ALLEGED BIGAMY.

Taranaki Daily News, 26 August 1919, Page 6

ALLEGED BIGAMY.

MAORI WOMAN CHARGED. AM UNUSUAL CASE. In the Magistrate's Court at New Plywontli yesterday, before Mr W. R. MeKcan, y.M., Mary Christian, a young Native <|oinaii, was charged with bigamy.

Sub-Inspector Hutton prosecuted and Mr S. W. Kit/.Herbert appeared for accused.

In outlining the case Sub-Inspector Hutton said accused was married at Napier on May 24, 1912, to Paul McLean, by the Registrar of Marriages. They lived together for a short while, when accused left her husband, who had not seen her since. Subsequently jl.'e became acquainted with a young man named Cecil Hendrieksen. He afterwards went to the front, but prior to going away he went through a form of marriage with accused at 'New Plymouth. While in England, Hendrieksen married another girl and was anxious to get the assistance of the authorities in securing a passage for her to New Zealand. Inquiries were made, which led to the discovery that Hendrieksen had been married to accused in New Zealand, - and 'in consequence instructions were issued that proceedings should be taken against accused.

Paul McLean, laborer, Nuhaka, Hawkes Bay, said he met accused at West Shore, Napier in 1912, and was married to her at the Registrar's office there on May 24 of that year. After the marriage they Jived together for ahout two months at Nuhaka. cused then left him, and he had not seen her since. She was married under the name of Mary Christian. To Mr Fitzherbert: He was certain accused was the woman he married, though he had not seen her for seven years.

Mr Fitzherbert: If I told you that this was not the woman, but only very like her, would you be surprised? Witness.—Oh, she is the one all right. Wm. Buchanan, Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages at Napier, gave evidence as to the carriage at his office sad produced the necessary documentsHe was unable to identify either of the ptrties now.

Paul McLean, recalled, recognised his signature in the marriage .register. Martin Bowe, driver, Napier, who was a witness at the marriage ceremony, identified both the parties. To Mr Fitzherhert: There was no interpreter present at the marriage, but accused answered all the questions put to her, as if she understood them. He was pretty well certain about her identity.

Re-examined by Sub-Inspector Hutton, witness said accused did not speak English very well. She seemed bashful, but she answered all the questions. In regard to the matter of identifying accused, Mr Fitzherbert protested that it was unfair to have her alone in the dock, especially for Europeans to identify. She should be placed with a number of other natives.

In reply to the police Mr Fitzherbert said he would have been prepared to bring other natives to the court for the purpose, had he been asked to.-

John Spencer Sclwyn Medley, Registrar of; Marriages at New Plymouth, produced the registrar with the record of the marriage of Martha Preston with Cecil P. Hendrickson on March 31, 1917. He could not be sure, hut thought accused was the same woman. She described herself as a spinster when signing the register. She could not write, hut made her mark, which he witnessed. She told him at the time that she understood English. When Hendrickson was called Mr Fitzherbert asked the Bench to warn lim that, being the husband of accused he was not obliged to give evidence against her. In answer to the Bench, Hendrickson eaid he did not wish to give evidence. Sub-Inspector Hutton pointed out that he was not the husband of accused, as he had repudiated the marriage, and the authorities had, after inquiry, brought cut his wife from England. The Magistrate ruled that as'the case appeared Hendrickson was not the husband of accused, and could be compelled to give evidence. Mr Pitzherbert mentioned that the witness should be warned of his rights, us, haring married another girl in England, he might say something which vould incriminate him.

The Magistrate remarked that it was for the witness to object to any such question that might incriminate him. Hendriclcson, who said he was a laborer, and resided at Inglewood, identified accused as Martha Preston. He ih'st met her in Napier, in 1013. He lived with her for a time, and they subsequently removed to the New Ply-mouth-district. He was called up for active service, and before leaving New 1 Zealand he went through the form of marriage with accused at the New Plymouth registry office. He identified his signature in the register and the mark made by accused, who could not write English. She spoke to him about McLean, to whom she said she had been married, but he had gone away and left her She said she had been tricked in the marriage with McLean, and that she J had not signed her proper name on the paper

[ To Mr Fitzherbert: He had always reI fused to marry accused so long aa her I marriage with McLean held good. She told him that Sam Jackson, of New Plymouth, had told her that the "marriage lines" were no good. That was several years after he first met her. He subsequently married accused while on final leave from camp. She had never told him that she believed McLean was dead. James Clarke, lanfl agent, New Plymouth, one of the witnesses to the marriage of accused and ITendriekson said j lie remembered them both.

To Mr Fitzherbert: He was as positive aa a man could be that accused '.■' as the woman who was married on March 31, 1917, in the Registrar's office, fie took notice because lie thought it sr.mewhat extraordinary that a white man should marry a native woman.

Charles Thomas Rundlc, land agent, .New Plymouth, who was another witness of the marriage, said ho could not definitely identity either of the parties. Tie recollected there was a marriage between a soldier and a Maon woman.

Constable Lupouple gave evidence as to interviewing accused at Tikorangi in November, 1918, in regard to her alleged marriage with McLean, which she emphatically denied. She claimed to be the wife of Hendrickson, and that she had drawn a separation allowance Irom the Defence Department on his account. He saw her again on March 20 last, at Waitnra, and produced a copy of the certificate of marriage with McLean, and accused then admitted having married him under the name of Mary Christian. He arrested her at Waitara on August Ist on the present charge.

Accused reserved her defence and was committed for trial at the next sittings of the Supreme Court at New Plymouth. Ba%was allowed accused in t£lQo anyone twtf.v' '