CHARGE OF MURDER

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1987, 18 February 1914, Page 3

CHARGE OF MURDER

THE SEYMOUR TBIAL. j A FINDING OP NOT GUILTY. EVIDENCE & ADDRESSES. The trial of Ellen Margaret Seymour: on a charge of having murdered her child, Thelma May Davis, on September 30 last, at Christehmch, was concluded in the Supreme Court yesterday before 'His Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout). The charge arose out of tho discovery of a dead body of a child, under a house at Rona Bay, previously occupied by the prisoner, her eister, Ethel Seymour, and a man, Leonard Jackson, it was the Grownjs contention that the child had been strangled in Christchurch, placed in a wicker basket, and brought on to Wellington. : Mr.. P. S. K. Macassey appeared for the Crown, and Mr. T. U. Wilford, with Mr. W. Perry, for the prisoner. Tho witness, Leonard Jackson, continued his evidence, being cross-exam-ined by Mr. Wilford. Hg- stated that the first day on-which he noticed the bundle under the house was October 27. Quito near to the house there were many sections of unoccupied sand-hills, and it would easily have been possible to bury anything that one wished to hide, and to do it without being seen. ■ His Honour: I don't know what all this has to do with it. Mr. Wilford: It has to do with my defence, Your Honour. ■ t ■- The Sister in the Box. Ethel Louisa Seymour, eister of the accused, who had lived with Jackson at, R-ona Bay, corroborated Jackson's statement that, when accused arrived in Wellington, she had two dress cases and a dress basket. On the morning of the day on which she left the bay she noticed a little brenvn shoe under the house. It was of a size to fit a child of ' about four years. She had, however, noticed the bundle under the house about six weeks before that. When her sister arrived in Wellington she still thought the child was with Mrs, Myall at Christchurch. Sho had never heard her sister speak of a- Mrs. Smith. - Mr. Macassey: Do you know how many children your sister has had? . Witness (after some delay): 1 suppose I heed riot answer that question unless 1 like. . Mr. Wilford objected to the question, and Mr. Macassey did not press for an answer. - To Mr. Wilford: Detective Enwle had questioned her sister for two hours on tho morning of her arrest before she was taken to tho police station. All the while • that Detective Ravrto was questioning Detective Mason was writing in a book. Tho detectives also kept asking witness whether she knew anything about it, .whether she was sure sho knew .nothing about it. and so on. , Mr. Wilford: What kind of a state did you get into? .-■ Witness: ,1 was pretty mad at thefinish. •. - . Did you know at the finish what you were saying?—"l don't knew " that I did." ' ' . ' . .. . . :.- Their Unhapjjy Homa. : Continuing, witness said that she had left hohie. when 'sho >yas l<) years of age'. "Her sister ''(£fa.e"ai'cu.sed) had always been at homo. It- had not been 'a very happj home, and the cause (sho admitted with some '■ hesitancy) was dnnk. It,was not true-that tlie child had Chinese blood. At any rate she had seen the child, and - had. \nqt .noticed that, .it had shown ally-sign, of Chinese origin. .......... Accused's Version Given to the' Police. Detective-Sergeant Rawte gave evidence- of tho preliminary investigations and the arrest of accused. Be had interviewed her prior to arresting her. ■ 'In reply to my question, 'What haveyou done with your daughter Thelma that you-loft ChristchurcU with.? , " said tho witness, "she replied, "I left her with Mrs.'Smith, whose address 1 don't know. The'day I left Christetach ' I was at Mrs. Myall's for tho baby, which I got, aud handed "to Mrs. Smith, a<, ■the top of Colombo Street. I doii't known why Mrs. Smith did not come to the house with me. I have known Mrs. Smith for about- eight months, but I don't know where she lives. I first met her at. a dance- at a hall in St. Asaph Street.-' I left the child with her whilst I came to Wellington, I have not hoard about the baby since I have been here. I have not made any arrangement to pay Mrs. Smith to look after.the child. I left Mrs.-Smith my address, Cumbrae, Mokaro Read, Rona Bay, Wellington. My baby Thelma was 14 months old. ... I was paying Mrs. Myall lls. 6d. a _ week-while sho had niy child, but, owing to my approaching confinement, I could not pay her further. On the same day that I went up to Myall's I accidentally met Mrs. Smithy and told her that I was approaching my confinement, mentioning that I'was on my Way to the receiving home, Fitzgerald Avenue, to get an. order to take the child from Mrs. Myall, in order to bring it to Wellington. This I would have done liatl I not met Mrs. Smith. - Mrs, Smith told mo that sho would mind the baby for me until I was over ray trouble. I met; Mrs.' Smith' every Friday night to go dancing. I met her at the hall. I met her every Friday night for about eight'.months. ' D'uring-.tbe time that I knew her I never introduced any friend of mine to her, neither did she introduce any friend of hers to inc. I never knew her husband, neither did she ever toll ine what occupation he followed. She used to just talk to me about her children, a boy and a girl, I can't tell you their age. To my knowledge, none of my friends have .ever seen liie with her. ' I don't know the man who conducted- the dances at St. Asaph Street; Hall. ■ I attended the dances there, aud the last was three weeks before it closed.' That won'd he about two months ago. The man in charge, so far as I know, knew 'neither Mrs. Smith .unr 1..' 'Che mm at the door Used to give out- the invitation tickets, which any woman could get with-out-charge. Sometimes, when they had a long night, payment had to be made. This was oil Monday iiiriits. I never attended on Mondays. "With the exception of meeting Mrs. Smith by Strange's on the day that I eanw away, I have never mot her 'at any place other than the hall in St. Asst>h Street. I travelled to' Wellington hy the s.s. Wahine. saloon, arriving here on October 1. My reason for previously stating that I bad no other children was that I was ashamed." More-by. the'Doteotives. Continuing, Detective-Sergeant Rawlo said that, inroply to, ftetcetivo'Masun. accused had said: "I .Ij-avc-'never .heard that Mrs. Smith;- had eomo' to Wellington. I hnvo not • seen nor hoard' from her since leaving the child with her. In answer to another question. ncens«d had stated that the-father, of "the child wor a tbrne-nuarter casto Maori, Accused being/unable, to Wl him ("Detcctivp RnwleV wlin Mrs. Smith was. he thought it ■ advisable to detain her luggage, and also chut of her sister. At tho police station he had recelvwl instructions to charge accused with tho murder" of Thelnia May Davis. When charged, she replied, "t am innocent." Accused had not been questioned nt th» pnlice station at, 'all.To Mr. WUford: Accused's statement I had heeu -tnacl.e in repk to question*. Sut, it the time, that bt asked these J

Questions ho did not know- that accused would bo charged with murder. To Mr. Jlacajsey: In asking ilie questions, my object was first of'ill! to find tho child Dans, and later to find .Mrs. Smith;" Dr. James S. M'Litiirin, Government Analyst, said he had made an exhaustive analysis, but had found iiq poison except a trace of zinc, which iiad possibly come from the bath in which the hotly came to .him. "Interviewed Fifty-five Smiths." Detective Mason corroborated the evidence of Dctcctivc-Serfieant .Rawlc. Detective Ward, of Cilristcliurch, said ho had searched in Christelwrcli for tho j Mrs. Smith with whom accused said she had left the child. In ail he lad visited fifty-five families of the name of Smith, hut could find i>o trace of the child, or any woman who would admit knowing anything about it. He had, however, found two Mrs. Smiths who had been at dances in the hall at St. Asaph Street. One of these knew the accused. He had met one other Mrs. Smith who knew her. These three Mrs. Smiths. • gave evidence corroborative of Detective Ward's statements. Frederick o'Ma]ley, resident in the Culverdcu district, said he had ouoo kept the Waiau Hotel, and in ]910 tho accused had worked for him. He had liad iw communication with . her last year, uor had he engaged her to work for him in-"-September last. Arthur Seymour, -brother of the accused, stated that he had gone to dances ir. tho hall in St. Asaph Street last winter. His sister had gone there only once. Ho did not know any Mrs. Smith ; who had attended tho dances. . John Thomas Wilson said that he was i tho secretary of the club which conducted dances in tho hall. Accused did Hot attend these dances regularly. This closed the case for tho Crown. Mr. Wilford did not call evidence for tile defence, I Crown Solicitor to the Jury. ! Mr. Maeassey then addressed the ytu-y. He remarked oit tho untruthful statement first made by the accused to tho police to the effect that she had uorer had a xM\i, and also -on a later statement, in which Seymour had asserted, she had left the child Davis with ono Sirs. Smith. The story about- Mrs. SmiUi. was. very unsatisfactory. Besides all this, accused hart given a descrip- ■ t-ion of tho clothes of the child Davis, which fitted exactly tho clothes found' lan the, body at.Hona Bay.. That body had been identified beyond all doubt as that of Thelma May Davis. If this, was not, then tho question must arise-, i where was 'I'helwa Davis ? Why should : Seyinonr take tho child, a baby of fifteen months, away from Mrs. Myall whori sho was! coming to Wellington to be confined? Sho had told Mrs. Myall that she was going to take it to Culvordcti, where she was going into service. This had been proved to be untrue. Why had the woman told a 1-io to Mrs. Myall? Why also had the- ■ child not been seen at tho house of. the parents of the accused prior to departure for Wellington? Another important question was why the large 'quantity of clothing received from Mrs. Myall had been left at the Seymour's Koine? If tho child had been handed over, to Mrs. Smith, why had the clothiiic not been handed over? There were only two suppositions possible. Either flip child had -died by accident or it had been 'deliberately murdered. If the child died s'natural death it must have { died between 2,30 p.m., when it was 'signed for as a healthy child, and 7.40! p.m. the same day. But there was not a tittle of evidence to support the supposition of death from natural causes. ■ And if death- had occurred from natural causes or from accident, why had Siivmaur sajd ao word, of it t0.., her,! father or Arid she taken the body .to' Wellington? There 'was also evidence that death from" nataral causes was not at all a likely thing to oecW in a 'well-nourished child such as Thelma Davis had. been proved to be, and there., was also .tho ovidenee of Dr. Fyffo (o the effect that tho condition of tho body was consistent with the theory that before death tho cliiW had suffered a bruise or abrasion on the throat. No evidence was tendered to support tho theory that the child died by accident. R- was impossible for tho Crown to offer definite direct evidence of the cause of death, but- he submitted- that, in view of the evidence, the jury must find that the little child was done- to death by tho prisoner Seymour in a cold-blooded manner. As to the motive ho 'suggested that a reasonable.motive-.iv,is clear. Accused, a single woman, had already two illegitimate children, and was shortly to have another, and she couid not support all the children any longer. Hor Solicitor's Address. Mr. Wilford said that the case for the Crown was simply: "Wo don't knowhow the child died. We ask you to say that accused-murdered her!" The suggestion of tho Crown was that tho woman, Seymour, who, according'to tho evidence offered, was fond of her child, had coolly murdered it. in order'to escape the expense of keeping it. He had been at some pains to put before tho doctor ;ill the possibilities of sudden death and now ho jvould put before the jury a theory consistent with the inuooenco of the accused. If the child died from rickets,' from which disease it was suffering, a 'sane woman, in accused's position VFould. have told her mother and father. But. near to confinement as she v/as arid possibly, therefore, in an abnormal state of mind, she would probably do tho most stupid thing possible, so sho kept the. child and took it to Wellington. Sho would Ve the more likely to do this -without' telling her parents in view of the fact that her home was -not a happy one. Also she nad kept- the child with her instead oi dropping the body overhoard from the steamer 'from Lyttelton or on the way to" Day's Bay. Slit- could lme burned it or buried it, but she kept i it with her and would not dispose oi it. Was this the act of a muvdeVess? Ho Rioted from nietlical works with a view to showing that tllo tart that accused was near to confinement would account for such abnormal conduct as Jie 'had 'put forward as a 1 possibility. Ho-would put it to the Jury that the child was suffering from rickets ami syphilis. His Honour: 1 *hall lull the iurv that lheve_ is not. a tittle of evidence that tlie emit] had syphilis. Mr. Wilford completed his address ' by reference to theso posailiililirs of sudden dpith, aiitl insisted th;vt tlto jurv must find that it was proved beyond doubt that the woman did the child to djMth before-finding-her-guilty. -The Crown case, lio urged, was oneof suggestion merely. ••". Tho Judge Sums Op. • His Honour, summing up to the jury, said that thp first fact of which tlse jury must tako account was that tho accused tool; the child from Mrs. Myall's house at l.'iO p.m., and the child was in good health. Sho went to her father's hoiiso at about G p.m., and sho had no child with her. She was seen on board tlip steamer, and the child was not there with her. As to tho lindinS! of the body, the evidence of Mr. Olaclian was that it was not there before Jackson and Kthel Seymour ocrumed tho house. Mho ovid-ence of identification of tlio child was its sise and a Rβ and sex, the' i'act- that it was liow-lejjued, tho birthmark on tl)(>. back, and the clothes found on tho body. ' ft had assuredly been (lead sotui 1 ! time between 2.30 p.m. and j (i p.m. The dfjetor had sail thai he oould not -discover tho cause- of death. All that liu could soy was lint tin; lapid dowMuposition in the rogioii of Dip throat was emisistiMit with a theory that the throat, had . been injured b'ifnr* dceth. The.queMion arose, whether the child died d n,-t<ml rl?-th or nr>t. S'l-.z-gestiW! had beeii put- forward that the i

child had .'Mot! a natural death, htit ho ' prpsiiniOfl tho jury would disregard them unless tlu'v \v<:m supported by evidence, 't'he-rr- wns, however, the fact that Seymour gave .Mrs. -Myall « Wrong address. Why had she done this? This was at : the basis of t-fib Crown's cite. There . was no evidence that the woman was in anything but a normal state of mind. There was nothing to -sfuppnrt tho theory that the accused kept the child's body because she loved tho child. She dia not keep it in her room, but had put it under the house. Tito jury must tome back to consideration of what the circumstances pointed to, AVhen asked for an explanation, she had said that sho had left the child with a Mrs, Smith, whoso ncklrf-ss she did not know. Sho had never sent Mrs, Smith money, and had not heard from her. Was this likt* the act of a woman who loved her child! . It was now suggested that the story about- Mi's. Smith was not true, find if the jury found that it was a lio tliey must- consider what reason tho accused could have tad for telling such a lie. There had been a suggestion that the girl was not in a normal state of mind, Ijnt there was no evidence of anything approaching insanity. The Finding. The jury retired at 4.5 p.m., imd returned at 5.5K) p.m. with a verdict of not guilty. The foreman stated that tho jury were of opinion that tliovo was not sufficient ovidmce to prove that tho accused committed the murder. Prisoner was accordingly discharged from .custody.