ELMSLEY ACQUITTED

Hokitika Guardian, 6 August 1929, Page 3

ELMSLEY ACQUITTED

WIFE’S EVIDENCE

(By Telegraph—Press Association)

AUOIyLAND, Aug. 5. The trial in the Supreme. Court of' Peter Alexander Elms ley, charged with, failing to provide his vyife with the; necessities of; life, and so permanently endangering her health, as the result of which she was unalple through fear, weakness, or any other caus§, to remove h,ei;sglf f fronj,, his charge, ended abruptly. Mrs Elmsley gave evidence ojn the same lines as the Police Court. She was asked by Air J/ustice Herdman whether she could nqt have gone a\yay from the house.

She said: “I could have gone—yes, but you did not expect that I would have gone and left my girls, did you.”

His Honour: I assure you I appreciate youjc sentiments,. Witness: I am sorry Sir. His Honour: Do npt worry, I can understand. Replying to further questions, witness said that in years, gone by she could haye. got away to, neighbours, but, lately she \yas forbidden to, go near them: On one. occasion when. she. wanted. to, gq to a neighbour, a,ccus.ed said ‘‘lf yo,u go there you, stay there,” Lfis Btonojur: Why di.d yon nqt go.? Witness:. I woq,ld. not leave my girls. She added thqt she did not blame her daughters, in any way. for their treatment of her. y It was not their doing.; they were trained from infancy, a nd saw their .father turn from her. The Court adjourned, and on resuming the Crpwn Prosecutor, Mr Mere* dith, said that in the light of the evidence. given i,t was useless to, proceed. ; It had to be, proved that the victim of such treatment was unable to. get away. fi;om her husband through fear, weak- ‘ ness or any other, reason. I Th.e Judge, in directing the Jury, to ;return a verdict of not guilty, said: I ‘ ‘No, matter what. we. may. think about | this case, or about the treatment meted out to this, unfortunate, woman, the ' fact is she was, able to. go away, | The Jury accordingly, returned a verdict of not guilty, and accused was | discharged;. f •