DEATH OF MRS. MUNN

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 937, 2 April 1930, Page 1

DEATH OF MRS. MUNN

Analysts Give Evidence NORTHCOTE MURDER TRIAL Doctor’s Theory Confirmed THE opinion that several doses of strychnine on more than one occasion had caused the death of Mrs. Lillie May Munn, the victim of the Northcote tragedy, was expressed by Dr. Reginald George Dudding, in the Police Court yesterday, while giving evidence in the prosecution of Arthur Thomas Munn, charged with wife-murder on February 11. This morning evidence was given by analysts, who reported finding strychnine in the woman’s stomach and elseimT’ where.

Mr. I’. K. Hunt, S.M., is presiding. Mr. V. R. Meredith, Crown Prosecutor, and Mr. E. H. Northcroft, for the Accused, are appearing. The first testimony given today was t>y a Northcote chemist. Frederick \Villiam Grant Johnson, who produced i liis ‘Sale of Poisons” register book yhich showed that on November 25, i 0920, there had been a sale of strychnine to Mr. A. T. Munn, Northcote. >rhe entry was signed by accused, ri-hoin witness remembered purchasing be poison. It consisted of one dram bf strychnine hydrochloride, which l-oat Is. Mr. Meredith: Did he tell you what be wanted it for? —To poison wheat ko poison rats. Did you tell how to use it?—l told him to put it in some utensil not used in the house, preferably an old tin, and when he had used the tin to destroy it. I also warned him to use Ml the strychnine or destroy any left bver. . The strychnine was wrapped in blain paper, labelled “Strychnine, not to be taken,” and on the other side a red poison label was attached. The package could not be opened ordinarily, said witness, without tearing this latter label, which was over the two ends and sealed. PRUSSIC ACID BOUGHT Munn bought further poison later, this consisting of two drams of diluted prussic aci*, and signed for |t. said witness. Mr. Meredith: What did he tell you |bar. was for? —For poisoning a cat. DM Munn, at any time after November 25, discuss whether strychnine had killed the rats?—No. Did he discuss the strychnine with kou ?—No. Were there any other sales of poifeon to Munn? —Those were the only two since I have been In the busitiess. A. bottle of amber-coloured liquid k'aa produced to witness, who said be had made the mixture up for. Munn on Dr. Dudding's prescription. On the morning of February 11 Dr. Dbdding called at his shop, and witness observed the tests made by the medical man with a fluid he had brought with him. The first two tests showed no reaction, but with the third the bichromate of potash crystals turned a dark violet cMour, and when a glass rod was drawn across these a violet smear was left. There was also an olive discolouration on the side of the dish. By this time the crystals turned very dark, probably black. The doctor took away some clean bottles from the dispensary and returned later In the afternoon with an attache case containing the bottles, filled, with liquid. These were labelled and handed to a boy to deliver to the Analyst. On February 4. Munn brought in a prescription by Dr. Dudding to be fnade up. continued witness, the dark amber-coloured liquid produced being the mixture, which contained no strychnine, Mr. Meredith: Is there any possibility of strychnine getting into that bottle or the previous one?—lt would be impossible. The first prescription was made up bn February 4, and the second about ® am. the day before Mrs. Munu's death, said witness. Munn himself Collected the mixture. ANALYST’S REPORT A schoolboy, John Fielder, a messenger employed by the chemist, stated that he delivered the leather case handed him by his employer to Mr. Parker, the analyst, on February 11. The bag was handed over as it Tas handed to witness. Alfred Jas. Parker, public analyst, Herne Bay, Ponsonby, said that on February II he received the attache case by a messenger, containing four bottles. The first contained amber liquid labelled “fluid from jug,” che second “fluid from cup,” the third ur *sc.” and the fourth “gastric lavage.” Each bottle was stoppered and Tell secured with string. He was asked to make a quantitative examination for strychnine, and this he made. Mr. Meredith: With what results? “—The “fluid from jug” and “fluid irom cup” gave negative results. The urine gave a distinct positive reaction for strychnine, probably only a small quantity of the alkaloid being present. The reaction was a complete one, but the colours were not strong. Mr. Meredith: Would the reaction leave any result regarding the presence of strychnine?—Not very much. "The gastric lavage” gave a distinct positive reaction for strychnine: “ w »s an immediate and very strong ®ne, said witness.

n my opinion,” said witness, “the child sample contained an amount of strychnine just about sufficient for reaction, but sample four undoubtedly contained more strychnine, but in my opinion, not a large quantity. My reason for stating that the fourth sample did not contain a large quantify was that a preliminary test made >ith two drams of the sample gave a \

very slight indication and not a complete reaction. But on using the balance I found strong ancl immediate reaction.”

The witness said he did not attempt to make a quantitative examination and reported the results to Dr. Dudding.

He submitted the first and second samples for analysis for epsom salts, but found neither contained any of this medicine. . CONTENTS OF STOMACH The Government analyst at Auckland, Kenneth Massey Griffin, said that on February 13 he received from Dr. Murray a jar containing the stomach, portioß of the liver, a kidney and the spleen of the dead woman. The same day he received a small bottle labelled poison, a bottle of medicine, 11 whole packets and one broken packet of epsom salts, from Detective-Sergeant Doyle. “I made an analysis on parts of the internal organs,” said witness, “with a view to ascertaining if there was any strychnine present. Mr. Meredith: What was the result? Did you find strychnine?—Yes. “I took the stomach, weighed it at Soz.,” proceeded witness. “I cut off a portion of 20z., and extracted it for alkaloids. The alkaloid was definitely crystalline fairly large, tasted intensely bitter, and gave a reaction for strychnine. I purified the I’esidue, and weighed it, and found it represented 6.5 milligrams, a tenth of a grain. I took a further 2oz. portion, and purified alkaloid weighing seven milligrams, which gave the same taste and reaction for stri’chnine. Mr. Meredith: Did you make, any tests with the liver? —Yes; I took, portions of the liver, kidney and spleen. The liver gave a crystalline residue, which was intensely bitter, and which, after heating with sulphuric acid, gave a very strong reaction for strychnine. The portions from the kidney and spleen gave very small residues, but both showed quite distinct reactions for strychnine. Mr. Meredith: As a result of the analysis can you estimate the amount of strychnine in the stomach when it was handed to you?—Yes. STRYCHNINE RECOVERED

“Thfe stomach weighed eight ounces, and from half of it, I recovered onefifth of a grain of purified alkaloid,” said witness. “The amount recoverable from the whole organ would he two-fifths of a grain.” he added. “It is well recognised by the authorities,” said Mr. Griffin, “that it is difficult to extract all the strychnine j present in tissue. With a view to j testing the amount recoverable, some j six and a-half years ago I carried out j some experiments with Dr. Maclaurin. j These showed that under the methods ! being used in the Dominion laboratory, I approximately half the strychnine j could be recovered. “I consider there was four- j fifths of a grain of strychnine in j the stomach when it was handed j to me,” said witness. “Anything j in the liver, spleen and kidney would be in addition to the poison found in the stomach.” Mr. Meredith: What is generally I recognised as the fatal dose of strycb- j nine?—-The fatal dose is from half to j two grains. What amount of strychnine would j you consider was in the organs you | examined?—The amount in other or- j gans would be very small. It would not add much to four-fifths of a grain. 1 The bottle labelled poison contained i two-fifths of a grain of strychnine \ hydrochloride crystals, said witness, j The bottle of medicine mixture con-j tained no sign of strychnine, neither was there any present in the salts. Mr. Northcroft: Were any results of these experiments made by yourself and Df, Maclaurin put on record in any scientific publication?—No. Can you refer us to any standard authority in which the methods you employed are described?—l can’t answer the question entirely. The principle of extracting alkaloids is defined ! in hall’ a dozen books and ours wera the same with a modification. The ■witness quoted the methods in “Taylor’s Medical Jurisprudence,” “Legal and Medical Toxicology” and “Poisons and Their Effects.” He promised to supply other standard works later. He j said the modification adopted was at | the stage when the alcoholic extract ! was obtained by amyl-alcohol. POST MORTEM EXAMINATION j Dr. Donald N. Murray said that in i the presence of Dr. Gilmore he performed a post-mortem examination on February 13. The body was that of a woman about 43. The face was swollen and a reddish fluid was exuding from the mouth. The tongue was swollen and half protruding through the lips. The eyelids were swollen and the face was bluish black. Rigor ; mortis was absent except in the feet.

MORE EVIDENCE BY DOCTORS MEDICAL MEN AGREE

The doctor minutely described the condition of the organs as revealed by the examination. There was no evidence of disease or injury that would cause death. Certain of the organs were placed in a glass vessel, sealed and labelled, and handed to the Government analyst for the purpose of detecting any poison. A report received subsequently from the analyst stated that strychnine was present. Basing his opinion on the evidence he had heard, the results of the post mortem examination and the report of the analyst, Dr. Murray said the cause of death was strychnine poisoning. “Thje inversion of the ankles, which •were very rigid, was consistent with strychnine poisoning,” said the doctor. “It took me all my time to straighten the ankles. That was the only symptom, apart from the congestion of the brain, that was compatible with strychnine poisoning. Mr. Meredith: You heard Dr. Dudding’s description of the convulsion Mrs. Munn had. Y/hat was the cause of that? Witness: Strychnine only. “The convulsion described by Mrs. Gill was consistent only with strychnine poisoning or tetanus,” added the doctor. Mr. Meredith: 13 the history of this case as you have heard it compatible with tetanus? Witness: Not at all. 1 don’t think the symptoms disclosed are compatible with any other disease but strychnine poisoning. Mrs. Munn's death was caused by the taking of a large dose of strychnine on the morning that she died. The doctor was of the opinion that several doses had been taken. Each convulsion had been the result of a separate dose. If Mrs. Munn had had any further bad turns between February 4 and 11 lie suspected they would have been due to her having other doses of strychnine. WITHIN 10 HOURS Mr. Meredith: What would the presr nee of 4-sths of a gram or strychnine in the stomach indicate?—That she bad had strychnine recently. Within what time?—Within 10 liours, probably less. Why?—Because, otherwise no strychnine would be found in the stomach contents, as was found in the lavage in this case. What is the usual time of death, after a fatal dose of strychnine?—Usually about two or three hours; maybe In five minutes.

In the event of the dose not being a lethal one, what would be the position'.’ • —The convulsions become less, and the intervals between them longer and the patient recovers generally quickly. And after recovery, do the convulsive twitchings cease?—Yes. What would the convulsive twitchings and fear of being touched between February 4 and February 11 be consistent with?—Fresh doses of strychnine after February 4. I do not think these movements would remain after the dose on February 4. Mr. Northcroft, who had a tooth extracted last evening, was indisposed and did not appear when the afternoon sitting commenced. Accused was represented by Mr. R. R. Bell.

I)r. Walter Gilmour, pathologist at the Auckland Hospital, said he was present with Dr. Murray at the postmortem examination. He agreed entirely with the testimony given by his colleague. After having heard the evidence concerning the symptoms of Mis. Munn, and the report of the Government analyst, the doctor expressed the opinion that death was due to strychnine poisoning. Mr. Meredith: Are the results of jour observations and what you have heard consistent with anything else but strychnine poisoning.—No. "There must have been more than one dose,” he added.

Could there be any relation between R dose on February 4, and an attack on February 11?—It would be quite impossible.

"ln my opinion more than two doses must have been administered to Mrs. Munn to produce the symptoms referred to,” said Dr. Gilmour, and with the exception of the poison taken on February 11, the doses would have been less than a lethal one.” Mr. Meredith: Did the examination at the post mortem disclose any liability to blood pressure?—No, nothing that produces high blood pressure or which might be the result of high blood pressure. "One effect of the administration of strychnine was to raise the blood pressure,” he said. "Consistent blood pressure during the week would indicate that the administration of strychnine was being kept up.” DETECTIVES VISIT HOUSE Detective-Sergeant P. J. Doyle said that about 4 p.m. on February 12, In company with Detective Power, he visited accused's home at 33 Richmond Avenue. Munn met the detectives at the back door and at his Invitation they entered the kitchen. Detective-Sergeant Doyle stated that they intended making inquiries into the death of his wife. Munn replied: “l cannot understand it; will the doctor not give a certificate. The detective replied? "No; I understand he w ill not give a certificate, but I do not know the reason.” Asked how long his wife had been ill, Munn replied “About a week: she took a stroke about a week ago and never recovered.” The doctor had been to see her several times, Munn asserted. In reply to a question, Munn said that his wife had been given some medicine ordered by Dr. Dudding, and some salts he had given her "I gave her half a teaspoonful of epsom salts yesterday, but the doctor ordered her a whole teaspoonful,” said Muun, in producing portion of the packet from the mantlepiece. Asked what food his wife had had during her illness, Munn replied that she had only been given what Dr. Dudding had ordered, and what he (Munn) gave her himself, comprising milk puddings, fruit, but no meat. The detective took possession of the salts from the mantlepiece. Munn produced a bottle of medicine from the kitchen mantlepiece. Munn then made a statement MUNN’S STATEMENT "I am a wicker-worker and reside at 33 Richmond Avenue, Northcote, and I resided with my late wife, Lillie May Munn, aged 43 years, and two children, Freda, aged 5 years, and

Doreen, aged 9 years. I went through the form of marriage with my late wife, whose maiden name was Hearle. but she was married to a man named William Westerley who died at the late war. Our marriage took place at Grey town almost ten years ago by the Presbyterian parson in our own private house. There are two children of the marriage referred to above. The occupants of our house at Richmond Avenue were my late wife, two children and myself, but a fiat under me is occupied by a Mrs. Gill. We occupied the house for the last seven years. My wife was in normal health until Tuesday, February 4, 1930. On that morning she complained of a headache. She got up at about 6 a.m. and she then complained of a giddy turn. She appeared ill and I decided to send for Dr. Dudding. Mrs. Gill came in and remained while 1 went for the doctor. Mrs. Gill assisted me to carry her from the kitchen to the bedroom. The doctor treated her for blood pressure. Her condition improved, but the doctor told her she must remain in bed for a week. She resented this and said she would get up. The doctor told her if she did not remain in bed here she have to go to the hospital for six weeks. The doctor gave me a prescription which I took to Mr. Johnston, the local chemist to make up. I received the medicine and gave it to the wife as directed. I, kept her in bed and attended to her wants personally as I had no woman in the house. * My two children were home with me, but the eldest went to school. My wife’s condition appeared normal to me from the time she went to bed on February 4, until the following Tuesday, February 11. She had no serious turns during that week. Dur-

ing that time I was in constant attendance on her and, to my know-' ledge, she did not leave her room, during the whole week. I assisted’ her out of bed on tw r o or three occasions. On February 5 I left the house at 7.30 p.m., and went to Northcote. 1 was at a political committee meeting and returned home at 10.30 p.m. During my absence a man named Harold Brown and his wife, who reside in Queen Street, looked after my wife. She appeared to be: all right when I returned home. Between the sth and the 11th I wa3 absent from home on two or three' occasions in Auckland during the day time, and, during my absence, the two children remained with my wife. On February 10 I was in Auckland from 9 a.m. to 12 noon, or thereabouts. The children were with her during my absence. Dr. Dudding arrived that afternoon. I had asked him to call and he reported an improvement. On February 11 my wife woke me and I gave her half a teaspoonful of Epsom salts, as the doctor had instructed. She refused to have breakfast. The doctor had ordered her fruit and vegetables, and she had taken this fruit five or six times a day besides bread and butter. “It was about 7.30 a.m. that I was in the room when my wife said: ‘I don’t want you to go away, I want you to stay with me/ She appeared normal, but I asked her if she were feeling bad. She replied: ‘I think I am going to have a turn/ Almost ten minutes later she got jumpy and moved her body gently as first, and tlien got wor»%. I said I would send for the doctor. She said she did not want the doctor but wanted me. She insisted on not seeing the doctor. I applied cold water to her heart, as the doctor ordered, but she told me it made her worse. She appared to lose her resistance, and I then saturated her with cold water applied with a towel. , She recovered

a little and I sent Mrs. Gill for the doctor and he arrived and I reported to him what had happened. He treated her and remained about an hour. She appeared to go to sleep and the doctor left. I remained in attendance on her, but later I became alarmed at her condition and I got a Mrs. Lydiard, a neighbour, to stay with her and I went for the doctor, and he returned and pronounced life extinct. BUYING THE POISON

“My wife and I have lived happily together and at no time had she ever threatened to take her life. She had no worries and her mental condition was quite sound. During her illness I had no reason to believe that it was brought about by other than natural causes.

“About six months ago T purchased a quantity of strychnine for Is 6d from Mr. Johnston, chemist, at Northcote, for the purpose of poisoning rats. About a month later I returned to the same chemist and I told him that the poison was a failure as the rats would not eat it. I asked the chemist if I treated it with syrup would it be a success and he said ‘Yes/ I told him then I wanted to poison the cat and he gave me a small bottle of liquid poison for which I paid a shilling. I gave the cat the lot by pouring it down the throat and it killed the cat. My reason for poisoning the cat was on acocunt of it being old and appearing sick. At that time I had the bottle containing the balance of the strychnine in the pantry on the top shelf. The bottle was labelled ‘Poison/ and I concealed it under an empty carton. I drew my wife’s attention to the poison and I told her what it contained. “To my knowledge the bottle containing strychnine remained in that position and I last saw it there between ten days and a fortnight ago. That was before the wife took ill. I did not discover the disappearance of the strychnine from the pantry until today, February 12, when the detectives came. I was present when Detective-Sergeant Doyle found a bottle labelled ‘poison’ in a drawer of a chest alongside the bed where my wife died, and that is the same bottle that I had concealed in the pantry. The bottle was almost half full when I last saw it in the pantry, but it is now practically empty. I had no idea the poison wii in the bedroom until I saw it when the detective found it. I used that drawer during the time my wife was ill. I had my collars in the same drawer, but I did not notice the j poison. My wife always had water | and fruit in the room alongside the bed. “The medicine and the salts handed 1 to the police are what my wife took when ill, and which were prescribed by Dr. Dudding. I had no poison in the house, other than that found by the police. I have not at any time purchased or procured poison from any person other than Mr. Johnston, and, from him. only the. quantity referred to. On the night before my wife died she said: ‘Will you promise me something?’ I said: ‘lt depends what it is/ She said: ‘I want you to promise me that you will not let me go to the hospital/ I said: ‘As far as I am concerned, you need not go to the hospital, but, if the doctor orders, you will have to go/ She* said: ‘I would sooner die than go to the hospital/ I did riot take that statement seriously. When I bought the strychnine from Johnston it was in a paper packet with a poison label, but I transferred it into the bottle.

I took the label off the packet and ; put it on the bottle. I did this be- , ' cause I thought it safer in the bottle. The bottle containing the poison I gave the cat I put in a sugar bag with the dead cat, and dropped it in the harbour. The balance of the packet of salts bearing my initials is the one from which I gave the wife : the dose the day prior to her death.” STRYCHNINE IN PANTRY At the point where the detective! reached the statement in which accused asserted he had bought some strychnine six months ago further questions were put to accused. “Have you any poison in the house,” ■ the detective asked Munn, who re-1 plied: “Oh, yes, I have some strych-j nine in the pantry, which I keep for ; rats.” “Surely you do not keep strychnine : in the pantry?” observed the detective ' to Munn. “Yes, I keep it covered,” answered Munn, who then entered the pantry on the back verandah. Munn put his hand on the top shelf oft 9in from the floor, and placing his hand on a honey carton, Munn said: “It’s under this.” “It’s gone,” said Munn, on lifting the carton. Ho ; turned round saying “we will look in the bedroom.” Munn walked into the front bedroom, followed by the | detectives. Entering the room, writ- j ness noticed some floral wreaths on ; I the bed, which was made up, but the ; j room w*as not occupied. Accused * sat on the left of the bed, between \ that and a chest of drawers. The detective commenced a search ■ of the room, and on opening the top L drawer of the chest he found it con- ■ ;j tained men’s shirts, two suits of j pyjamas and unironed soft collars, j ' which were in the right-hand corner j nearest the bed. “On moving the collars.” said writ- ! 'i ness, “I saw the small bottle, labelled

‘poison.’ “Do you use this drawer,” asked | the detective of Munn, who said “Yes, but I do not wear pyjamas. I cannot stand them.” On seeing the ; bottle, Munn remarked “That’s it.” The detective wanted to know how 1 the bottle got into the drawer, and ; Munn said he did not know. He | thought it was in the pantry and had j last seen it about a fortnight ago. On i examining the bottle, the detective j saw no finger impressions on the ; glass. The bottle contained a few j small white crystals. After further inquiries the detective said he and Detective Power again j interviewed Munn at his home on Feb-; ruary 15. The accused then made a further statement. In this document, j accused said his wife had always en- J joyed good health until 12 months ago. | She was sentimental and worried about trifling things. He referred at ; length to the purchase of the home,! on which a Government loan was ob- j tained and on which £9O arrears was owing, except for £l6 paid recently, j Munn said that he and his wrife at-! tended a city theatre on the night of i February 3, and in the rush to catch j the boat later Mrs. Munn was so ex- i hausted that she had to be helped on j to the boat. Munn further said the ! doctor had told his wife on the Tues-1 day that if she did not remain in bed a week she would be sent to the! hospital. On the night before Mrs. j Munn’s death Munn said he was work-1 ing until 1 a.m., and then came in j and made some supper, his wife being ! asleep. She woke up and he gave her some milk and some bread and butter. He attended his wife during the night, and when he wakened at 7 a.m. his wife seemed all right. He bad mixed some salts for her, but did not know whether she took them. He denied that his wife was disturbed or was crying or hysterical that morning. He said he had no idea that the strychnine had been moved from the place where he had left it in the pantry. He refuted the suggestion that his wife had vomited during her illness. Witness asked accused what he was going to do about the two young children and whether he intended getting a housekeeper. Accused’s reply had been: “No damned housekeeper for me. I know too much about them.” That had been on Saturday, February 15. After inquiries had been continued until March 8, a warrant had been obtained for accused’s arrest. With Detective Power, witness had gone over to Northcote, where they found Munn in the house. Mrs. Stuck was also present and the two children. “I said we wished to speak to Munn privately in the other room,” continued witness. Munn’s reply had been: “You’re here again.” Witness had said he had a painful duty to perform. He told accused that he had a warrant for his arrest on a charge of murder. After the warrant had been read accused had asked what it meant and he was told that he was under arrest. Accused had asked what the evidence was, but witness refused to discuss it with him. Munn said “I told you I bought the poison. I did everything for the damned womaij. Can I get bail?” Witness had told Munn that he was not baliable as a right, but that he could bring up the question when he came before the Court. Munn, remarking that he was afraid the woman would leave, asked for permission to speak io Mrs. Stuck which was refused. Munn had then been taken to the central police station. (Proceeding.)