THE WAITARA TRAGEDY.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIV, Issue 9399, 20 March 1909, Page 5

THE WAITARA TRAGEDY.

Per Press Association. New Plymouth, March 19. Mr Skerrett opened the case*for the defence in the murder trial this morning in an address of considerable length. He said it was admittea that’Goode shot Mrs Klenner but indicated that the line ot defence would be to prove that he was insane and so irresponsible. He called Mr Jenkins. Mayor of Waitara, who deposed to Goode's intemperate habits and delusions as to being persecuted. Messrs Hind, commission agent. Stubbs, colliery proprietor. Townsend, solicitor, Buchanan, town clerk, all of Waitara, gave similar evidence. . , ~ .. After Mr Skerrett’s address witnesses were called for the defence. Walter Frederick Jenkins, Mayor of Waitara, who had known Dr Goode intimately for 12 |years said accused was a morose sort of man and very reserved when sober. He had very few friends. ,He used to think people who did not agree with him were his enemies. Latterly this idea increased. He had mentioned people who he thought tneri to injure him professionally. Had told witness that he was being watched by Mr Fraser, storekeeper, at Waitara. Had asked'witness for permission ’to pot up a boarding around the front of a vacant section in front of witness’s auction mart to prevent Fraser from looking on his verandah. Dr. Goode went “on the spree” sometimes. He did not drink continually, but in bouts. Delusions of persecution increased during drinking bouts. Accused attended witness’s family professionally, and was a very nice, sympathetic man. To Mr Weston: On one occasion accused said to witness, ‘‘Do you see that fellow watching me?’ when there was no one else about. To Mr Skerrett: Dr. Goode seemed to think every second man was trying to do him an injury. When witness said there was no one there on the occasion when he complained someone was watching him, he said to witness, “You’re just like the Lund, Stubbs, Townsend, Fraser and Vaughan, gave evidence on similar lines. , . Thomas Buchanan, Town Clerk of Waitara, had known Dr. Goode for ten or eleven years. Dr. Goode drank in bouts, heavily, and was very morbid and morose. Some years ago'witness was Deputy Retain • ing Officer to the Taranaki County Council. Goode came into the office to exercise his vote in l the usual way. Witness marked the voting papei with the voter s roll number, gummed the edges down, and handed it to the doctor. Accused wanted to kuow what witness had written on the paper. Witness explained the procedure, bnt Goode refused to take the voting paper, and demanded a fresh one with no marks on it. Witness again explained the matter, hut accused replied “No; yon want .to know how I’m voting.” No argument could shake this belief. At length accused said, “Oh, well, I’ll make the election void, and take the paper away with me.” Witness told him of the penalties for taking a paper out of the office. He took the paper away, and witness laid an information against him, as a result of which accused was fined £2 and costs. On another occasion witness saw accused at his gate, adjacent to the surgery, hanging to the gate and unable to stand without assistance, and making unsuccessful efforts to lift the wire off the gate in order to enter. Someone passing by said, “What’s the matter, doctor?” He replied, “Some —’s playing a joke on me. They’ve horse.” The man replied, There s your horse there,' doctor.’ The animal was about 25 or 30 feet away. Goode replied, “Yes, look at the ; there’s thousands of them, and I don’t know which is mine.” There was only one horse in the paddock ' Herman Schultz, a farmer, said he called at Dr. Goode’s on the 13th December last to get a mixture for a cold, between 12 and 1 o’clock. Accused was the worse for drink. He sat down and talked for a while, and accused gave him a mixture, telling him to take that home, drink it, and if it didn’t cure he was to return and accused would give him something that would kill. Mr Johnston: What did you do with that medicine? Witness: I didn’t drink it. Mr Johnstone: What would you ,say was accused’s condition as regards liquor? Witness: Pretty bad. Cross-examined: Accused was jocular. He said he had four bottles of whisky in him then. ' Eis Honor: You dion’t believe that, of course? . Witness said he did not think the doctor was in a fit state to dispense medicine, and that was the reason why he had not taken the mediome. Herbert Taylor, veterinary surgeon, was at Gonde’s house about 1 o’clock on Sunday, 13th December. Accused wanted witness to kill a dog for him. Accused warned him that people were watching him, and warned him to beware of them. He arranged to poison the dog next day. On Monday he got there at 1 o-clock and saw Dr. Goode. After poisoning the dog he looked very bad, and appeared very excited. They went to the surgery together. The doctor proposed they should have a drink, and witness sat down. There was a whisky bottle on the table. Accused started walking round the table, and said, “This is no good to us.” He then got hold of the whisky bottle, waved it round and threw it on the sideboard. He then' said, “Gome into the dining-room and we’ll have a drink in there.” Witness “tried to get out of it,” but Goode said,, “You’ll have to have a drink with me; oome on.” He caughc witness by the collar of his coat, and shoved him into the dining-room. Accused looked the door and closed the windows, and poured out two tumblers full of whisky. Accused drank his neat, hut witness spilled some out. Almost at once accused suggested another drink, and insisted on witness drinking a tumblerfall of whisky. Accused drauk his right off, and then started talking again about fox-hunting. He sat straddled on a chair as it it were a horse, and suggested that witness should jump over/the table and run. He was whooping and hallooing as one would when hunting. Accused suggested still another drink, but witness refused point blank. Accused tried to force him to drink the whisky, and they rolled together on the floor. Accused lurched ana fell by the side of the table, and witness unlocked the door and stepped out into the passage. Accused protested against his going, and seemed very loth to let him leave. His state was bordering on delirium tremens. Ac-

cused endeavoured to persuade him to return and “make a night of it.” Gross-examined : Witness had told accused that he would probably need to get poison from Ogle, and he said, “If you get it from Ogle, I won’t have the dog poisoned.” Accused had 4 a wild appearance, as though he had baen drinking heavily. Robert Martin Beattie, superintendent for the past twelve years at Auckland Mental Hopsital, said he had had thousands of cases of insanity under his care On Bch February examined Dr. in. New Plymouth Gaol. He examined his physical condition first. Accused gave him the impression that he was a chronic alcoholic. Ho had tremors in his facial muscles ana tremors in his hands. His face was flabby and showing enlarged bloodvessels. His eyes had lost their lustre to a large extent. His heart had an impure sound and an accentuated second sound. His bloodvessels generally showed a thickening of their walls. His speech was binned and thickened and his hands restless. He found the accused’s whole intelligence was impaired. The accused seemed simple and childlike in his replies to questions. His power of grasping even a simple question was very small. There was general mental confusion and considerable impairment of memory. He found also that he was suffering from delusions of persecution and suspicion, and he had at any rate one hallucination. As the result of his examination he concluded that the man was undoubtedly insane and suffering from chronic alcoholism. The seat of the trouble was of some months, probably some years, duration. On that day he would have certified the man as insane and suffering from chronic alcoholic insanity. In all cases of alcoholic insanity, where there were delusions of persecution, outbursts of violence were to be expected, and for that reason patients so suffering in asylums were .put under careful supervision and regarded as dangerous cases. Knowing that Dr. Goode had had bouts of excessive drinking, that his full brother was insane, that he suffered from delusions of persecution and of being watched, and that an impulsive murder had taken place, he would say that Dr. Goode was insane at the time, and would not kuow the nature and quality of the act He had been insane,for some time and the stimulus of alcohol would induce an aggravation of his condition, inducing toxaemia. There was no doubt whatever that the accused was suffering from mental* degeneration. Delusions of persecution were commonly associated with alcoholic insanity and indicated a dangerous man. The facts that the accused had appeared rational after : arrest and that he recognised people and surroundings were not inconsistent with his opinion, for in all forma of mania, even the worst cases recognised people. People suffering from ohionio alcoholic insanity were often quite capable of carrying on highly complicated business. Alcohol stimulated sexual desire in cases of this kind. Sexual desire in a perverted mind .was frequently a symptom of trouble itself. Witness examined the accused again on March 15th, and fonnd that he had improved both mentally arid physically, but would not he quite sure whether he was or was not suffering from delusions, for the simple reason that he could not get him to speak fluently enough; hut he was still convinced accused had those delusions Ou the first examination would have had no hesitation in certifying him 1 as insane, baton the second examine tion would have had considerable hesitation. This change was due to the hygienic life he had been living and his abstention from alcohol. He was even now in the early stages of alcoholic dementia. There was nothing inconsistent with insanity in the fact that Goode reloaded the revolver after using it. He was quite certain Goode was not feigning. To Mr Weston: Would not say there was a hereditary taint in the family from the mere fact of a member dying in a mental asylum as the result of melancholia. There was no epilepsy in this case. If he found partial recollection of the crlirie he would not be suspicious of feignmg. He was quite positive Dr. 'Goode nad absolutely no recollection of anything about the crime. He had no recollection of anything from the time he prescribed for Schultz until the time the police came to his surgery. Goode’s memory was defective even in respect to recent events. Mr Weston quoted Mr Millington’s evidence about the third day after he was brought to gaol. Accused said to witness, “I want yon to see the police about the revolver that jjthis woman had in her house.” Didn’t that suggest that the man knew a good deal about the offence? Witness : No. I pat that down to delusion. Witness thought accused’s memory might have been revived by sufficient stimulus right back to the time of the shooting. Mr Weston : He had the highest of all stimulants. He saw Mrs Klenner lying there on her death bed, telling how the deed was done, and her depositions being taken. Don’t you regard that as sufficient stimulus? Should he not have recollected? Witness: He might have done, but he didn’t.

Re-examined: Homicidal frenzy in the case of insane was of brief dura? tion. He had not come down from Auckland specially to make an examination in February. He was spending a holiday in the district at the time.

The adjournment was taken at 5.45 till 10 o’clock next morning, the jury being again looked up for the night.