SUPREME COURT

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 271, 12 August 1919, Page 3

SUPREME COURT

ALLEGED BIGAMY

ACQUITTAL OF THE ACCUSED

His Honour Mr. Justice Edwards was on tho bench at the Supremo Court yesterday, and doa.t with the two remaining cases on the criminal calendar.

James Jackson, otherwise called Miehaol James Jackson, was placed in tho dock to answer a charge of having committed bigamy. Mr. P, S. K. Macassey, of tho Crown Law Office, appeared for the Crown, and Sir John Findltty, K.C., with him Mr. P. W. Jackson, for tho accused. Mr. A. W. Bodon was foreman of tho jury.

The charge against the accused was that in January, 1912, ho married Martha White at the Registry Office, Wellington, and on January 31, 1!)1G he wont through a form of marria.ge ■with Gladys May Morris at tho Basilica, Hill Street, Wellington, while his first wife was still alive, thereby committing bigamy. The accused pleaded not guilty. At tho outset Sir John Findlay announced that he accepted the depositions of Mrs. Nellia Nightingale, who was unablo to appear owing to illness, and tho formal evidence jjivern by tho officiate of tho office. Mr. Macassey, in opening, said that tho accused was charged with bigamy and he road section 2it of the Crimes Act, which defines bigamy. Tho facts wore that accused married on January 31, 1912, one Martha White, a spinster, at the Registry Office. During 1911 they 6tayad at Mrs. Nightingale's, and later they left one another, and tho accused married his present wife in January, 1916.

The Registrar read the depositions of tho witnesses that were agreed to, and also the affidavits of the accused and of Martha White.

Mr, Macassey said that the accused commenced divorco proceedings against hia first wife, but <lid not go on with the case.

■ Plain-clothes Constablo H. H. llussoll said ho Saw the accused on February 17 last. He sai<l that when he marridd Martha White he pioked her up out of the street. Ho enid he was half drunk when he went to the Registry Office and married the woman. Ho made complaints against tho woman's moral con-

To Sir John Findlay: Ho knew that the accused was A station manager in Hawke's Bay. He had a good character, and was a- hard worker. The accused's allegations against his wife's conduct were in tho main correct.

Mr. Macassey objected (o this evidence.

Sir John Findloy efiid that the woman soaked in alcohol, and when she left accused her condition was such that he had treason to believe that tho woman would not live.

Tho witness said the woman was of a bad character, and a heavy drinker. Sir John Findlay, in opening, said that he did not think tlio case would give the jury much trouble. Thero was no crime in the calendar which varied more in blameworthiness than bigamy. There was a difference between bigamy that was moro or less of a technical character and the bigamy committed by a scoundrel who deceived a young and innocent woman. Continuing, Sir John Findlay said that the accused met this woman White in 1911 when on a visit to Wellington. He was then in chargo of the Jubilee Gold Mine, _ which was about 28 miles from Blenheim. He led a lonely lii'c, and about onco in threo months ho came to Wellington. He made 110 inquiries as to tho woman's antecedents, and he married her. It was a Tash, improvident marriage wilh a woman ho did not know. Having married hor lio tried to do his duty by her. After marriage, after a short stay in Wellington, they went to the Waikato, wliero tho accused was manager of a sheep station. He had a comfortable home for her, but at tho end of three Months he discovered that she was drinking aa hard as ever, and sho p.dmitted having misconducted herself. Farther, she told the accused that he had no hold on her, as she was married to a fisherman in England, but did not know whether ho was olive or dead. She cleared out and went to Auckland, and later she canle to Wellington and Btayed with Mrs. Nightingale. She wrote to the accused ami asked him to forgive her. Ho came to Wellington and set up another homo for his wife in Taranaki Street. On coining l home on one occasion he found his wife in a state of semi-drunkenness, and another man in the house. He thrashed the man, and his wife left him. Ho took proceeding)! by way of divorce about five years ago. At that time the accused had no intention of marrying again, and the divorce proceedings drifted and were not pressed. La tor tiie accused was appointed manager of a sheep station at Hawko's Bay, and then met his second wife. Ho then took steps to find out if his first wife was alive. Ho made inquiries through the police and the Registrar, but she could not bo found in Wellington. Ho made exhaustive . inquiries, but could find out nothing about her. So believed then sho was dead, and he al6o believed the statement that sho had iindo" to him that she was already married. The accused placed all tho facts beforo his second wife and her oeoplo, and the' marriage took place. The accused believed, and honestly believed, that his first wife was dead, and further he believed the woman's statement that sho had been previously married. His Honour, in summing up, expounded the law on the point, and told the jury that if they were satisfied that the accused made all reasonable inquiries and took all reasonable care before entering into his second marriago ther must acquit him, t but they must bo satisfied on tho point. . . Aftor a retirement of about half an hour, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty, and the prisoner was discharged.