TIMARU MURDER TRIAL

Hokitika Guardian, 11 February 1921, Page 4

TIMARU MURDER TRIAL

THE DEFENCE

TIMAItU, February 9

In opening the defence, Mr Thomas remarked to the jury on the great responsibility that rested on them on the occasion of such a terrible tragedy. The Court was a British Court, and British justice was the law of the land. Mr Thomas asked the jury to cut out

everything else, and bring in their verdict solely on the evidence. There were in the case two points which the jury must consider, the first being that the prisoner did not intentionally do the act of murder, and, secondly, that at the time of the tragedy, the prisoner was not sane. The onus of proving the first point was on the shoulders of the Crown prosecutor. As to whether the prisoner was sane or insane, Mr Thomas hoped to prove conclusively that the prisoner was insane. As to whether prisoner did or did not commit the net, he did not propose to address the jury at that stage. In his opening, he proposed to confine himself to the mental aspect of the prisoner. Evidence would be adduced regarding the hereditary and personal history of the prisoner. There were two outstanding causes of insanity, heredity and stress, and of these heredity was more decidedly the most potent. As far as heredity was concerned, the history of the prisoner was most extraordinary. His father had been nothing less than a “drunken waster.” He was a man of intemperate sexual habits, and at the time of his marriage was" recovering from a venereal disease. To his wife and children lie had proved almost incredibly inhuman. His family had also ljeen an unfortunate one. His brother, a solicitor had been struck off the rolls for embezzlement. Another had died in the Avondale Asylum a raving lunatic. On the mother’s side, also, there was *a frightful history. The mother’s father, Dr. McCrystal, an Indian Mutiny veteran, had been a drunkard, and a morphia fiend, and had died from an overdose, after attending to numerous victims of a big mining accident, of morphia. In other words ho had committed suicide. Dr. MeCrystal’s wife had also been unfortunate in that she was addicted to drink. She would for some time lie normal, and would then go off on a drinking bout, so badly that on occasions she had suffered from delirium tremens., iA oousin had been sent to the Seaoliff Asylum, and another cousin had committed suicide. Still another cousin was mentally defective, while a half-sister was an inmate of a southern institution. That was the hereditary history of Matthews on his father’s and on his mother’s side. Mr Thomas went on that with insanity and vice on both sides, it was only to bo expected that such a union would result in insane progeny. The accused’s oldest sister had, years ago, been committed to the Seaoliff Asylum really a hopeless case. A brother had shown signs • t abnormality at about sixteen years i 1 age, and after shooting a man had been put into .Seaoliff, when he had escaped. An infant member of the family had been born an idiot, with an ab-normally-formed head, and had died. Coining from such a family, what could to expected? In many of these mental cases there was a starting-point bark to which the doctors were able to go. Mat-thews had been born probably predisposed to insanity, and the doctors were able gradually, by tracing back, to find the point where the strain had caused the insanity to evolve. Mr Thomas went on that the doctor who bad examined Matthews had put only I wo questions, and Matthews, in reply, had spoken for two hours. He was going to “reform the world.” He was going to eliminate “sexual hypocrisy” and to revise the whole social system. There was a parallel l>etw,een the case of the accused and that of the famous Lionel Terry. It was a mistake to assume that that was only one form of opiplcpsy, which was really wider under two heads: the great sickness and the small one. Tho accused was evidently suffering from the psychic equivalent of epilepsy—epilepsy of the mind. A man suffering from that type of epilepsy might act normally for some time, and then suddenly experience a wild maniacal outburst.

! Mr Thomas went on to speak of ac- ' cused’s extraordinary bent for indecent * exposure, and said he would produce ! medical evidence to show that accused I was undoubtedly insane. THE MOTHER’S EVIDENCE, j Caroline* El ten both Hall, mother of the accused, showed considerable omo--1 tion when giving hor evidence. Her first : husband, site said, was Richard Mat--1 thews, who had proved a bad husband. . He drank very considerable and was I very eccentric in his habits. Mrs Hall gave evidence on the lines of Mi I Thomas’s opening, concerning her fami ily, and that of her former husband, j an d stated that the accused had been ' somewhat a brilliant boy at school, winding prizes at both day and Sunday i schools. He had always been a par- ' ! Ocularly good boy to his parents, 1 sending money whenever he was away. I Hor first husband bad been very keen on sexual matters, and had led her a most unhappy life in that respect. Her match with him had not been a love one. and he bad been suffering from a , vrncrnl disease when lie married her. Speaking of the accused’s Subsequent delinquencies, the witness stated that lie hadsuffered from a bladder weak- ' ness, to which she ascribed his alleged

indecent actions. He had told her when ! previously sentenced that the facts of th(i case were much exaggerated. He had previously commenced to talk aliout 1 sexual matters and about girls, his views not being ordinary views. A\ it- • ness protested strongly, but could not remember all he said. However she advised him to “get a decent girl and get married.” Prisoner said that he would rather discuss such matters with married women than with girls, married women having more sense than girls. Witness turned the conversation into other channels. Continuing, witness said that her second husband, Hall, was rather too ready to lift his hand to her children, particularly to the two younger bovs, Reginald and Clarence. In one of bis ‘impatient’ moods lie had broken two ribs of one other son, I alleged misdemeanours. i Evidence was given as to the prisoner having exposed himself in the Gardens on a day in August, 1919. ! Constable W. Brown, of Wellington, identified tho accused ns a man he had been after in Wellington for indecent exposure. When witness caught sight of him, prisoner had run away at the

same time threatening to shoot him I with a revolver. The affair occurred ' in Wellington Terrace. ! John Highsted, gardener at the Botanic Gordons, Christchurch, said that he was one of the men who captured Matthews, for his first offence, in August 1919. In October, 1920, lie saw Matthews again in the Gardens, with his chillies disarranged. Witness chased him, and prisoner presented a revolver. YESTERDAY'S EVIDENCE. [BY TKI.KGItAOH —PER PRESS ASSOCIATION J ; " CHRISTCHURCH, Eeb. 10.

i lie trial of Reginald Mathews on u (barge of murdering Clare nee Edward WagsUilf at Timaru on October 27, 1920 was continued at the Supreme Court before Justice Herdmau. Evidence as to domestic infelicity of accused's parents was given by Charles W. Hcrvey, a former resident of lnverca rgill. Dr. Arthur Crosbio, Supt. of Sunnyside Mental Hospital, said lie had made two thorough examinations of accused and had seen him in the cells before liis appearance in Court.

Mr Thomas—“ Now I will ask you a bald question. Is accused sane or.insane Witness—“l consider that he is insane, because ho suffers from delusions.” Mr Thomas—“ Would you tell the jury the effect of heredity on that man?” “There is a great probability that ihe insanity of the parents would be transitted to the child—not necessarily in the same form. In the Ordinary circumstances of life accused would succumb to shocks much more easily than persons without such heredity.” Witness went to Paparua gaol on January 22 and 30th. and he had a long conversation with accused who expressed to him two definite delusions. On the second occasion when witness got on accused’s delusions and beliefs, he immediately went away at a tremendous rate, “using words that eminent counsel would really envy.”

Mr Donelly: “Surely you do us an injustice, there?”

Witness: “Accused knew his subject, and let you have it at top.” His Honour: “You will find eminent counsel never suffer from delusions here.”

Mr Donnelly: “Thank you, your 1 lonour.”

Witness continued that accused spoke, with emotional warmth and instinctive Certitude. His examinations showed the following results:—Matthews believed himself capable of institution reform in sexual and social procedure; secondly, he had a definite delusion of persecution. There was no doubt that Matthews was suffering from sincere delusion. His delusions dated back from bis days in America. He told witness things regarding bis experience in America. He gathered that lie had got iato trouble with the police there in regard to sexual matters. He bad precisely the same delusion regarding the American police as he had regarding the New Zealand police. Witness added that lie was of opinion that, accused was an epileptic. He knew be was a paraiiine. Tho incident of the "Matthew’s absent mindedness quoted by Phillipson and others were consistent with epilepsy. Exhibitionism might be the sole symptom of an epileptic. The witness was subjected to a lengthy cross examination of a technical nature. Dr Alexander Cameron McKillop, Superintendent of Scad iff Mental Hospital said he had examined accused. He found be had delusions of persecution concornig the police, and his treatment. by them. In reply to Mr Thomas lie said, lie classed accused as a parsiliiae. A paraniac did not know the difference between right and wrong. He would have no hesitation in committing accused to a mental hospital. He was quite satisfied that accused wa,s insane

Evidence in rebuttal will be called tomorrow.