance. — John Donnoghue was charged on warrant, by Benj. Britton, master of the Industrial, with disobeying an order made by the Court binding him to pay 2s 6d per week towards the support of his son, an inmate of the Institution. — The case was adjourned for a fortnight to enable defendant to get the order.
Soliciting Prostitution. — Elizabeth Attiwell, charged by Constable Beasley with accosting persons in Princes street, was fined L3: in default one month’s imprisonment.
Pawn broker’s License. — Robert M. Mark’s application for a pawnbroker’s license for premises situated in Princes street was granted.
Alleged Manslaughter. — John Miller was on remand, with the murder of Catherine Ryder on January 14. — Inspector Mallard prosecuted and Mr Stout defended. Anne Kenny, charwoman and wife of John Kenny, laborer, said that eight o’clock on the morning of the 14th January she had occasion to go to the house of Mrs Carter in Clark street. She saw Kate Ryder, whose house adjoins Carter’s, sitting at her doorstep, and heard her abusing the accused. Noticing Ryder lift a brick, witness turned away and walked down Clark street to Mr Perry’s house at the foot of the street. After witness had been working at Perry’s some time she looked up at Mrs Ryder s house, which overlooks the yard, and noticed accused move nearer Ryder’s house. Witness continued at her work, and afterwards heard Miss Eager call out that Ryder was killed. Accused’s appearance was now different to what it was on the morning in question. He was now clean shaved, then he had a little hair on his face. Witness did not see accused from the morning of the 14th ult, till yesterday. He was then in the police station along with several prisoners, and she immediately identified him as the man she saw at Carter's. — Detective Shury stated that he had been investigating the case with Constable Henderson. When last witness was taken into the room at the watch house yesterday for the purpose of identifying accused, she looked along the line of prisoners, and pointing to Miller said, “That’s the man who assaulted Ryder." — Constable Henderson, who laid the charge, gave similar evidence. — Mr Gillies, clerk to Sparrow and Co., said that accused had been working for the firm as laborer for some months. He was not working at the time of the alleged occurrence. He was the best working man they had ever had, and was the last person witness would expect to see in the position in which he then was. — Flora Carter said that she was walking along Princes street with Mrs Frederick on the night of February 13, and when near the Octagon they were accosted by accused, who asked them to have a drink. They went with him to the Octagon Hotel, and he told them to go home and he would follow them. They did so, and accused stopped with witness, and Frederick slept on the sofa in the front room. Accused was the first to get out on the following morning, and while lying m bed witness heard Mrs Ryder abusing her. Witness got up shortly afterwards, and heard Ryder abuse accused. The latter said he would throw her over the bank if she did not keep quiet. There is a bank about 5ft from witness's house. Accused caught hold of Ryder, crossed her arms, and threw her on her back. She rolled under the fence over the embankment into Mrs Sutton’s yard. Three other witnesses gave evidence similar to the last witness. The most important evidence was that of a little girl named Lottie Young, who swore most positively that prisoner was the man whom she saw throw Ryder over the fence into Mrs Sutton’s yard. When taken to the police station on Friday, she said, on seeing prisoner, "It's very like him but he has got his whiskers off. Never said, “It’s not him.”
[Left sitting.] -Evening star, 9/2/1875.
SUPREME COURT.-CRIMINAL SITTINGS.
Friday, 16th April. [Before His Honour Chief Justice Prendergast.)
MANSLAUGHTER.
John Millar was charged with the manslaughter of Catherine Ryder, on the 14th January last. Accused pleaded Not guilty. Mr Haggitt for the Crown; Mr Stout defended. The facts of the case have been fully reported, but it may be stated that the case :or the Crown was chiefly this: Deceased was a woman of ill fame, residing in Clark street, off Maclaggan street. Prisoner passed the night previous to the committal of the offence in an adjoining house, occupied by a woman named Mora Carter. In the morning, deceased, who appeared to have been drunk, abused Carter and the prisoner, whereupon the prisoner took her by the arms, and threw her down a steep embankment, or threw her so near that she rolled over the bank. Deceased was picked up, bleeding and injured, and died ten days afterwards, from peritonitis, resulting, it was contended, from the fall. The Police took up the matter, but had had considerable difficulty in proving the identification of the prisoner as the person who committed the offence, as he had shaved off a moustache and small beard, which he previously wore. A good deal of evidence was taken on the point of the identification of the prisoner. He was identified by women of the locality as being the man who threw the deceased down. As to the evidence on which the charge was brought to a termination before the case for the Crown was closed, namely, the medical evidence, we give the following: —
Dr A. J. Garland, who made the post mortem on deceased, said that with the exception of injury to the head, there were no external marks on the body. Peritonitis, namely, the inflammation of the abdominal walls, caused the death of the woman. A fall on the stomach from a height of 11 to 12 feet, over a bank, would be likely to produce peritonitis. Peritonitis might be produced without there being external marks or bruises ten days afterwards.
By Mr Stout: Peritonitis might arise without any known cause. Witness would not positively swear what caused the peritonitis in this case. Peritonitis clearly caused the woman's death. By merely looking at the body witness could not say what caused the peritonitis. He could not swear that the fall of the woman had caused it. It could result from four or five different causes — cold, for instance. If he had been called in to see her, and any reasonable cause were assigned, he should attribute it to the cause assigned.
Dr Yates, Dr Hulme, and one of the female nurses at the Hospital, gave evidence regarding the symptoms and state of the deceased after her admission. She was treated for peritonitis.
Dr Yates deposed that a fall as described, would cause peritonitis, and if she fell on a log of wood it 'would more likely be produced.
Dr Hulme, on Dr Garland's evidence of the post mortem examination being read over to him, said that the evidence did not account for some of the symptoms. Taking Dr Garland's account to be quite correct, it was a puzzle to: him (Dr Hulme) how certain symptoms could be accounted for.
Dr Hulme went into the evidence in detail, giving his opinion on the points referred to therein, and said the post mortem examination, as described by Dr Garland, left him in doubt. He (Dr Hulme) could give no positive opinion as to the cause of the peritonitis from which the death of deceased ensued. He then described various causes that, independent of a violent fall, might have caused death.
His Honour, at this stage of the proceedings, said that he did not think Mr Haggitt could carry the case on any further.
The Foreman of the Jury remarked that the Jury were quite willing to proceed.
Mr Stout remarked that the Foreman appeared to be under a misapprehension. It was not a question of adjournment — it was whether the case should go on.
His Honour: My impression is, gentlemen, that — though of course I do not like to express an opinion— I think it should be withdrawn.
Mr Haggitt: Is it not a question for the Jury, your Honour?
His Honour: Of course — entirely.
Mr Stout submitted that the Crown were bound to withdraw the case if the evidence were insufficient.
His Honour reviewed the medical evidence, and read a great portion of the same. It was, he remarked, shown that there were abscesses on the liver and on the left kidney, and that such an abscess could have produced the peritonitis that caused death. There was no doubt that the deceased had been thrown, and that she was very much bruised and shaken. But for the Jury to bring in a verdict against the accused they would have positively to say that her death was caused by peritonitis resulting from the fall — undoubtedly, they must be quite clear that the peritonitis of which she died was caused by the fall.
Mr Haggitt pointed out that the abscesses, instead of causing the peritonitis might have resulted from it.
His Honour said that if they had not had a post mortem examination there would have been a case for the Jury, no doubt. They might have then come to the belief that death had been caused by the fall; but they had the post mortem examination.
Mr Haggitt: Which apparently was incomplete. He did not know it was incomplete; but it was apparently incomplete. But if in every case where the post mortem was incomplete — and he merely assumed this was so — the prisoner was to escape, in spite of there being other circumstantial .evidence, it would be opening the door to a rather serious state of things.
His Honour pointed out to the Jury that they might assume that the woman received a very violent shaking on. being thrown over; but, to bring in a verdict against the prisoner, they would have to say that death could only have resulted from the fall, while Dr Hulme and Dr Garland testified that that could not be assigned as the sole cause — their evidence showed that death might have resulted from other causes. It was still a question for the Jury whether the peritonitis which caused death was induced by the fall over the bank, and if they so found they could convict.
Mr Haggitt said if the Jury could attribute the peritonitis to no other cause than the fall over the bank, they were bound to convict.
His Honour: No doubt.
Mr Haggitt: If your Honour thinks that under the circumstances I ought not to proceed with the case, I —
His Honour said he did not think Mr Haggitt could ask the Jury to convict after hearing the evidence of Dr Hulme. He then read and commented on part of Dr Hulme's evidence.
Mr Haggitt: Of course, your Honour, I will be entirely guided by the opinion your Honour expresses. Your Honour has simply to direct an acquittal.
His Honour, addressing the Jury, said that to find the prisoner guilty of manslaughter they would have to say that the death of the woman could not have resulted from any other cause than the act of the prisoner — they would have to safely say it caused her death; they would have to say from the medical evidence that the peritonitis could not be attributed to any other cause than the fall. It seemed to him from the medical evidence that they could not attribute, without a reasonable doubt, the peritonitis of which the woman died to be due to the fall. That being so, it seemed to him that they ought to acquit the prisoner.
The Jury, without leaving the box, at once agreed to a verdict of Not guilty.
His Honour (to the Jury): You understand, as I said over and over again, there can be no question that he was the man that threw her over, in a violent way, and caused the bruises on her head. But, to convict, you would have had to come to an undoubted conclusion that the peritonitis of which she died was the result of the fall, and that you could not find any other cause to which it might be attributable. The prisoner is discharged.
Millar was thereupon released from, the dock, and The Court adjourned till this morning. -Otago Daily Times, 17/4/1875.
Catherine Ryder's remains lie in Dunedin's Southern Cemetery, in an unmarked grave.
No comments:
Post a Comment