A MELBOURNE SENSATION. ALLEGED MURDER BY A WOMAN. A MYSTERIOUS POISONING CASE.

Te Aroha News, Volume VI, Issue 272, 13 June 1888, Page 3

A MELBOURNE SENSATION. ALLEGED MURDER BY A WOMAN. A MYSTERIOUS POISONING CASE.

Makgarkt Si'AKNA, a restaurant-keeper of Melbourne, has been committed for trial on a charge of the wilful murder of Edward Gillett, who died on 26th April from the ©fleets of a dose of placial acetic acid. The deceased was a gentleman of independent means, but a dipsomaniac. At the inquest Mr R. Walsh conducted the case on behalf of the Crown, Messrs I'urvis and Caldham -v\ atched the proceedings on behalf of Mrs Spanna, and Sir Kryan O'Longhlen for the relatives of the deceased. Mr Walsh said that befoic he called Mrs Spanna he wished it to he understood tha» circumstance-- would be shown throwing 1 very strong suspicion on Mrs Spanna, a id he wished her to be cautioned. The Coroner informed Mrs Spanna thai she could refuse to answer question- if she thought her evidence would implicate herself. ' Margaret Spanna deposed a> follows :-- I am the wife of Edward Spanua, jeweller. I superintended a cate business, in which J ha\e an interest with my dau«hter,^ in Bourke street. Ido not keen lodgeis. The cafe has a licence to sell colonial wine*-. I knew deceased. He hud been li\ ing at the cafe for iive or six v%eeks. He wa< \ enmuch under the influence of drink when he came to stop at *he cafe, and was drinking more or less all the time he was there. He told me that ho had been drinking for 15 >ears. About 9 a.m. on the 26th he came to my private house in Lonnlale-street, and my sen am told mo he watery ill. He had come from the cafe. I gave him some gruel, which he vomited. I afterwards him gruel and brandy, which he retained, and he sat by the fiie smoking a cigar. I told him to He down in the drawing-room and have a sleep, and he asked me to tend to a chemi-t for a sleeping draught. The sen ant went for a draught, but on roming back said that the chemist lefused to dispense it without a doctor's certificate. Deceased then said he would get it himself. He went away, and returned w ith a sleeping draught. I persuaded him not to take the sleeping draught, and 1 sat duwn beside the sofa and commenced talking to him. Whilst I vias &o engaged he went to sleep in a sitting position. He remained in my charge until 3 o'clock, when I sent him out with my groom in a buggy. He returned about 4, and wanted to dii\c me down to the cafe. To humour him 1 went for an hour's drive with him in a cab. Before he went out in the buggy he went into my son's bedroom and dressed himself. When he was dio?-ing he called me to the door, and -aid— "What ate these bottles on your son's table ': ' I replied that I did not know, and he said he would speak u> him about them. I went away without entering the room. We .sent to the cafe between 5 and 6, enteimg from Eli/abeth-streot, and 1 promised that if he did not go into a hotel I would give him a glass of brandy and water. When u c anived at the cafe I did so. It was dark in the cafe, and the gas was not lit. My daughter complained to the deceased about going out in the buggy and robbing her ot a drive, and he got excited and said he would take his sleeping draught. In the entrance of the cafe wherehewas he laid the bottle produced on the table, and asked me to give him hi<= sleeping draught. The bottle was full, and I emptied most of its content* into a glass of brandy and water and gave j it to him. He drank the greater part, j and then spat it out, saying I had ( given him the "wrong stuff— that it was poison. I did no*" know that this bottle was labelled "Poison. 1 ' This was the only bottle he had on him. I went with him,to u chemist, and told the latter to give him something quick, as he had taken poison. I at once went for a cab to take deceased to the Hospital. Deceased was treated at the Hospital by three doctors, who wished him to remain in the institution. He refused, and said, "Margaret, take me home." He got out of the stretcher and walked to the cab. When he arrived at my private home, I sent my son for Dr. Bird, who attended him until he died. Tw o servant- of the cafe were in the place when I gave the draught to ! deceased. I never yot any money trom him. He gave my daughter €50 because I ! went bail for him. My daughter and I j have a joint account, and the money was paid into it. I cannot truthfully say howmuch money the deceased paid while he boarded at the cafe. 1 should think about X.IQQ. He was always dres-ed during the time he was stopping afc the cafe. The cook took his boots and hat away on one occasion to keep him from going out, but he went out and bought a hat and a pair of boots. He told me afterwards that he got the hut from Mr Beeston. of Eli/,abethntreet, his brother-in-law. The deceased wrote something on a paper bag. —The Hag was produced along with a will, and copies of both document-? -were made. The paper bag boie the following inscription in lead pencil :--■' March 23, 1888. Mrs Margaret Spanna. — T bequeath to Mrs Spanna, tor your kindness, all my property, personal and otherwise, in Victoria ; po help me God.— Willmm Ej>w\ri> Gii.lktt. Witnesse-. — Geo. Hardie, Agues Bancroft. 1 ' The will was as follows : — This" is the last •will and testament of Wm. Edw. Gillett, of Buurke-street Ea-t, Melbourne, in the colony of Victoria, gentleman. I give, devise, and bequeath unto Margaret Spanna, of Bourke street East, Melbourne, aforesaid, the wife of Edward Spanna, for her own sole absolute use and benefit, all the real and personal estate of or to which I may die seized or- possessed of, subject to the trusts and equities affecting the same ; and I declare that my object in making this will is to endeavour to recompense Mrs Margaret Spanna for her kindness to me, and the great attention and trouble she showed and took with me, and I appoint the said Margaret Spanna executrix of thid, my iast will and testament, hereby revoking ail wills and testamentary writings heretofore executed by me, and signed by the said William Edward Gillett this 27th day of March, 1888. William Edward Gjlli.tt. —Signed by the said William Edward Gillett, and for his last will and testament, in the presence of us both, being present at the same time, to which, at his request and in his presence, and in the presence of each other, we have hereunto subscribed our names as witnesses. — Montvuue Cohex, solicitor, Melbourne. Abraham La?;l.'' Witness continued — When deceased wrote on the paper bag I said it was no good, bub he said, " Yes it is ; you keep it." I put it carelessly in my pocket. I did not a&k deceased to have a will properly drawn up. He asked me to send for a solicitor. I advised him to go to his own solicitor. He said, "I won't go to him because my brother in -law will kick up a row about it." Mr Cohen was then sent for. Deceased gave tho will to Mr Cohen and told him he would have to fight hard for me. Two days before his death the deceased made an appointment with Mr Davidson, but did not keep it. He would not go back because he was frightened that his relatives would keep him without a sbitch of clothing, as they had done before. I kept his bank book, and I gave him money as he wanted

ifc. When lie [mid money ho gave his cheques to my daughter, who nursed him at the cafe. 1 gave him what drink he wanted. He did not drink to excess in the houpe. Whisky and brandy wore given to him, but never raw. The spirits* were often mixed with beef tea and given medicinally. William Davidson, a resident of Hawthorn, said that, he was a brother-in-law of the deceased, whom he had known for twenty-five years. He was steady in hit. habits up to about tive years ago, when he took to spirits instead of opiates, which he used to take to produce sleep. Witness saw the deceased for the tirst time this year on the 9th March when he called at his ottico with Mrs Span pa, and asked witness to defend him at the Carlton Police Court. Ho appeared to have been drinking-. On the afternoon of the following 1 day witness found deceased at his house puttering from the c fleets ot drink. He stopped with w itness until the 18th April, when the deceased, in company with witness, went to Mi> Spanna's shop, When they entered the shop Mrs Spanna and all the ladies? clustered round the deceased, and said, "Oh. Mr Gillett, how nice you look." The deceased then said to Mrs Spanna, " Why were you not at the couit this morning?" She replied, " Because 1 heard that the case was settled.'' The deceased then said, " Well, give me back that i'so. "' She retired, and said they would settle that another tint' 1 , Gillett thensaul. "Why didn't \ou come out to see me ?" MrSpanna «aid that she Ind done all she could to see. him, and hid oven offered an old man €1 to fetch him back to her re-taurant. The deceased then handed a letter to Mi-. Spanna, w hich she passed to witness The letter lan as follows: " Mt\rys\illo. -For (Sod's sake tell Mrs Spanna of this place where lam detained against my will. Lot. her demand to have me — by lorce if nece^ary." They left the shop a few minutes afterwauls, and the deceased got on a tram to i.'-o for a ride. He did not return to witness's house. On the morning of the 19th witness went to Sputum's and asked if the deceased was there. She replied that he was up-tair?. >Vitne- 5 then "-aid, ''Xow, Mrs Spanna, you say that thi-s i* a respectable business you have heie. and you ha\e no right to keep my brother-in-law. Is it right for him to ' sleep in a house full of females ?" She replied " What am Ito do?" Witness said, "Turn him out into the street, and we will i take care of him. ' He then went upstairs and saw deceased asleep in bed. There ! was a bottle of rum on a chair alongside his bed. From that up to the time of ! his death witness called at the restaurant every da). On the 23rd witness called at the cafe in company with the deceased's brother, and saw Gillett in compain with Mr-* Spanna. He asked when he was going away: and Gilletfc said, "I'm going away to Queen-land on Saturday.' 1 Witne>- then said, "Look here Gillett, if you don't go away fiom lumc jour sifter will employ u private detecthe to watcli you and this place until sullicient evidence can be obtained to enable action to be taken.'" Mis Spanna said, " 1 don't cue.'' Witness then a->ked deceased to come up to his. om'ee, a? he had important business to communicate. The deceased replied, " What is the important business. ?" Witness replied, " It is to set'le your property in such a way that you can live upon the interest, and the principal cannot be squandered. He leplied, " Right ; I will be there. 1 have ! tricked her." To Mr Waloh : The deceased did not keep the appointment, and witness never saw him alive again. On the night uf the deceased's death witness called at the cafe" at 10 o'clock, and saw Mr Ben Spanna, who said that tho poison wa* taken out of the room. Witness said, " What had you poison for ?" He replied, " I have said it was for corns ; I did not want everyone to know what it really was for." To Sir Bryan O'Loughlen : 1 -poke to the deceased about his will, and was told by him that he made a will in Mrs Spanna's favour, but that he had made another one subsequently revoking it, and leawng his property to his brother-* and sister-. He also said that she wanted him to go into partnership with her, and to put all his money into her bank. He replied, "Ko ; we will be purtneis but wont be boss." Mr Purvis : When did yon tir-t «cc the new will ? — Before the 10th April. Mr Purvis: Where is it?-— lt is in the court. Mr Purvis : Produce it, please. Sir Bryan O'Loughlen produced the will, which was a,s follows :— " Melbourne, March \ 30. 1888 I give and bequeath all my propert), real and personal, to my brothers and sisters that aie living. — Willmm Edward Gtllj-tt. Henry Bee.ston. Harriet Beeston.' Mr Purvis : Do you call this thing a will? — T would like to take some money on it. ( Laughter.) Mr Purvis : Who made out that cheque for £20?— Mr Uillett. Do you know that the signature was disputed at the bank ? — Ve" ; they said that the signature was unlike. Who guaranteed that the .signature was correct V— l did. The bank manager said that a number of women wcie coming to the bank with cheques, and that he wanted to stop it, as he thought that something was wrong. William Robert Davidson deposed that he was the coroner's constable. He heard about the death of Mr Gillett about 8 o'clock on the night of the 26th April, and went to the cate". Two constables were present taking evidence, and al&o two reporters. Mrs Spanna said that the deceased had been at the cafe for about a month, and had been drinking very heavily. She had been trying all she could to get him off the drink, and that day she had taken him to her private house in Lonsd alestreet. During the day she said that the deceased had gone into her son's room, and had toldher that he (the deceased) had seen some bottles in the room labelled " Poison," and that he wanted to know what they were for. She replied that she did not know, but that he could speak to her son about it. At about half past 5 they both came to the cafe together, and as soon as they entered the shop the deceased said that he would take his sleeping draught. He then took a bottle out of his pocket, which he gave her to pour out for him into a glass in which there was brandy. He immediately drank it, and as soon as he did it said, "Oh ! my God, I'm poisoned : I have given you the wrong bottle." She took him to Rowley's, the chemist, where he had an emetic, and was then taken to the Melbourne Hospital, where, however, he would not stop, saying that he would sooner have Dr. Fitzgerald. Mrs Spanna then said, " We setit for "Dr. Fitzgerald, but he was notat home, so we sent for Dr. Bird. He came and prescribed for Gillett, and went away." The inquest was then spoken of, and Mrs Spanna asked when it would be. Witness replied that it was for the coroner to decide. She then asked where 0 the body would be taken to. Witness replied "to the morgue." She then said that fehe would rather have him taken to her private house, and have tho inquest there. Witness then went downstairs with the reporters, and met Mr Spanna, jun., who asked them to have a bottle of wine. They had the wine, and after having

drank it Mr Brown, one of the reporters, said "Itis a clear case of suicide." At this Mr Spatma rose up and html, " By — , now that you have mentioned it, I can toll you something. He (the deceased) cmnc into my room one day, and asked me what I had all those bottles for. I did not toll him, and T would not like to toll you.'' Dobective Ward said that he called at young Mr Spanna's .shop on the 27th April, in company with Detectives Nixon and O'Ponnell. Itfixon asked Spanna if he was summoned to attend the inquest., and he replied, "What do! want to attend for? I caught the old- - - in my room two or three tinier, and threatened to kick him out. If he had not gone in ho would not have got the bottle." Nixon then asked what he used the poison ior, and Spanna leplied that he vised it for a certain disease. Witness then went, with Ni\on to the lestaurant | and a^ked Mins Spanna toi a statement, which she refused to gi\e until s-lio Irul seen her lawyer. Mi Davidson, recalled In Mr Purvis, «aid that tlie deceased's mother committed suicide by cutting her throat, and that one ot his brother^ had shown mental weakDr. Thomas Naughton Fit/gerald '•aid tliat he had known Mrs Spanna lor about twenty li\eyear.s. On the 26th Mare the deceased was bi ought to his house by a Mrs, Keneratt s-ullermg fiom the elleets of di ink. Ho (ilie witness) examined him, and atter preset ibing, told the deceased that it «,!■< no use hiiu eoniinu tor treatment ' unle— he «.i\e up the dunk To Mr I'ii nit,: Jle did not lunembu ha\ing told Mis Spanna that the deceased's inside was so de-tioyed with tit ink. that he could not be cuicd. Dr. Conway M. M'Knight, 10-ident sur ycon at the Melbourne Hospital, said that on the evening of the 26th April he taw the deceased, when he was tii-l brought to the institution In Mr .Spanna. She was in an excited state, and a»ked witness to gi\e him something us he had taken poi-on. Witness gave him caihonate of niagne-ia and an emetic, winch nvi'ie him \omit, after which he w.ts sent into a w u\l, but w ould not stop. To Mr I'urws.: The deceased was quite conscious, and told witness that he luul taken poison b\ accident, and had l>etn treated at a chemist's- The deceased and Mrs Spanna appeal ed to bt on fiiendly terms with each other, and he acquic-eed in all she said. Abraham Lael, clothier, ot Uourke street, said that he witnessed a will made by Mr (lillettat Spanna's restaurant on the 27th March. The deceased wa- then quite sober. Montague Cohen, solicitoi, of the liim of J^ney, WiNon, and Cjh.'U, Queonstrect, that on the 24th March Mr* Spanna called at hi- olncc, showed him the will known as the " p.ipor bag will," and said that the deceased de.-hed to .see him about it. He piomised to call, and did so, but the deceased \vn- out. On the 27 th lie was again lequested to call at the eato, and did .so at about half-past 5. Mi- Spanna and the deceased weie in the fiont >hop. Wit ness spoko to the decea.sed, and said, '' 1 i understand that you want to sec me on 1 some leg'il matter. "' Me leplied " Ye-, [ I do; you had better cime upstairs. He' then led the wa\ upstair-, followed J by witness and Mrs Spanna. They j vent into a sittinjrroom, when the j deceased look the "paper-bag will out of Mia Spanna's hand, and said, "Is thh -ill right?" Witne-s replied, "It is a vcr\ informal kind ot document, and it you want to carry out the e\ident intention, \ou had better hn\e a proper document prepaied. If you like I will ha\ eit prepared in my oliice and \ou can .sign it." The deceased replied, " Oh, no : I want it done now, and it \ou can't do it, I'll to tin?." Mrd Spanna then joined in the ! conversation and asked witness to make the will at once, and he contented. Whilst Mrs Spanna was away getting the paper and ink, witness a-ked the deceased if lie had any real property. The deceased said " Xe\er mind w hat. I ha\e got : Tarn going to lease it all to Mrs Spanna. Witness next inquired if he had any relations, and Uillett said, "Yes I have: they ha\e been no use to me. Thty have only been tiding what they could get out of me. ' On Mis | Spanna returning witness wrote out the j will and the deceased signed it. j Dr. Jaine-, of Collin-.-streel, said that on the 16th March the deeea-ed, in company with Mr- Spanna, came to hU house, w hen (iillctt was Bii tleiing from delirium tremens. He examined him. and .said that he w ould ha\c to discontinue di inking and take nourishing tood, and would ha\e to be watched and nursed. Mrs Spanna said that she would take care ot him, and the} left with the intention of going to South Melbourne. The Coroner in addressing the jury -aid that what they had to decide was whether flillctt's death was culled by accident, by culpable negligence, or murder. When this ca.se was fir-t imported to him he asked the constable to enquhe if there wa» a w ill in favour of the poison who administered the poison, and if there was. had instructed him to make a thorough inquin. There was \ery little evidence to show thatthe poison had not beenaccidentally administered, or that there had been cu'pable negligence, except that the draught was given out of a bottle on which the word " Poison '" was written in laige letters : but it was certainly her duty to sco what was on the bottle. If they wore of opinion that Mrs Spanna was guilty of culpable negligence, she was guilty of manslaughter It was further alleged that the poison was given intentionally for the purpose ol killing the man. They had to consider this, and with it the fact that the man was a drunkard, with an hereditary taint of insanity as well. When he tirst went to the cafe he wus dirty and disreputable, and there must have been very good reasons to induce Mrs Spanna to take him in. They had to remember that he was a drunkard, for whom no one could feel an interest, and consequently she must have thought she would obtain something by taking him into her cate. They knew that .she had received money and cheques fiom him, and also that she offered one man t'l to kidnap him away fiom his .sister's place when he was stopping there. She could not have taken such an inteiest in him unless there were some advantage to be gained. If there had been no will and the poison administered, they would have been satisfied that it was done accident ally, and there would have been no need for the inquiry, for it would have been. to her advantage to keep him alive. On the othei hand, the man was going away to Queens land on the Saturday, and if she felt that the money, almost in her grasp, was passing away from her, that was a motive for poisoning him. It was, however, very difficult to come to a conclusion, but if they believed that she poisoned the man in order to obtain possession of his property, she wus guilty of murder. Mrs Spanna w r as to be looked upon as being perfectly respectable, but as she had taken the responsibility of looking after the deceased, she would have to be held responsible for so doing. It was not her business to go out of her way, as she had done, to eet the man under her protection, and she ; had only herself to blame for what had occurred

The jury, after a consultation, lasting one hour mid ihirty-Hvo minutes, rctuuiod the following verdict :•-" That at Melbourne, on tho 26th April la&t, the deceased, William Edward Gillobt, was wilfully and maliciously murdered by Margaret Spanna." The prisoner was then committed to tnko her trial at the Criminal Couit to be held on the 15th of June. The prisoner took the verdict a cry quietly.