USE OF A DRUG.

Taranaki Daily News, 2 December 1921, Page 3

USE OF A DRUG.

CASE IN SUPREME COURT. A PRISONER ACQUITTED. The re-trial of Archie C. Hooker, on a charge of attempting to procure a miscarriage, took place in the Supreme Court, New Plymouth, yesterday, before Mr. Justice Reed and jury. Hooker was charged with supplying a noxious thing with intent to procure a miscarriage. He was also alternatively charged with unlawfully supplying a noxious thing, knowing that it was intended to be used for the purpose of procuring a miscarriage; and also that he did unlawfully attempt to supply a noxious thing, knowing that it was intended to be used to procure miscarriage. The case was conducted by the Crown Prosecutor (Mr. C. H. Weston), and Mr. R. H. Quilliam appeared on behalf of the accused.

The following jury was empanelled: H. Mace, P. J. Mason, O. E. A. Cook, M. Scott, Chas. Brewer, H. T. Bishop, W. J. Batten, A. Bray, J. McLeod, G. H. McGahey, W. Quickfall, L. H. Johnson. Mr McLeod was chosen foreman. ✓ CASE FOR THE CROWN. The Crown Prosecutor said the facts of the case were simple. Accused was a plasterer carrying on his trade in New Plymouth, and just prior to the alleged offence be had recently returned from war service. During his absence Hooker had been married to a girl in England. On his return to New Plymouth he met another girl and kept company with her for some time. - He did not disclose the fact that he was alread. married. As a result of their relations the girl became pregnant. Hooker asked if he got some stuff to procure a miscarriage whether she would take it, and the girl said she would. Hooker bought some capsules of ergot apiol, and posted them to the .girl. She did not take them, however, and the pills got into the possession of the girl’s brother. Together with Hooker he went to the police station, and there accused made a full statement, admitting the whole thing. The Crown Prosecutor read a letter from the Dominion analyst (Dr. F. H. McLaurin), giving the result of an analysis of the capsules. He found that the average amount of extract of ergot in each was approximately one grain. Dr. H. A. McCleland gave evidence as to the effect of ergot. He believed that the drug could procure miscarriage if given for some time. In reply to cross-examina-tion he admitted that there were doctors who contended that no drug would procure miscarriage.

Detective-Sergeant Cooney gave evidence as to the visit of the girl’s brother and accused to the police station. He advised them to see a solicitor, but before they went the other man seemed doubtful as to whether Hooker would Accompany him, and then-produced the box of pills, stating that they were what Hooker had been giving to his sister. Witness took a statement from accused, and subsequently arrested him the following day. Hooker then said he did not think it was unlawful.

Cross-examined: He did not warn Hooker before taking the statement, as he did not think it was necessary to do so. THE DEFENCE. In opening the case for the defence, Mr. Quilliam submitted that as regards the first two counts there Was no case for accused to answer. These, said counsel, depended on the nature of the thing supplied being noxious. He submitted that on the evidence of Dr. McCleland the capsules were not noxious within the meaning of the . section. It was true that in a large quan- ' tity ergot might cause a miscarriage, and might be classed as a poison or noxious I thing; but all that the box contained was twenty grains of ergot, and a certain amount of savin and apiol. The Crown Prosecutor submitted that Dr. McCleland’s evidence was sufficient to take the case to the jury. His Honor said he would defer consideration of the point raised by counsels Continuing his address to the jury, Mr. Quilliam said the defence was a simple one and consisted entirely of a denial of a guilty mind—that was to say, while admitting most of the circumstances, Hooker denied that in acting as he had done he had any mtentioi o procure a miscarriage Accused had previously served for some years in a chemist’s shop. He got the girl' into trouble, and she worried him a good deal Like many other soldiers abroad he had contracted a most unfortunate marriage while m England, and after li v hig with his wife for days only they separated He concealed this first marriage, even from I his people and when the gid spoke to him about marrying her he made the' stupid excuse that he had consumption. Then the girl s brother came on the scene. Hooker saw he had made a mistake, and would have to disclose the real reason for his unwillingness to marry. He then told or his marriage in England. He gave the girl the capsules, knowing that they would I have no efiect, but with the idea of giving some peace of mind to the girl, and honing that she would submit to the inevitable From his position as chemist’s assistant * he must have known that there were effective means if he desired to procure a I miscarriage. |

Counsel said he did not intend to endeavor to mitigate accused’s conduct, but it was denied that Hooker had deceived the girl by talking to her of marriage lines CCUSed SaVf> evldcace 011 the above

E; A- Y alk ? r gave the opinion that ergot apiol, taken ui doses of, sav, 8 grains tljree tunes a day over a short period would not be noxiou?. As regards the use of drugs for procuring a miscarriage, medical men were doubtful if any drug was them' Ve f ° r the purpose ’ and never UB ed no£foT’ e -f a ? li i ned: The ca P sules would be noxious if taken, say, at the rate of 20 per day over a period of ten days. The had ° Sleat ' deal to do with the JUDGE’S SUMMING UP. Summing up, His Honor said that upon the first count the jury could not find the reused guilty unless they were satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the article was a noxlous one—that the tin of capsules was of such .a nature as to procould h uysearriage. The second count tho’lh l dlsregarded - Upon the third eount \ qUe^1O1 ‘ . Was as t 0 whether ac?honvb,^ en he . dld give « he artie'es, ThJi 8 , *ey might procure a miscarriage. Ihey would have to consider the whole of the cu-cumstaiipes of the case against the evidence of accused in the box, when he nrocnJ hat - he - k '"‘x the capsules could not pioeure a miscarriage. If they believed ■ h -ni th ■ Jury sh °uM acquit accused. The jury retired at 3.46 p.m. and refur'ied at 4.15 with a verdict of “Not guilty , and Hooker was discharged.