SERIOUS CHARGE

Dominion, Volume 20, Issue 62, 7 December 1926, Page 5

SERIOUS CHARGE

AGAINST MARRIED WOMAN USE OF INSTRUMENT ALLEGED Before His Honour Mr. Justice Alpers, in the Supreme Court yesterday, Elizabeth Anu Wylie, alias Nevill, a married woman, faced the charge of having, ou or about July 11, 1926, unlawfully used upon Elsie Davis a certain instrument or other means with intend to procure miscarriage. The prosecution was conducted by Mr. P. S. K. Maeassey, while Mr. T. M. Wilford, with him Mr J. F. B. Stevenson, appeared for accused. Mr. R. Pointon was elected foreman of the jury. At the request of Mr. Maeassey, the Court was cleared. Admissible Evidence. In opening the case for the Crown, Mr. Maeassey stated that the l<*te Mrs. Davis first visited accused on the advice of Dr. Jacobsen. It was alleged that on July 11, at accused’s house at Lyall Bay, a certain instrument had been used by accused on Mrs. Davis, who later contracted peritonitis, from which she died at the Public Hospital. Mr. Maeassey traced the nature of the evidence that would be called bv the Crown, and remarked that some evidence would be called with tho object of prov Ing system. To this, however, Mr. Wilford objected. Mr. Macasse.v submitted that such evidence was admissible if it were called in order to prove that accused was a professional abortionist. His Honour agreed with Mr. Maeassey that such evidence was admissible to prove system. Accused, said Mr. Maeassey, was a menace to the community. As a result of her activities, one woman Lad died, while two girls had had septic miscarriages followed by serious illnesses. Another Objection Overruled. ■ Detective Murray gave formal evidence to tho effect that he Was present at the Wellington Public Hospital when Elsie Davis, then dying, gave her depositions before Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M. Mr. Stevenson was present at the time, and had full opportunity of cross-examining Mrs. Davis. When Mr. Maeassey proposed to put the depositions in as evidence, Mr. Wilford objected to its admission. "I want to draw Your Honour’s attention,” said Mr. Wilford, “to the fact that at that time the charge referred to an operation on July 5. To-day the indictment referred to July 11, and that is a charge on which Mr. Stevenson had no opportunity of cross-examining deceased at all.” Mr. Maeassey submitted that the date of tho alleged operation was immaterial. It did not matter what the date was, as long as the offence was committed _ His Honour ruled that the depositions were admissible. Cross-examined by Dlr. Wilford, Detective Murray said that, while deceased’s depo : itions were being taken, she had been given somethiup to drink occasionally. No morphia had been given, however, and, to his knowledge, no hypodermic syringe had been used. The depositions had boon taken in open Court, and were not dying depositions. Mr. Wilford: Could you tell me whe•w the patient lierself know she was dvinE? * it -.i Detective Murray: I cannot eay that. Further examined by • Mr. M ilfoid, witness stated, that, no matter how near death the patient was at the time, her evidence had been perfectly; and intelligently given. The Husband's Evidence. Arthur Jeffery Davis was the next witness Examined by Mr. Maeassey, he stated that he was a eommermal traveller Elsie Davis ( his wife, died on July 21, 1926, when thirty-two years of agm Prior to his wife’s death he was at Nelson. He bad had a conversation with his wife over the telephone on July 11, and she Lad told him that she was not feeling well. On the following day she had said she was not at all well and was very “shivery” and weak. On July n he found a certain instrument on top of the wardrobe in their room. This he gave to Dr. Sinclair. He had not seen the instrument before. He did not know that his wife was pregnant or that she had procured an abortion. Witness was searchingly crossexamined by Mr. Wilford. • Another witness stated that while he was driving Mrs. Davis around the bays she had asked him to stop just past 150 Queens Drive. She entered a house there, where she stayed for u short w hue. Dr Sydney R. Cottell stated that on July' 13 or 14 he examined Mrs. Davis and found she was about to have a miscarriage. He ordered her to the Public Hospital. Other medical evidence was also called, two doctors admitting to Mr. Wilford that they could not definitely swear that an instrument Lad been Detective Sinclair stated how he and Detective Murray arrested accused. At tho time of her arrest she had Over £6OO to her credit in. the bank, and £l4l 19s. 10£d. actually in her possession. Corroboraii”e evidence was given by Detective Murray. . ■ Norah Cochran, a single woman living at Kelburn, related how Mrs. Nevill had performed a number cf operations upon her, after which she had stayed ar what accused described as a nursing home owned by a Mrs. Wilson. She then went to the Public Hospital. “A Trap for the Mouse.” Cross-examined by Mr. Wilford, witness stated that she was in the Public Hospital at the time when the police asked her to give evidence t gainst accused. She had not seen the evidence which she gave in tho Magistrates Court, and no one had - ead it ever to her Neither had she seen any police officers since the case had been heard in the Magistrate’s Court. Witness was very cflosely cross-ex-amined by Mr. Wilford, who was comparing her replies with those given by her in the Magistrate’s Court. Mr. Maeassey objected to this procedure, claiming that it was unfair to witness. His Honour: It is all right. Mr. Macassey, Mr. Wilford has been sotting a trap for the mouse, but so far Hie mouse has not walked into it. Now he's looking for another piece cf cheese. The c.'se was adjourned until this incrninf.