CHARGE FAILS

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Volume 81, Issue 28, 27 October 1937, Page 9

CHARGE FAILS

-Press Association.)

WomaA Acquitted of Alleged Abortion JUDGE ON JURY'S DUTY

(By Telegraph-

CHRISTCHUECH, Last Night. Gertrude Grace Taylor, a married woman, of Christchurch, was acquitted on charges of unlawfully using. an instrument to procure abortion on three oceasions, in her second trial at the Supreme Court bef ore Mr. Justice Northcroft and a jury. A jury had disagreed after a xetirement of four hours at the first trial on October 20. Mr A. W. Brown prosecuted and Mr. Hardie Boys, of Wellington, appeared for the accused. The case proceeded along, 6imilar lines to those of the previous trial, the only new evidence being that of Agnes Burns, a married woman, who was con* ' victed at the previous hearing on October 20 when she and Mrs. Taylor were on trial. s The danger of allowing outside inter* est in the subject of abortion to influence the jury was emphasised again by Mr. Justice Nortkcrott, the Crowi Prosecutor and counsel for the defence, Mr. Hardie Boys said that the cas for the Crown rested largely on th evidence" of accomplices and warned the jury that on the advice of judicial authorities this evidence should be re garded with suspicion. Not a small part of the campaign against abortion, said Mr. Hardie Boys, had been directed against juries and the jury system. A book had been published which by its title was directed to. juries. It was said that in abortion cases juries did not "convict and unless they did ' 'this and that would happen." The view appeared to be that accused had only to be pnt in the dock and it was the duty of a jury to couvict, but a jury was not in Court on a heresy hunt or as a social welfare committee and unless the evidence proved accused to be guilty a verdict of guilty should not be returned. His Honour, in aumming up, said the jury must not be influenced 'in making its decision by outside interest aud agitation about abortion nor by the opinion of the presiding Judge or counsel on either side. It was indeed true that the public was anxiously interested in the subject of abortion. It was proper for those interested in ' social questions to address themselves earnestly to the problem of abortion, but that was not the duty of the jury who were to decide the case on the evidence. After analysing the evidence his Honour said that the subject of abortion was an uneasy one for many people and its prevalence was a danger of seducxng juries .from their duty. . He reminded .the. jury that i£ there was any danger to the jury system it was not from outside but frcm the juries themselves who were boajii On oath to decide the case on the evidence. The jury . retired for about 45 minutes and 6n returning the foreman said that on the evidence accused was found not guilty.