BIGAMY CHARGE

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 19719, 9 December 1926, Page 11

BIGAMY CHARGE

AN UNUSUAL CASE OLD MAORI CUSTOM ACCUSED COMMITTED FOR TRIAL A most unusual case of alleged bigamy was .heard in the Wanganui 1 Magistrate’s Court yesterday before IMr John McMillan, J.P., and Mr W. H. i Mason, J.P. Hori Tureia, the accused, i was represented by Mr N. R. Bain, and the prosecution was conducted by Detective J. Walsh. According to Detective Walsh it was alleged that accused was married in 1913. Some years later his wife left him and went to Kakahi. Accused became infatuated with a native from : Kaiapoi and finally married her. The i original copy of the marriage certifi- ’ cate was produced by Father Reardon. The marriage had been performed in accordance with the Native Land Act in 1909. Objection was lodged by Mr Bain to the production of the certificate as there was nothing to show that it was the original document. • Evidence regarding the 1913 wedding i was given by Father Vibaud. He rei membered the occasion well, because i after the ceremony he was coming ■ down the river and the canoe capsized. ! The certificate had been wet along the lower part and the stain had obliterated the signature of a witness. Nevertheless the certificate was quite good as a legal binding document. First Wife’s Evidence Matahewa Tureia stated that she was married to Tureia at >aranui by Father Vibaud, of Jerusalem. Mr Bain at this stage objected to tho evidence proceeding. He pointed out that tho witness was apparently the original wife of the accused. By tho laws ho did not think she could be compelled to give evidence against her husband. Detective Walsh then produced a 1926 Amendment, which made it clear that the first wife could give evidence in a bigamy case. > Mr Bain: Oh! well the amendment has not been made generally available o the profession. Detective Walsh: But, sir, it has been in the Court for some months. Matahewa then continued her evidence. She had been married to ■ Tureia for five years and there were : two children, both girls. At the end of five years witness went to her parents ; at Kakahi. i To Mr Bain: Sho had been living ! with Hori Tureia for some time prior ; to the ceremony, according to Maori i custom, as man and wife. Mr Bain: Do you think you were doing the right thing by leaving your : husband and going to live at Kakahi? ! Detective Walsh: This is not a Court l of Morals, your Worships, and I i ! s rongly object to the question. Counj sei only needs to ask her whether she I understood the marriage ceremony at | the time in 1913, but he won’t put that I question. 1 Mr Bain pointed out that the I evidence showed that the parties lived • together under Maori custom. The prosecution had to prove guilty mind ■ in the case. He intended to make the i proceedings as short as possible, and ;as the Crown prosecution would bo heavy in a Supreme Court case he was endeavouring to make proceedings as cheap as possible. Detective Walsh: Mr Bain’s explanation is one of the most astonishing I have ever heard in this Court. It that ignorance was no oxciwe in the eyes of the law. After further evidence was hoard the accused was committed for trial at the next session of the Supreme ' Court at Wanganui on February 15.