Biography

ANNIE PILET (n&eacutee Mahon)

Annie Mahon, child of Thomas and Delia (or Sarah) Mahon (nee Buller or Butler), was born
at County Galway, Ireland, in about 1861-1866. It’s not known how or when Annie came to
New Zealand, but it is estimated to be around 1879.

Annie, aged 16-21, married Pierre (Peter) Pilet, aged 33, at St Patrick’s Church, Dunedin, on
5 October 1882. Peter was from France and his occupation was as a seaman/mariner.

Peter and Annie had the following children:

Name; Birth date; Birth place

Anastasia Pilet, 10 August 1883, Port Chalmers

Margaret Annie Pilet, 7 December 1884, Port Chalmers, died aged 5 months

Peter Pilet, 6 August 1886, Dunedin

Henry William Pilet, 9 September 1889, South Dunedin

Annie had a long criminal record for drunkenness, theft, obscene language and vagrancy. In
1898 her occupation was listed in police reports as “prostitute”.

Her physical description was 5ft 0in in height, slight build, dark complexion, brown hair, blue
eyes, scar over left eye, mole on right cheek, with a short, pug nose.

She sometimes used the aliases Annie Mahon, Annie Jackson, Margaret Jackson or Mary
Jackson. Some aliases are hard to track as the names were quite common, but her life can be
reliably followed in the following newspaper and police reports. It is interesting to note that in
some of her court appearances she was represented by Alfred Charles Hanlon who is best
known for representing Minnie Dean, and who was the subject of the TV series ‘Hanlon’.

3 April 1894

1 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10013, 3 April 1894, Page 4

2 Otago Witness, Issue 2093, 5 April 1894, Page 15

“Larceny. A respectable-looking woman named Margaret Jackson was charged with the
larceny, on the 31st ult., of a mirror, two pairs of gloves, five bottles of scent, and two baby’s
gowns, of the value of 25s, the property of Thomas Ross. She was further charged with the
larceny of 10 pairs of socks, of the value of 9s, belonging to Tone Duck. Mr Hanlon appeared
for accused, who pleaded guilty, but desired to point out in mitigation of the sentence to be
passed that she was a married woman and had one or two children. She had been in Dunedin
all her life, was the daughter of respectable people, and was married to a very respectable,
hard-working man. This was the first time she had got into trouble of any kind. He did not
think he was wrong when he stated she was driven by circumstances to do what she had. She
was in indigent circumstances, and was nearly starving. He thought the Bench would not send
her to gaol, and suggested that she should be ordered to come up for sentence when called on.
The Sergeant of Police stated that about 1 o’clock on Saturday accused went into the shop of
Mr Ross, and while there put these things into a bag. Mr Ross followed her, and found the
things in her possession. The other things were also found upon her, and she admitted taking
them from the shop of Tone Duck. The Bench having ascertained that the goods would be
returned to their rightful owners, said that under the circumstances they would convict
accused, who would be required to come up for sentence when called upon.”

27 November 1894

3 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10217, 27 November 1894, Page 8

4 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10314, 22 March 1895, Page 4

5 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10314, 22 March 1895, Page 4

6 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10351, 4 May 1895, Page 3

7 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10360, 15 May 1895, Page 4

“Stealing from a clothes Line. Annie Pilet, alias Margaret Jackson, a respectable looking
young woman, was charged with stealing two shirts, a nightdress, and necktie and other
articles of clothing, of the total value of 14s 6d, the property of David Wilson, Cumberland
Street, on June 6, 1893. She was further charged with stealing, about the same date, clothing
valued at 3£, belonging to John Black, Cumberland Street. Mr Hanlon appeared for the
accused, who pleaded guilty. Sergeant O’Neill stated that at the time mentioned – June of last
year – complaints had been made to the police of articles stolen from clothes lines. An effort
was made to detect the offender but without success. Last Saturday, however the police had
occasion to visit the accused’s house, and. there found the articles. Accused admitted having
committed the offence. At the time the articles were stolen she used to live in the locality. Mr
Hanlon, for the accused, said that at the time the offence was committed the woman had had
some trouble with her husband, and gave way to drink. She had been brought before the court
for larceny, and it was well known then that there were other cases against the woman, but in
order to give her a chance of reforming she was convicted and ordered to come up for
sentence when called upon. He submitted that the bench might deal leniently with the woman,
and inflict a small fine. Mr McArdle said that seeing the offence was committed such a long
time ago, the bench would deal leniently with the accused. She would be fined 20s in default
one month’s imprisonment in each case.”

19 March 1895

“Annie Pilet alias Margaret Jackson was sentenced to 48 hours imprisonment for drunkenness
in Dunedin”.

22 March 18955

“Drunkenness. A first offender was convicted and discharged and Annie Pilet, alias Margaret
Jackson, was similarly dealt with.”

4 May 18956

“Theft. Annie Pilet, alias Margaret Jackson, was charged with stealing 4s 3d from the till of
Louisa C. Gardiner, at King Street, on the 2nd inst. A plea of guilty being recorded, and
accused having, said that she was drunk at the time and did not know what she was doing, and
that the money had been returned to Mrs Gardiner, Sergeant O’Neill stated that Mm Gardiner
kept a second-hand shop in King Street. She heard someone in the shop, and on looking saw
accused coming from behind the counter. Behind the counter Mrs Gardiner kept a dish
containing money, and the woman accused was seen to have money in her hand. The woman
was detained and the police sent for, and on their arrival it was found that the woman had put
the money into her mouth. She had been convicted of larceny twice in 1894, and had also
been convicted of stealing from a shop. She was very intemperate. The Bench sentenced her
to seven days’ imprisonment, with hard labour. Sergeant O’Neill asked if the money was to be
restored. The Bench: She says it has been restored. Sergeant O’Neill No; it is in the hands of
the police. The Bench: It is to be restored.”

15 May 18957

“Drunkenness. Annie Pilet, alias Margaret Jackson, who pleaded guilty, was fined 10s, in
default 48 hours imprisonment. The fine was paid forthwith.”

8 June 18958 9

8 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10382, 10 June 1895, Page 4

9 Otago Daily Times , Issue 10382, 10 June 1895, Page 4

10 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10419, 23 July 1895, Page 4

11 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10425, 30 July 1895, Page 4

12 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10448, 26 August 1895, Page 4

13 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10474, 25 September 1895, Page 2

14 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10505, 31 October 1895, Page 4

15 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10589, 8 February 1896, Page 8

“Drunkenness. Annie Pilet, alias Margaret Jackson, against whom there were seven previous
convictions, and who has been up three times within the past six months, was fined 40s with
the alternative of 14 days imprisonment.”

22 July 189510

“Drunkenness. Annie Pilet, alias Margaret Jackson, was charged with this offence on the
application of Sergeant O’Neill, who stated that the accused while in the lock-up on Sunday
morning became very ill, and had to be removed to the hospital, and that the doctor had said
that she would not be able to attend court before Monday next the accused was remanded.”

29 July 189511

“Drunkenness. Annie Pilet, alias Margaret Jackson, who came within the habitual clause of
the act, was sentenced to 14 days’ imprisonment.”

24 August 189512

“Drunkenness. For this offence Annie Pilet was sentenced to a month’s imprisonment”

25 September 189513

“Messers M W. A. Walton and J. B. Thomson were the presiding justices at the sitting of the
City Police Court yesterday, and dealt with two women charged with drunkenness. The first
of these was Annie Pilet, alias Margaret Jackson, who pleaded guilty. Sergeant O’Neill
informed the bench that this woman had been five times convicted of drunkenness within the
past six months, the last time being on August 25 when she was sentenced to a month’s
imprisonment. She was released from gaol on Monday about 1 o’clock, and got locked up
again by half past 5 o’clock. Accused made strong promises of reformation to the bench, but
was convicted and sentenced to a month’s imprisonment.”

30 October 189514

“Drunkenness. One first offender was convicted and discharged, and Annie Pilet, against
whom there were 11 previous convictions, and who came under the habitual clause of the act,
was sentenced to a month’s imprisonment.”

6 February 189615

“A Prohibited Person. Thomas O’Connor (for whom Mr Hanlon appeared) pleaded not guilty
to procuring liquor for a prohibited person named Annie Pilet on January 29. Sergeant O’Neill
stated that the woman was before the court on a charge of drunkenness on the morning of the
day mentioned, and defendant happened to be in court too. When she was discharged he
followed her into the street and took her into the Bowling Green Hotel. He put her in a private
room and then went to the bar, getting a glass of beer and a glass of brandy. He gave the
brandy to the woman and drank the beer himself. It would be proved that he knew the woman
for a long time, and that on the previous day he was warned by the police that she was a
prohibited person. Annie Pilet gave evidence that accused knew her for a long time, and knew
also that she was a prohibited person. After the summons was issued, but before she got her
subpoena he came to her and said “If you don’t go to the court I’ll swear I don’t know you and
I never saw you”. Mr Hanlon observed to the bench that as his client refused to take his

advice he would withdraw from the case. Evidence was also given by Edward Holmes
(licensee of the hotel), Robert Lord, and James Hallinan. The accused swore be had only
known the woman for a week and that he did not know she was a prohibited person. Accused
was convicted. Accused was further charged with accompanying a prohibited person into the
Bowling Green Hotel. Sergeant O’Neill stated that charge was part and parcel of the other
case, and he would withdraw it. Accused was then charged with procuring liquor for the same
person at the Bay View Hotel. Sergeant 0’Neill said that on the afternoon of the same day
accused took the woman out to South Dunedin. He bought a bottle of beer at the hotel, and
they afterwards consumed the liquor between them. Accused pleaded guilty. In answer to his
Worship, Sergeant O’Neill said that the man was a labourer, was married, and had a family.
His Worship said that that made the man’s conduct all the more disgraceful. On the first
charge he would be fined 59s and costs (27s), and on the second 5s and costs (13s).”

18 February 189616

16 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10599, 20 February 1896, Page 2

17 New Zealand Police Gazette, 1896, page 51.

18 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10636, 3 April 1896, Page 4

19 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10636, 3 April 1896, Page 4

20 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10469, 18 April 1896, Page 8

21 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10509, 4 June 1896, Page 4

“Annie Pilet was fined 20s, in default l4 days’ imprisonment”

19 February 189617

Annie Pilet alias Mary Jackson

Charged with drunkenness (sentence 48 hours) and damaging property (sentence 14 days) at
Dunedin.

1 April 189618

“Annie Pilet, alias Margaret Jackson, was charged with drunkenness. Sergeant O’Neill stated
that accused came under the habitual clause of the act, having been convicted four times
within six months. There were 15 previous convictions altogether. The woman had a family,
was an annoyance to her husband, and was a prohibited person under the act. The husband
had repeatedly complained that he could do nothing with her. Accused said she was willing to
mend her ways and sign the pledge if the bench would deal leniently with her. She was fined
5s in default 24 hours’ imprisonment, on condition that she would carry out her promise.”

3 April 189619

“Annie Pilet, alias Margaret Jackson, was charged with drunkenness. Sergeant O’Neill stated
that accused came under the habitual clause of the act, having been convicted four times
within six months. There were 15 previous convictions altogether. The woman had got a
family, was an annoyance to her husband, and was a prohibited person under the act. The
husband had repeatedly complained that he could do nothing with her. Accused said she was
willing to mend her ways and sign the pledge if the bench would deal leniently with her. She
was fined 5s in default 24 hours’ imprisonment, on condition that she would carry out her
promise.”

18 April 189620

“Drunkenness. Annie Pilet, alias Margaret Jackson (who came under the habitual clause of
the act, and who pleaded hard to be leniently dealt with for her children’s sakes), was fined
10s, in default 48 hours’ imprisonment.”

4 June 189621

“The only case was a charge of drunkenness against Annie Pilet, who made her fifth
appearance in the past six months. Sergeant O’Neill mentioned that she was arrested last

Sunday morning, and, becoming ill in the lock-up, was sent to the hospital. Accused denied
that she was drunk, and said that she met her brother on the Sunday morning, and saw he was
quite intoxicated. Two constables came past and arrested her brother, one of them saying to
her “You may as well come too,” She had not a drop in her head. Evidence to the contrary
was given by Constable Findlay and the watch house keeper. Sergeant O’Neill stated that the
woman had a quarrel with her husband, who gave her a black eye, and in consequence she
became desperate and went out and got drunk. The accused having pleaded hard for a chance
to reform, the Bench convicted her and ordered her to come up for sentence when called on.”

18 July 189622

22 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10277, 18 July 1896, Page 2

23 New Zealand Police Gazette, 1896, page 172.

24 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10600, 18 September 1896, Page 4

“Drunkenness. Annie Pilet: was charged, on remand, with this offence. Sergeant O’Neill
mentioned that accused had kept away from drink since the case was remanded. His Worship
was glad to hear it, and dismissed the case.”

“Prohibition Order – On the application of. Sergeant O’Neill, a prohibition order was granted
against Annie Pilet, by consent.”

12 August 189623

Annie Pilet alias Jackson

Charged with drunkenness (sentence 1 month) at Dunedin.

18 September 189624

“Breach of Prohibition Order. Annie Pilet was charged with having, on the 11th inst.,
purchased liquor from the licensee of the Red Lion Hotel during the currency of a prohibition
order against her. The defendant was under the influence of liquor when she appeared in court,
and his Worship, saying that the woman was not in a fit state to answer the Charge, adjourned
the case for a week.”

“Supplying Prohibited Person – John Walker, licensee of the Red Lion Hotel, was charged
with having, on the 11th inst., served liquor to Annie Pilet during the currency of a
prohibition order against her. Mr W. C. MacGregor appeared for the defendant, who pleaded
not guilty. Sergeant O’Neill asked for an adjournment for a week as the principal witness in
the case had appeared in court so much under the influence of drink that she had to be ejected
from the court. Mr MacGregor said the defendant did not wish to deny the facts, but it was
simply a question of law as to whether he was guilty or not guilty. The defendant did not deny
that he sold the drink, but he said he had no knowledge that the woman was a prohibited
person. His Worship: How long has the defendant been a hotelkeeper in Dunedin? Sergeant
O’Neill replied, for many years. Perhaps the court would like to take whatever evidence the
police had got. The woman Pilet; a prohibited person, was discharged from the Dunedin gaol
on the 11th inst., and was met at the gaol gate by her daughter. She want from there to the
defendant’s hotel in Stafford Street, where she asked for a. glass of beer, was supplied with
the drink, and paid for it. She left the hotel and came to the Police Court, and outside the
Police Court she met a gentleman, who asked her if she would have a drink. She consented,
and they went back to the same hotel again. The gentleman called for whisky for himself, and
for rum for Pilet, and these drinks were supplied and paid for. The licensee served the drinks
in both cases. Annie Pilet, Constable Daubney, Percy Ward, and Constable Boddam gave
evidence in support of the charge. Mr MacGregor submitted the case must fail. The copy
served on the licensee was not a copy of the order made. The act must be strictly construed,
and unless the rules were strictly applied, no one came within the scope of the criminal act.
Mr Carew: It is a copy with one or two, words omitted. Mr MacGregor said he simply said it
was not a copy. Mr Carew: It is not necessary a copy should be served at all. Mr MacGregor

said that was a different point. Section 12S was very badly worded, and did not apply to this
class of prohibition orders at all. The main point was that actual knowledge must be proved
before criminal liability took place under this section. To create guilty knowledge it must be
shown that the person to whom the drink was sold was the person, or probably the person,
referred to in the notice. Defendant did not know that this was a prohibited person. Evidence
was given by defendant. His Worship thought that if Mr MacGregor’s argument was correct
the act was almost inoperative. He considered that a fine of 20s and costs would be sufficient
to meet the case. It was evident that defendant did not exercise sufficient care in the
dispensing of liquor.”

18 and 24 September 189625

25 New Zealand Police Gazette, 1896, page 197.

26 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10729, 18 February 1897, Page 2

27 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10789, 29 April 1897, Page 4

28 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10978, 6 December 1897, Page 4

29 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10980, 8 December 1897, Page 2

30 Otago Daily Times, Issue 10983, 11 December 1897, Page 8

Annie Pilet alias Jackson

Charged with drunkenness (sentence 6 weeks) and with procuring liquor, being a prohibited
person (sentence 48 hours) at Dunedin.

On 2 November 1897 Peter filed a petition to the Supreme Court of Otago and Southland for
divorce from Annie, citing adultery. His affidavit states that on 7 and 28 October 1897 Annie
committed adultery with Henry George, a sailmaker, at Dunedin. In her response to the
petition on 3 December 1897, Annie denied the allegation. The divorce does not seem to have
been granted (see 29 November 1899).

18 February 189726

“Drunkenness. Annie Pilet was fined 40s or one month’s imprisonment.”

29 April 189727

“Drunkenness. Annie Pilet, who had been twice convicted within the past six months, was
fined 10s, with the alternative of seven days imprisonment. The Sergeant of Police explained
that accused was before the court on Monday for being drunk, and was then fined 20s. She
got time to pay, but instead of making an effort to do so she went and got drunk again.”

6 December 189728

“Drunkenness. The case of Annie Pilet was adjourned to Tuesday, her solicitor, Mr
O’Reilly, representing that she was going to the Magdalen Asylum at Christchurch.”

8 December 189729

“Drunkenness. Annie Pilet was charged with this offence, and the case was further remanded
to Friday on the application of her solicitor (Mr O’Reilly), the object being to allow of her
going to the Magdalen Asylum at Christchurch.”

11 December 189730

“Annie Pilet a frequent offender was charged with drunkenness. Sergeant O’Neill stated that
accused was on remand from 3rd December. She had expressed her willingness to enter the
Magdalen Home, Christchurch, and as the ladies of the St. Vincent de Paul Society had made
arrangements for her to leave by that afternoon’s boat, the police would take no further
proceedings against her Mr O’Reilly appeared for the accused, and agreed to an adjournment
till Monday, on the understanding that if accused went to the Magdalen Home the charge
against her would be withdrawn. Adjourned to Monday.”

14 December 189731

31 New Zealand Police Gazette, 1898, page 23.

32 New Zealand Police Gazette, 1898, page 50.

33 Star, Issue 6136, 24 March 1898, Page 3

34 Star, Issue 6142, 31 March 1898, Page 3

35 Press, Volume LV, Issue 10000, 1 April 1898, Page 6

Annie Pilet alias Mary Jackson

Charged with vagrancy (sentence 1 month) at Lyttelton.

17 February 189832

Annie Pilet alias Mary Jackson

Charged with obscene language (sentence 7 days) at Lyttelton.

24 March 189833

“Alleged Theft. Annie Mahon was charged with having on March 22, at Christchurch, stolen
£7 in money, one watch and guard arid one pipe, of the total value of £7 18s 6d, the property
of John White. Accused, who admitted the theft of the watch and chain, but denied having
taken the money, was remanded for one week.”

31 March 189834

“Annie Mahon, alias Pilet, alias Mary Jackson, was charged on remand with having, on
March 22, at Christchurch, stolen the sum of £7 in money, one metal watch and guard, one
pipe and one pair boots, value .£8 8s, the property of John White. John White stated he was a
labourer living at Cheviot. He came to town on March 22, and went to the Railway Hotel for
a drink, where he met accused. They had a drink, and then he went with the accused to her
place. He was under the influence of liquor, and did not remember anything after he left the
hotel, until he found himself lying on his back in the centre of a by-lane. He had .been robbed.
Detective Fitzgerald stated that he arrested the accused on March 23 on a charge of having
stolen the articles and money. She denied all knowledge of the theft. Later, however, she said
that a man had given her the watch. The other articles were also found at her place. Accused
made a statement, and said she found the prosecutor lying outside a hotel drunk. He asked her
for lodging for the night giving her his watch as security for payment. When he got half-way
he fell down and was too drunk to move. Accused was committed for trial.”

1 April 189835

“Alleged Theft. Annie Mahon, alias Annie Pilet, alias Mary Jackson (on remand), was
charged with stealing, on March 22nd, at Christchurch, £7 in money, one metal watch and
guard, one pipe, and one pair of boots, of a total value of £8 8s 6d, the property of John.
White. John White, a labourer, of Cheviot, gave evidence that he came to Christchurch on
March 22nd at about 7 p.m. He had eight or nine pound notes with him when he left. He went
into the Railway Hotel with a woman, and shouted for the accused and several other persons.
Accused and witness left the bar together about 11pm. Witness could not remember exactly
what took place or who were present in the hotel bar, as he was under the influence of liquor.
Witness did not remember what took place after he left the hotel with accused until about the
middle of the night, when he found himself lying on his back in a by-street, about 100 yards
from the Railway Hotel. Witness then discovered that all his money, his pipe, watch and
boots were gone. Witness identified the watch and chain produced. He did not give any of the
articles named to the accused or any other person. Witness was subjected to a rigid cross
examination by the accused, with the object of showing that witness was too drunk to have
any accurate knowledge of the events of the evening. Other evidence having been heard,
accused elected to address the Bench. She stated that she met White and had a drink with him
in the Railway Hotel. She then left him, returned half an hour later, and had another drink
with him. She left him again, and when she was coming back along Manchester Street White
was outside the Railway Hotel lying on the footpath. The hotel was closed. White was asleep.

He roused him up, and he asked her to take him home, as he had no place to stay. He said he
had no money, but would give her his watch and chain until the morning until he got his
money. It was White himself who handed her the watch. White had some whiskey in a bottle.
He lay down and would not go home, so she left him and went home. She did not see a
farthing of his money except what he spent in drinks. Accused was committed for trial at the
next sittings of the Supreme Court.”

30 May 189836

36 New Zealand Police Gazette, 1898, page 109.

37 Star, Issue 6192, 31 May 1898, Page 2

38 Hawke’s Bay Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 10930, 1 June 1898, Page 3

39 Press, Volume LV, Issue 10051, 1 June 1898, Page 3

Annie Mahon alias Pilet alias Mary Jackson

Charged with theft (sentence to come up when called on) at Christchurch.

31 May 189837

“Theft. Annie Mahon pleaded not guilty to a charge of having on March 22, 1898, at
Christchurch, stolen from the person of John White £7 in money, a metal watch and guard, a
pipe and a pair of boots, of, he total value of .£8 8s 6d. The accused was undefended by
counsel. Mr Stringer said that White, a labourer, residing at Cheviot, came to town, met the
accused at the Railway Hotel and went out with her. On the way he lost his senses probably
through drink and coming to found himself lying in a by-street, and missed his money, watch
and chain. He reported the matter to the police, who went to the house where she lived. She
first denied having seen them, but afterwards produced the watch and chain. Three witnesses
gave evidence for the prosecution. The accused gave evidence, asserting that she had not
taken the prosecutor’s money. After leaving the hotel she found him lying on the footpath,
drunk. He offered her his watch and chain, and pipe which she took, as she was partly under
the influence of drink herself. It was a pewter watch with a brass chain. Her friends at
Dunedin were willing to receive her back, and she had been two months in gaol already. His
Honour summed up. The jury, after a retirement of ten minutes, found the accused guilty of
the theft of the watch and chain. Mr Stringer said that the woman’s husband, who was in a
good situation, was willing to take her back, and Mrs Cunnington, who had interested herself,
in the case had offered to take her into the Samaritan Home till he did so. He (Mr Stringer)
would suggest that the woman should simply be ordered to come up for sentence when called
upon. His Honour ordered the accused to come up for sentence when called upon, on the
understanding that the course mentioned by Mr Stringer was followed.”

1 June 189838

“Annie Mahon, found guilty of robbing a drunken man, was ordered to come np for sentence
when called on.”

1 June 189839

“Theft. Annie Mahon was indicted for having on the 22nd March stolen from one John White
£7 in money, a metal watch, &c. The accused, who was undefended, pleaded Not guilty. The
case for the prosecution was that on the date mentioned in the indictment the prosecutor met
the accused in the Railway Hotel and was drinking with her. Subsequently he went out into
the street with her but became unconscious and found himself in a bye street with his money
pipe, &c, gone. Subsequently the police went to the house of the accused, and there found the
watch, &c. The accused gave evidence on her own behalf, and stated that she found the
accused lying on the footpath after she had been drinking with him. The prosecutor asked her
to take his watch and chain to get lodgings for him, and as she was under the influence of
drink she did so. When she found next morning that she had the watch and chain she tried to
find the man, could not do so. She had friends in Dunedin who would take her back, and try
and keep her from the drink. His Honour summed up, and the jury retired to consider their

verdict, and after a short absence returned a verdict of “Guilty of stealing the watch.” Mr
Stringer said he had made enquiries, and found that there were hopes of her reform. He
understood from Mrs Cunnington that the prisoner had a husband at Dunedin in a comfortable
situation, who had most tolerantly agreed to take her back. If his Honour would let the
prisoner go on condition that she would come up for sentence when called upon Mrs
Cunnington would take her to the Samaritan Home until arrangements were made to send her
to Dunedin, where her husband would meet her. His Honour said that he was always willing
to give a woman like the prisoner a chance of returning to respectability, and he would release
her on her undertaking to come up for sentence when called upon.”

1 June 189840

40 Press, Volume LV, Issue 10051, 1 June 1898, Page 5

41 Ashburton Guardian, Volume XX, Issue 4508, 1 June 1898, Page 3

42 Otago Daily Times, Issue 11128, 1 June 1898, Page 4

43 Timaru Herald, Volume LX, Issue 2719, 1 June 1898, Page 3

44 Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XXXII, Issue 122, 1 June 1898, Page 2

45 Evening Post, Volume LV, Issue 128, 1 June 1898, Page 2

46 Grey River Argus, Volume LVII, Issue 9992, 1 June 1898, Page 4

47 Hastings Standard, Issue 641, 1 June 1898, Page 3

48 Feilding Star, Volume XIX, Issue 283, 2 June 1898, Page 2

49 Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume XLIV, Issue 2272, 3 June 1898, Page 2

50 Otago Witness, Issue 2335, 1 December 1898, page 27.

51 Otago Daily Times , Issue 11263, 5 November 1898, Page 4

52 Otago Daily Times, Issue 11275, 19 November 1898, Page 2

“Annie Mahon, assault, to come up for sentence when called upon.”

1 June 189841 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49

“Annie Mahon was found guilty of robbing a drunken man, and was ordered to come up for
sentence when called upon.”

12 September 189850

“Annie Pilet pleaded Guilty to a charge of having on the 12th of September stolen one
tablecloth from the dwelling house of Roderick McKenzie. The Prisoner said that she had
been drinking heavily for three weeks previous to the offence. She was dared to take the
tablecloth from the Oban Hotel, and took it. In the morning she was taking it back to the hotel
when she was arrested. The Crown Prosecutor said that there were 41 previous convictions
against the accused. His Honour said it was quite evident that short terms of imprisonment
were of no use in the case of the prisoner, and the sentence of the curt would accordingly be
that she would be sentenced to 12 months imprisonment, with hard labour.”

5 November 189851

“At the Police Court yesterday Annie Pilet, against whom there were 42 previous convictions,
was charged with drunkenness. Defendant, who asked for a prohibition order, was convicted
and discharged.”

19 November 189852

“Drunkenness. Annie Pilet was convicted and discharged for being drunk, and was fined 20s,
in default 48 hours, for damaging a cab curtain to the extent of 4s, the property of Edward
Alexander. The Sergeant explained that when in the cab the woman became violent and
resisted, and the curtain was torn in consequence.”

28 November 189853 54 55

53 Star, Issue 6346, 28 November 1898, Page 3

54 Oamaru Mail, Volume XXIII, Issue 7378, 28 November 1898, Page 3

55 Press, Volume LV, Issue 10205, 29 November 1898, Page 5

56 Otago Daily Times, Issue 11541, 29 September 1899, Page 2

57 New Zealand Police Gazette, 1898, page 220.

58 Otago Daily Times, Issue 11593, 29 November 1899, Page 7

59 Star, Issue 6655, 29 November 1899, Page 4

“The following sentences were passed: Annie Pilet, for theft from a dwelling, twelve months
imprisonment.”

29 September 189956

“Drunkenness. Annie Pilet, who celebrated her liberation after a 12 months’ sentence of
imprisonment by getting intoxicated, was fined 5s, and allowed until Monday to pay the
money.”

28 November 189857

Annie Pilet

Charged with theft from a dwelling (sentence 12 months) at Dunedin.

29 November 189958

“Annie Pilet was-charged with that at on about October 2, 1899, at Dunedin, she did break
and enter by day the dwelling house of Peter Pilet, in Forth street, Dunedin, and stole
therefrom a silver watch, a gold albert chain, and two shirts, the property of Peter Pilet. Mr
Barclay appeared for the accused, who pleaded Not guilty. The Crown Prosecutor said that
the peculiarities of the case were that the accused was the wife of the prosecutor. Provision
was made in the Statutes for an offence by a wife against the property of her husband, and
vice versa, but no prosecution could lie if the parties were cohabiting at the time of the
alleged offence. But if the parties were living apart, either was liable to criminal proceedings
for offences against each other’s property. In this case Peter Pilet would tell them that he and
his wife had not been living together for 12 months. On the 6th September he went to the gaol
to meet his wife after she came out. She went away the same day, and did not return.

On the 2nd October, he left his home, locking his bedroom door, and leaving his son behind.
On his return he found that the bedroom window, had been broken, and the articles mentioned
stolen. The boy would tell them that the woman called with a strange man, and, breaking the
window of the bedroom, got admittance to the room and stole the articles in question.

Evidence was given by Peter Pilet, sen., Peter Pilet, jun., Ann Stanley, and William Gilbert.

Mr Barclay submitted that the essential elements of housebreaking were here absolutely
wanting. At the very outside, all that could be made of the case was that it was a drunken
freak on the part of this unfortunate victim of the alcohol habit. The watch, she said, was her
own; all that her husband did was to pay for its repair. She wanted money to pay a fine at the
Police’ Court, and never dreamt there could be any harm in breaking the window and taking
the things. What she did was done in the broad daylight, and in the sight of her son, whom she
told to tell his father. How could that be called housebreaking? Accused was called as a
witness, and the jury then (3.5 p.m.) retired, and returned at 6.30 with a verdict of Not guilty.”
The accused was discharged.”

29 November 189959

“Dunedin, Nov 28. The jury returned a verdict of “Not guilty” in the case of Annie Pilet,
charged with breaking and entering and stealing articles from the house of her husband, and
she was discharged.”

29 November 189960 61 62 63

60 Timaru Herald, Volume LXII, Issue 3121, 29 November 1899, Page 2

61 Oamaru Mail, Volume XXIV, Issue 7685, 29 November 1899, Page 1

62 Evening Post, Volume LVIII, Issue 130, 29 November 1899, Page 5

63 Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XLIII, Issue 15000, 29 November 1899, Page 2

64 Otago Daily Times , Issue 11604, 12 December 1899, Page 6

65 Otago Witness, Issue 2389, 14 December 1899, Page 16

66 Otago Witness, Issue 2389, 14 December 1899, Page 43

“At the criminal sittings the jury returned a verdict of not guilty in the case of Annie Pilet,
charged with breaking and entering and stealing articles from the house of her husband, and
she was discharged.”

Annie died at the Public Hospital, Dunedin, on 11 December 1899, aged 38, of acute
pneumonia and alcoholism.

12 December 189964 65

“On Sunday afternoon a woman named Annie Pilet went to the hospital and asked to be
admitted, saying that she was very ill. Examination showed that she was suffering from
severe inflammation of the lungs, and during the night her condition grew worse. Death
supervened about 3 o’clock yesterday morning. An inquest has been deemed unnecessary.”

14 December 189966

“One of the most notorious female inebriates who make work for J.P.s in Dunedin died in the
hospital on Monday morning. As a “special pleader” for clemency Annie Pilet was
unsurpassed, and many a time a soft hearted justice yielded weakly to her insistent appeals for
another chance. Her record for drunkenness and for offences directly traceable to her
besetting sin was unusually bad, and the terrible certainty with which she flew to the open bar
as soon as liberated was one of the strongest arguments in favour of an inebriates’ home that
could possibly be adduced.”

Annie was buried at the Northern Cemetery, Dunedin, on 12 December 1899 in a shared,
paupers grave.

Sources

Marriage certificate, Peter Pilet and Annie Mahon, registration 1882/3501, Dunedin.

Death certificate, Annie Pilet, registration, 1900/233, Dunedin.

Burial record, Annie Pilet, Block 70, Plot 17, Northern Cemetery, Dunedin.

Petition for divorce, Dunedin Archives DAAC/206811, 394/122, 1897.