Death, Charles

NZPO 1880 - 81 Death C. Settler
NZPO 1880 - 81 Death Samuel

Web Site
http://ajlassociates.biz/getperson.php?personID=I22132&tree=frost

Wellington Independent 12 March 1873
SUPREME COURT.
CRIMINAL SITTINGS.- TUESDAY, March 11.
...
CHARGE,
His Honor, in charging the grand jury, said they were no doubt aware that the ordinary date for the Bitting of the court had been anticipated by a few weeks for the purpose of enabling him to preside at the usual sittings of the Supreme Court in Auckland in April, in consequence of his Honor the Chief Justice having been called upon to administer the affairs of the colony in the absence of the distinguished gentleman whom her Majesty had appointed to succeed Sir George Bowen in the administration of the government. He was happy to say that their duties on the present occasion would be very short. There were only two cases on the calendar for hearing, but they were cases of considerable importance as affecting one of the most important avocations of the inhabitants of the colony. The cases were both sheep-stealing cases, and in a country a large portion of whose wealth depended upon pastoral pursuits there could be nothing demanding more serious attention than to see that property of this description should receive the most thorough protection of the law. There was reason to fear that the lax system that prevailed throughout the colony, and the fact that much of the land was unfenced, placed in the way of weak-minded persons a temptation to commit depredations on the property of their neighbors. It was therefore necessary that in all cases where a prima facie charge of this nature was made out that investigation of the kind instituted in the present cases should be made, because if such a crime should become rife amongst the community a great blow would be given to one of the foremost industries of the colony. In the old country the offence of sheep stealing was not very long ago considered a capital crime. It was a subject for which we might feel thankful that we lived in a highly civilised country where it was not thought necessary to inflict such extreme penalties for this class of offence, but he hoped they would not lapse into the contrary extreme to that which once prevailed in the old country by treating such offences as the one with which the prisoner was charged as offences of a comparatively venial character. He trusted this kind of lax mortality would not be practised in the colony to any great extent, and if the law were administered with vigor its effect must be not only to give full protection to property but to keep the colony from lapsing into a state of the greatest immorality. His Honor explained to the jury the bearing of the law upon the cases before them.
The Jury then retired and after a short absence returned into Court with a true bill in each of the two cases on the calendar.
SHEEP STEALING.
Charles Death was charged with having on the 6th February stolen eight ewes, one sheep and two lambs, the property of Peter Speedy, a sheep farmer at the Hutt.
Mr Gordon Allan defended the prisoner, who pleaded not guilty.
Prosecutor said the prisoner and himself owned land which was divided by a distance of about a quarter of a mile. On the 6th February, witness having missed some sheep, he examined the prisoner''s flock, and found more of his (witness''s) sheep among the flock than he had sold to him about a fortnight before. Told prisoner what he had seen, and after some conversation it was agreed that prisoner''s sheep should be mustered for examination. Next day the sheep were mustered, but the only ones like witness''s were the ten which had been sold to prisoner. Witness felt pretty certain that there were more of his sheep about the place, and on further examination he found eleven sheep concealed under some furze in a pen in a distant part of the paddock. Prisoner came up and asked what witness was doing there, and when witness told him the sheep looked very much like his, prisoner said they belonged to him. The legs of the sheep were tied; and their ears were cut and bleeding. It seemed to him that the ears had been cut to destroy witness''s ear mark, and when witness pointed out to him the remains of the old ear mark where the fresh cut had not been made low enough down to cut away the base of the original mark prisodnr (sic) said "To tell you the truth the sheep are your''s," and he was quite willing that witness should take them away. Witness had mustered his own sheep, and had missed as many as thirty, and those found on prisoner''s place were of the same description as witness had lost.
Cross-examined by Mr Allan Could not say when he saw the missing sheep last. They had no other mark but the ear mark, but witness could tell any of his sheep without a mark to guide him, though he wound not undertake to swear to any particular sheep without a mark. After some further conversation with the prisoner about the sheep witness agreed to sell them to him at eight shillings per head, and his wife gave a promissory note for the amount. Witness did not lay any information against the prisoner for sheep stealing, nor was he aware by whom the information was laid. The first intimation he had of any prosecution being instituted was about tbe 14th February, when a constable came to witness''s house, read a paper, and asked witness if the contents were correct. Witness replied in the affirmative. The facts contained in the paper were, he believed, communicated by some of the neighbors.
Cross-examined by Mr Izard: The promissory note was returned and the sheep taken back before the information charging the prisoner with sheep stealing was laid.
David Speedy corroborated the testimony of his brother as to the main facts.
Mr Allan and Mr Izard having addressed the jury.
His Honor reviewed the evidence and summed up the facts of the case.
The jury, after an absence of about two hours, returned a verdict of guilty, but recommended the prisoner to mercy on account of his having a wife and family, and also on account of this being his first offence. Inspector Acheson, in answer to his Honor, said the offence with which the prisoner was charged was not, he believed, a common one in the province. His Honor said he was glad to hear that such was the case, as the offence was really a most serious one, and one which must be suppressed with a vigorous hand. He would hear any evidence to character that might be producible.
Henry Death, a cousin of the prisoner, said the prisoner had always borne a good character, and was known as a hard-working man. He has a wife and two children.
Joe (sic) Mabey said he had known the prisoner for fifteen years, and had never heard of him doing anything wrong until the present occasion.
His Honor said he was very much disposed to give the fullest possible consideration to the recommendation which the jury had given, although there seemed to be no ground whatever for the recommendation as far as he could see; but, notwitstanding that, he had endeavoured to ascertain whether it was a case in which a recommendation of mercy ought to have weight, and he was sorry to say it was not so deserving of mercy as he could have wished, because there were considerations in the case displaying great moral obliquity on the part of the prisoner, The theft showed more of the action of the rogue than the fool, because after stealing his neighbour''s sheep, he made a deliberate attempt to defend himself in the possession of them. He deluded the prosecutor into the belief that he was trying to find his sheep by pretending to make a muster, while at the same time he knew he had eleven of them hidden. The case was by no means a light one. Still, as he had heard that prisoner had borne a good character, and that he had a family, he was induced to do what he otherwise would have considerable doubts about, knowing that for many years sheep stealing was punishable by death, and that it was even now punishable by a sentence of fourteen years penal servitude. Having learned from the Inspector that the offence was not a common one, the prisoner would be sentenced to eighteen calendar months with hard labor.
...

Feilding Star 13 June 1889
Wellington Supreme Court
Tuesday, June 11
(Before his Honor Justice Richmond.)
DEATH v. BOYD
This was a case in which plaintiff, Samuel Death, sought for an order of the Court with respect to a trust. He alleged that his uncle, Charles Death, who died on the 10th (sic) April, 1884, placed in his hands 170 pounds to hold in trust for his (Charles Death''s) two sons, Earnest (sic) and Samuel, till they came of age. By the will of the 3rd April, however, Charles Death bequeathed all his property to his daughter Ellen Boyd, making her husband, William Boyd, of Feilding, executor. Mrs Boyd subsequently claimed to be entitled to this money, and the plaintiff asked the Court to declare whether or not she was entitled to it. The defendants (William and Ellen Boyd and Ernest and Samuel Death, junr.) alleged that the sum received by the plaintiff was 280 pounds 10s 10d and was the property of his aunt Caroline Death, now deceased, which she wished divided between Ernest and Samuel Death and Ellen Boyd; that Ernest Death was now over 20 years of age, and competent to be entrusted with his share; and that the plaintiff had acknowledged Ellen Boyd''s claim until recently, and had made an arrangement to pay it to her in April last. Mr Travers was for the plaintiff, and Mr Gully for the defendant. After evidence had been taken, and counsel had addressed the Court, the case was reserved for further consideration in Chambers


Death Details
1883/3923, Caroline Death, Aged: 62Y - Date of Death 25/8/1883 from Death Registration

Hutt Valley Cemetery Records Caroline Death, Date: 25 Aug 1883, Burial Record, Christ Church Anglican, Taita

Evening Post 25 August 1883
Funeral Notice
The Friends of Mr. CHARLES DEATH are respectfully invited to attend the Funeral of his Wife CAROLINE, to leave his residence, Taita, on Tuesday the 28th August, 1883, at 3 o''çlock p.m.
JOSEPH HALL,
Undertaker

Evening Post 27 August 1883
DEATH.- On the 25th August, at Taita, Lower Hutt, Caroline, the beloved wife of Mr. Charles Death, aged 62 years.

-

Death Details
1884/1247, Charles Death, Aged: 72Y - Date of Death: 27/4/1884 from Death Registration

Hutt Valley Cemetery Records Charles Death, Date: 27 Apr 1884, Burial Record, Christ Church Anglican, Taita

Evening Post 29 April 1884
DEATH.- On the 27th April, a (sic) Taita, Mr. Charles Death, aged 71 years
-
The Friends of the late Mr. CHARLES DEATH are respectfully invited to attend his funeral, which will leave his late residence, Taita, at 2.30 p.m. on WEDNESDAY, 30th April.
E. & A. COLLETT,
Undertakers