Daily Honolulu press. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1886, 1886-02-02

ana IelU Dau DeCauSe VI Wuub NC VOiu
me about his family. l kept the
money; my husband had nothing to
do with il.
Cross-examined by Attorney-Gen-
eral: do not know Of my husband
having been from home after II
O'Clock, or little after, since he
has been keeping the Royal. Mr..
Peterson spoke about wanting money
on his two visits; it was three or
four days after he first came that l
gave him the money. Never have
been long in company with Peter
sons daughter. presume all Mr..
Cummins' friends know he lives on
King street; he has been there about
two years. 1t was on occasion of
Peterson's visit, after he left, that
Walker objected to my lending the
money.
A. CARTER, sworn: had CONVEX
sation with Mr.. Peterson about P.O.
robbery since it's occurrence; have
been acquainted with him, inti-
mately, since he came to the country.
The conversation was before the ex-
animation in the Police Court.
(The Attorney-General objects to
question as to the nature of the
conversation, and the Court sustains
the objection, on the ground that
Peterson could not be discredited
now when he had not been asked
regarding this conversation on his
cross-examination.
Mr.. HATCH submits, in the alb
sence of Justice Bickerton, by per-
mission of the Court and consent of
the Crown, the evidence of |. B.
Peterson at the preliminary examin-
alton in the Police Court.
At six O'Clock the defense rested,
and a recess of an hour and quarter
was taken.
AFTER RECESS.
The Court resumed at 7:15 p. m.
Mr.. F. M. Hatch addressed the jury
in behalf of defendant, and claimed
that the evidence presented by the
Crown was insufficient to convict,
the only point made being that the
defendant had been furnished with
such information as would render it
possible for him to commit the
offense.
His Excellency the Attorney
General addressed the jury on be-
half of the Crown, claiming that Mr..
Peterson's evidence was reliable,
and that there was hiatus between
the hours of 10 and ii O'Clock on
that Saturday night, in the ali6i
attempted to be proven by the de-
fense. He said he did not believe
that Walker was not out of his house
after II at night for four months,
and he did not believe that when all
the telephone bells in the town were
ringing with the news, and every
body talking about it, that Mr..
Walker remained quietly and pri-
vately in his house until between l
and O'Clock in the afternoon. He
took Mr.. Peterson's evidence to be
true from A all the way down to Z.
AS to Mr.. Dunn's evidence, he
thought, "Dunn won't do"
Hastie, he thought, was well
named, from the haste with which
he left the country. He thought
Mr.. Walker should suffer, if for
nothing else, if he was Mr.. Peter
sons friend that night, he should
have taken care of him; if not his
friend, he should have reported him
to the authorities. He did not ask
the jury to convict on the uncor-
roborated evidence of Mr.. Peterson,
but he held that Mr.. Peterson was
strongly corroborated in three very
important particulars (D Mr..
Walkers saying nothing when Mr..
Peterson proposed to destroy his
books; (2) his being with Mr..
Peterson Immediately before the
crime; and (3) the matter of the
money borrowed from Mrs. Walker.
MIR. JUSTICE Preston said the
prisoner was charged under Chap.
Id, secs. l6 and II, Penal Code,
which stated that whoever in the
night enters, or breaks and enters
any building used for public pur-
poses, with intent to commit a felony
therein, shall be punished by im-
prisonment, etc. 1t was immaterial
in this case whether Walker took this
money or not; if he entered this
place, whether with guilty intent or
not, he is guilty. If be went in to
steal those books he is guilty under
this act. The removal of those
books would be felony. The tes-
timony of Peterson was direct and
positive, and you will bear in mind
that the suggestion was made by
Walker not only then, but on pre-
vious occasion. Walker said on his
direct examination that Peterson
told him the state of affairs:
81 had come from behind the
bar; Sharratt came in''-then he
narrates how Sharratt went away
81 went out with Peterson he
walked about the little room;
he got excited; wished he was dead
he would leave the doors open;
answered, 'Oh bosh!' If he said
so it is as strong corroboration of
Peterson's evidence as any you can
have. Whether there are any other
circumstances of corroboration it is