Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

The Ligouri Case.

AUSTRALIAN AND N.Z.,pABLE ASSOCIATION. (Received This Day at 10.15 a.m.) . _ SYDNEY, July 8. Bishop Dwyer gave evidence that lie received a letter from Ligouri, explaining how she left the Convent and explaining a wish to see him. He wrote in reply, expressing regret at the course Ligouri bad taken before consulting him, and saying he was willing to see her. This letter, lmweveir, was not delivered to Ligouri as her whereabouts were then unknown. Dwyer explained that be took subsequent action regard- ' ing Ligouri, after securing an opinion from Doctor Heavy, who had attended her at the Convent, that the Sister was deranged in mind. The Bishop then came to Sydney, where in reply to inquiries made in official quarters he received a letter from the In-spector-General of Police stating the Police Inspector at Wagoa and Doctor Tivev who examined her, reported they could find no traces of insanity, and that she refused to return to the Convent. Her wherealxmts were then unknown. At this stage, an affidavit- hy Dr. 1-ea-vv was produced expressing the opinion that Ligouri was of unsound mind and should lie placed under proper oaiT aiid ■ coiltrdl. Bishop Dwver explained how he secured the issue of a warrant after consulting the Solicitor-General’s Department and a Chamber Magistrate, detailing the circumstances of tlie ease. In cross examination, Dwyer was asked if be bad told the Court all he knew, ( without mental reservations. He said “Yes”. Pressed on the doctrine of mental reservations, he declared he did not know you could properly mentally reserve in a Court of Justices on oath. A lie, on oath, was perjury. It transpired that an application for the warrant was made at Waggn, on tlie grounds of Ligo-uri’s insanity, and • was refused, but Dwyer did not inform the Sydney authorities when applying for a warran there. Asked why, he replied—“ They (ltd not ask me.” Asked, if he took action because he was afraid that Ligouri would make disclosures, Dwyer said he was not afraid as to anything she could disclose. i

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HOG19210708.2.27.3

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Hokitika Guardian, 8 July 1921, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
343

The Ligouri Case. Hokitika Guardian, 8 July 1921, Page 3

The Ligouri Case. Hokitika Guardian, 8 July 1921, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert