A SINGULAR PROSECUTION.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2337, 13 September 1880, Page 2

A SINGULAR PROSECUTION.

A variety of circumstances prevented us from obtaining and publishing a full and accurate report of the proceedings in connection with the prosecution a few days ago of Dr Hayes, of Tcmuka, at the instance of a woman named Philips, formerly in that gentleman’s employment as housekeeper. case is one of some interest to the medical faculty, and a copy of the depositions having been placed at our disposal, we arc enabled to supply some of the more important missing links in the evidence. The prosecutrix in cross-examination said—l was married in England, but was only married once. My husband died three years ago last January. I did nothing but work in a laundry at home. I was never on the stage or engaged with a theatrical company. I

have sung at concerts, but not since my husband’s death-., I never stated to anyone that I had been an operatic singer. I never stated to anyone that I was married to Dr Hayes in England. (Laughter.) I never stated that I bad been a countess in England. (Laughter.) [Witness —“Is that to be brought against me.”] People said my husband must have been a count or one of the nobility, otherwise wo could not have had such valuable furniture. Wo had chairs valued at £SO apiece,.they were made of elephant’s tusks. (Laughter). My husband did not, hunt the elephants. (Laughter) He was a metal broker. I think I first saw Mr Johnson on the matter of this case about two days before I swore the information. I have received no money except from Dr Cummings’ wife. Mrs Cummings first gave me £1 and said that I could do some needlework for her. I told her at that time some of the story between me and Dr Hayes. I can’t remember saying anything about my illness to her or anyone else, except to ray solicitor. I gave authority to Mr Johnston to settle this matter out of court if Dr Hayes wished it. The settlement I contemplated was for Dr Hajms to obtain me cmplojunent. I did not authorise Mr Johnson to settle it by taking money, but to settle it the best w r ay he could. I have had two miscarriages before this in England. When I was ill, Dr Hayes did not toll me to go to Dr Cummings. I did not know what was the matter with me when I entered the hospital. James Murdoch, M.D., gave evidence to the effect that calomel, the drug alleged to have been administered to the prosecutrix, was a mild purgative and that it was most improbable that any medical man would give it for the purpose alleged. In cross-examination by Mr Hamersley ho deposed as follows:—Mr Johnston, solicitor for the prosecutrix, came to see mo in Timaru about the case to and after telling me about it I said that if there was any truth in it Dr Hayes out to have it settled. Mr Johnston said he had written Dr Hayes about it, and that his client was going on with the prosecution, unless Dr Hayes was prepared to “ bleed handsomely.” Mr Johnstone also said that if a respectable solicitor was appointed with power to arrange matters it might bo settled, but Mr Johnston seemed to think it would be a matter of great difficulty to find a respectable solicitor. liy Mr Johnston —You said that Dr Hayes was a man of bad moral character and had treated the woman brutally. You said that you bad advised Mr Phillips not to go on with the case as it would injure her as much as Dr Hayes. Yon said that your client was stubborn, and that she would go on with the case unless Dr Hayes would “ bleed freely.” You said something to the effect that Dr Hayes would be a madman if he did not try and prevent the case going into Court.

William Johnston, sworn—l am a barrister and solicitor of the Supreme Court, residing at Tcmuka. On the Friday previous to the Ist September, Mrs Phillips came into my office and asked mo what my consultation foe was. I told her, and she immediately paid me. She then sat down. I had not up to then the slightest idea what she was going to consult me about. I bad

not previously spoken to her since December 28,1879. She made a statement to me. I saw her twice during the following month, and herinstmetions to me emphatically were that she did not want money from Dr Kayes. I wi’ote a letter on the August 30 requesting an interview with him. I wrote that letter without any instructions from my client and simply with the hope that it would lead to a settlement so as to prevent the case going into court. In my interview with Dr Murdoch, ho appears to have fallen into a great mistake in supposing anything I then said was under the instructions of my client. I did make use of the expression, “that the woman had been brutally treated, and no matter what the result of tire case was, I thought Dr Hayes would be a madman to allow the case to go into court without making an effort to prevent it,” and in connection with this I said if he wishes to settle it, I am quite sure lie will have to “ bleed freely” as my client seems determined to go on with the case to prevent any other poor female from being treated in a similar way. By Mr ITamcrsley—The letter produced, dated August 30, 12 o’clock at noon, containing the words : —“ Sir, —I have received from Mrs Phillips instructions of a very serious import. May I request an interview within the next 24 hours? ” was the one I wrote Dr Hayes. Dr Hayes took no notice of the letter. I was not fully instructed when I wrote it. I cannot say what meaning I attach to the word “ instructions ” in my letter to Dr Hayes. I did not mean money. If Dr Hayes called on me I did not intend to make any proposal to him. On being pressed, witness admitted that he meant “marriage.” (Laughter.) I had no instructions from my client to that effect. I would not bo willing to draw out the settlement if I was paid for it. I cannot sa} r what I meant by the words “ bleeding freely.” You can attach whatever meaning you like to them. I never told Mr McKay and Sergeant Carlyon that if Dr Hayes “ bled freely ” the case might be settled. (Witness afterwards admitted that he used the words to Mr McKay.) The conversation I held with Mr McKay took place before the information was sworn to. I knew a cousin of Dr Hayms’ at Home —Dr Albert Walsh —an eminent surgeon and highly respected in Dublin. I know Judge Hayes, Dr Hayes’ father. I once dined with Judge Hayes. lam not friends with Dr Hayes. I received a very insulting letter from him. I never liked him, and now I regard him with profound contempt. (Laughter.) His Worship—-So this is all the evidence you have to offer Mr Johnson ? Mr Johnson —Yes your Worship. His Worship—There is no evidence of an offence having been committed; the mere fact of his having given a box of pills did not constitute an offence, there being no proof as to the composition of the pills. Mr Johnston stated that his brief differed from the evidence of his client.

Mr Uamerslcy took Mr Johnston severely to task, and quoting Johnston’s “ Justice of the Peace” pointed out the very unprofessional conduct of the counsel for the prosecution.

His Worship then dismissed the case, and the announcement was followed by applause. Mr Hamersley said he had a large number of witnesses in attendance, but that owing to the dismissal of the case he was prevented from calling them to prove the utterly unfounded nature of the charge, the ialsity of the evidence of the prosecutrix, and the personal animus exhibited by her counsel.