The Queenslander (Brisbane, Qld. : 1866 - 1939), Saturday 15 April 1871, page 8

National Library of Australia http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article27265562

THE SCRUBBY CREEKTHE trial of Catherine Begg, for the murder

of Ellen Macdonald Exworthy, a child of eleven

and a-half yean of age, was one of the mostdifficult and intricate, if not one of the mostperplexing ohm with which a Bockhamptonjury has had to <W. The evidence was purelycircumstantial, and the various portions of it so

scattered about, and inmany parts so hidden,

that the Crown, although represented by Mr.Lilley, had great difficulty in making up a perfect whole. The case, it

appears to us, was gotup with great ability and care, the chain of evi

dence was well connected and strong, and bo

efforts were made to disturb facto, or prejudicethe prisoner in the estimation of the jury. In

his anxiety to let the case stand on its own

merits, or demerits, Mr. Lilley scrupulously aToided that specious eloquence,which few can use with greater effect

when points are weak and positions untenable.The evidence, so it seems to us, was in almostall instances corroborated and established, andthat by witnesses upon whom no slur could beoast, and with whose bearing and unprejudicedstatements not even Mr. M'Devitt could find

fault. The general opinion, which was oertainly

not on the side of the prisoner, became more

unfavorable as the case proceeded, and thosewho had watohed the trial from its commence

ment, anticipated a different verdict. The sum

ming up ot Mr. Lilley was logical and cox elu

sive, nor did Mr. M'Devitt's reply, which was

very long, tend in the slightest degree to weakenit. His Honor, however, did not equal our ex

pectations when he summed up. As he read and

commented, the case appeared to grow more hopelessly intricate and disordered, and when he hadoonoluded, he handed to the jury a task, whiohwe did not envy them. Looking upon the

various points of evidence as so many links,

which—if united in one chain—would be con

clusive circumstantial evidence, we were hardly

prepared to find these links, after they had beenunited by the Crown and left intact by Mr.M'Devitt, one after the other disconnected byHis Honor, and so tossed and twitted about thatit

was practically impossible collect them andto remake the chain. l>ealing with possibilities rather than with probabilities, using theformer as bases for arguments and deductionsrather than the latter, His Honor appeared tous to dispose of each piece of evidence as he approached it, by supplying suppositions. Thepuzzle which had been so skilfully put

together,

fell to pieces, and in this disjointed statewas handed back to the jury, and theyreturned a verdict of " Not

returned a verdict of " Not Q-uilty." Inall questions of public interest the Press is

naturally looked to for an expression of opinion,but there are cases in which it behoves thejournalist to be most guarded in his expressionof that opinion, as Judges are hedged in bythe law, and are as dangerous to be touched as

a porcupine. We shall, therefore, confine ourselves simply to a short review of Hia Honor'sruling, and the point upon which his logic hasfailed to convince us, whatever it did the jury—who had, we submit, no option than that ofacquittal after the Judge's charge in favor ofthe prisoner. His address speaks for itself.

What more immediately concerns us is themanner in which His Honor disposed cf

the arguments of the prosecution, and his

grounds for doing so. It would not be withinthe limits of our space to take all the points ofHis Honor's address, and discuss them seria

tim ; we therefore merely touch upon the more

salient, those most germaine to the matter.

"There were many acts deposed to," said HisHonor, " such as not driving up the cows andlighting the fires, which might have been inno

-1

cent act9." They certainly might have been,;

but taken in connection with the crime, they'

have no insignificant importance; otherwisewhat is circumstantial evidence? Upon such

reasoning might would dispose of the best linki

of evidence ever supplied. The hypothesis thatthe woman might have got up early on accountof a larger washing than usual, is proved to befallacious, as it waa a marked feature in the

principal witnesses' evidence—viz., the G-reenalehes', whose house commands a full view•of Bird's, that such an occurrence hadnever taken place -during the whole time

they had been on Scrubby Creek, and thatthe girl Ellen was invariably first seen of a

'

morning outside the house, and on all occasions>

not minutes, but hours before Mrs. Begg ever

made her appearance. We cannot see uponi

what grounds His Honor supposed that on this|

particular morning Mm. Begg had such an exteaordinaY waahing that it necessitated thelighting of the fires the previous night, and herruing at such an early hoar as the one in question ? Such an act wm shown to have been anisolated and an unusual occurrence, and as such—we should hare thought—deserred the importance the prosecution attaohed to it. Allunusual occurrences are most important

linksin

ohains of evidence, as was the equally unusualone of the cows being left out all night. It was

unfortunate that so much that was odd occurredat the same time. It was surely Tery ill-judged

same was Tery ill-judged

of the prisoner not to hare enquired of hernearest neighbors (before going all the wayto Jones') if they had seen the child ?

We forget how His Honor disposed ofthis oversight. If—according to her statement—the child was sent out by her at half

past 9 o'clock, how is it that she became anxiousas to her fate so remarkably soon as a quarterof an hour afterwards, for we find her inquiringfor her at Jones' at a quarter to 10 o'clock. Weperfectly

agree with His Honor that the dreamabout the blood was singular, most singular; it

certainly was not enough to conTiot her, butwhat was the " deep care in her bosom," andwhat suggested the idea to her, when the childwas only suspected to have strayed, that anyone had •• stabbed her." Why not tomahawked,or shot, or drowned, or lbst ? "It might bepossible,"

says His Honor, "that the prisonersaid hurt or injure instead of stab." True it

might be possible, but it is by no means probable,the words are too dissimilar in sound and signification. The word " stabbed" is not lightlyuttered, or forgotten, or mistaken for another, it

has a murderous sound about it that impresses thememory; and the girl was stabbed, a remarkablecoincidence when taken in conjunction with theaccuracy of Mrs. Begg's prediction, which—though we agree with His Honor—" did notimply a guilty knowledge," was neverthelessstriking, though by no means unaccountable.It takes a powerful mind to be the sole possessorof the one dread secret, which is perpetuallystruggling into light, and eventually overcomesthe most determined will. It speaks with mostmiraculous organ, and will out, as in Griffin's

case, when he foretold that the policemen were

shot and not poisoned, and in most oases whereconviction follows. It must be understood thatwe are simply differing from His Honor inpoints of logic, and that we in no way impugnthe justice of his ruling, or the correctness ofthe verdict given by the jury, as directed byhim. We have only to say that our deductionsfrom the same premises hardly coincide withhis—perhaps it would be presumption to expectotherwise. For instance, he says, in reference toMrs. Begg living in adultery, "that "

the immorality spoken of was not suggestive of crime"—what is it

suggec tive of then ? Have not mostof the greatest crimes on record originated fromconnexions of this kind, from David down to

John Boss, of Springsure. Why are prisoners'antecedents brought either for or against them,when charged before the Court ? Is there no

thing suggestive of crime in breaking God'scommandments—in what better school could a

a

person graduate into crime ? In oonolusio'n, we

would observe that we differ in toto from HisHonor's interpretation of the cause of thechild's dress being tucked up to her waistbecause she had to cross the creek; seeing thatthe water in no part where she crossed was

higher than her ankles, and even supposing shehad tucked it

up,is it likely, or even probable,

that it would remain up after a fierce deathstruggle had ensued, and while her body was

being dragged by the hair of her head five-andtwenty feet along the ground ? The arrangement of the dress was premeditated, and tookplace after the murder was committed, to con*

vey the idea that a oiiminal assault had' beenattempted previous to death. His Honor didnot seem to us to present the evidence as a

whole to the jury, but in detached part*. InScotland the verdict would have been "Notproven."— Northern Argtu, 5.