RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Inangahua Times, 30 July 1880, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Thue' day, July 29th, 1880 (Before W. H. Revell, Esq., E.M.) Concealment of Bibth. Allen M'lnnis and Ellen M'lnnis ap« peared in answer to an information charging them with unlawfully concealing (he body of a dead child. There was a second information cbarg» ing Sarah Ann M'lnnis with endeavoring to conceal the birth of the said child, The following evidence was called for the prosecution :— Henry S'anley Thorpe: I am a legnlly qualified medical practitioner residing in Keefton. I know the three defendants. On the 4th of the present month I went to their house, and there saw the three defendants. I made an examination upon Sarah Ann M Innis, and I found that she had been recently delivered of a child. She admitted that such was the case, but did not state the date. Neither of the other defendants made any statement to me in reference to this matter. On the 4th July, I made a post mortem examination upon the body of the infant, at the request of Sergeant Neville. It was a newly born male child, fully developed. The child bad breathed. In my opinion the child died through exposure, the umbellical cord had been sere red,, but 1 <lid not see any signs that the prorer course had been taken to secure the cord. On the 17th April last I saw the two female accused, arid was nsked to prescribe fnr Sarah Ann. I made a partial examination of the girl, and after that I did not prescribe, as I suspected she was pregnant, I did not communicate my suspicion to the other accused. I expressed a wish to make a more minu'e examination, but it was declined. I have since attended Sarah Ann, and treated her similarly to a woman recently delivered. The mother admitted that the daughter had been recently confined. Charles Langton Neville — L ara a sergeant of police stationed at Feefton. In consequence of a rumour I went to tiie accused's house on the evening of the 3rd instant. I saw Ellen M'lnnis in the street, and told her to inform her bus* band I wanted to see him. On the following morning I saw Allen M'lnnis, and told him that I had hpard that his daughter had been confined of a male child. He paused for a second, and then admitted the fact of the confinament haying taken place, and I accompanied him to his house at Black's Point. I went into a shed at the rear of the house, and the body of the dead child was dug* up and handed to me. I saw Allen M'lnni* dig it up from the floor of the shed. I» was covered up with earth. It was a male child, and it was naked. In answer to my question he stated that his daueh* ter Sarah Ann was the mother of the child, and that he had buried it there. He said it was born on the 30th June, in the waterscloset. He said he was asleep at the time, and his wife enme into the room, and called him to assist her as their daughter had been confined. He also said that he bad heard the cry of a child before being called, but that statement he subsequently denied. He went out and assisted to carry his daughter in, and then returned to the closet and brought the child in ; the child being then dead. He said he kept the child two days in the boo so, and (lien buried it. Had a conversation with Allen M'lnnis on the Ist of the present month outside the Court House, but he did not then mention anything about the confinement. During the adjournment of the inquest [ saw Ellen M'lnnis, and had a conversation with her. She said that the child was born on the morning of the 29th June. She said that on (he night in question her daughter, Sarah Ann, was sleeping in the same bed with her, and that she missed her, and heard a faint cry in the direction of the yard ; went to the closet and found her daughter lying on the floor insensible, and a newly bon male child by her side. She went to her husband from assistance, and between them Sarah Ann was ; carried into the house, and that she went back for the child. She stated also thnt prior to this «he had no knowledge of the daughter's condition, and that she had lately been prescribing for her daughter for the whooping-cough. She further said that wh^n she first went to the closet she fonnd the umbellical cord cut. She said sho was a professional mkNwife, and had herself been the mother of a large family. She said that she found the child dead when she went to the closet, nnd that she was aware that her busband had put the child away. Had een Ellen M'lnuis on the evening of the 3rd instant, at Black's Point, but she did not inform me anything about the confinement. I know Sarah Ann M'lnnis, and when I arrested her she said she perfectly understood the charge against her, Saw her previously, on the 23rd instant, at her father's house, and she said that she had her own sus* pioions as to the state she was in previous to her confinement, and admitted that she had been confined on the morning o? the 29th June in the closei ; that her mother had prescribed for her for in* Summation of the lungs, and that on the day previous to her confinement her mother gave some" pills ; that ilie slef t with her mother on the night cf lur !'O''finetuent, and feelirg unwell col up and went t» tlip closet. Sh« said she took a lipht with her from the kitche ..

table, and was confined. Not knowing how to act to disengage herself from the child after its birth she took a knife that she saw laying in the shed, cut the cord and fainted, and remembered nothing more until she fonnd herself in bed. She said she. then asked for the child, and it whs brought to her wrapped up in a flannel, but dead ; was aware that her father' had put the body away, By Allan M'lnnis-You did say to me on the morning of the 4th that you were exci'el on the occasion of the birth, but I have no recollection of your ever denying the fact of bringing in the child. Nichol Ramsay— l know the three accused, they live near my place. On the morning of the. 4th July. I saw Allen and Ellen M'lnnis. Sarah was in bed. Subsequently had n conrersa* tion with Mrs M'lnnes, and told her that there was a scandalous report going round in reference to her daughter, and that if it was false they should try and clear themselves She siid she could not stop people from talking, and it was no use trying. She said nothing about her daughter. I led Wrs M'lnnis to understand that it was reported that her daughter had beeu confined. From what Mrs M'lnnis told me I left undeV the impression that the report was not correct. By Mrs IWnnis— You might hare said that time would prove it. John Prentice— l live at Cru«hmgton, and on Saturday, 3rd instant, saw Mrs M'lnnis, I asked bow her daughter was, as I heard she hod been ailing. She said her daughter had had the whooping-cou?b, but would be all right in a few days. I npked her if it would not be better to c;»Jl the doctor, nnd have the girl examined to stop the rumour which was going about. She said she couH not think of having her daughter examined as their wa9 nothing wrong with Ikt but a cold, and that she would be all right in a day or two. The rumour was quite current at the time that the girl had been confined. This closed the ense for the prosecution, and the formal questions hiving been put to the accused who were unrepresented by Council, they reserved their defence, and were committed to take their trial at the next sitting of the District Court at Reefton to b) hold on the* 25th : August. Biiil accepted, accused in £100 each, and two sureties of £50 each. Cuiti Cases. In the following cases judgment was given by default:— New Independent Company v. Edwards, £2 4* 2d ; same v. Small, £3 6s 81 ; same v. Walter?, £413; same v. H. Mace, ss ; Ing'ewood Co., v. Clear £4 7s 101 ; Eureka Company v. Thompson, 18 s 4d; Rate Collector v. Hunter, £6 15 <. The case of National Bank r. H^slop was adjournei at the request of defendant, to enable him to obtain the evidenc of Messrs Nanearrow and Stratford. AIKEN ■ V. PiKBY. This was an application for an order under a'judgment summons. Mr Lynch, who appeared for the plain* tiff, explained the circumstances of the case, and said that evpry possible step had been taken to defeat the judgment. He called the following evidence :— Margaret Parry: I am the wife of the late Thomas Parry, and schoolmistress at the State School. I receive £84 per annum. I have not yet re* ceived any capitat : on allowance. My husband's life wan insured for £200, and that money has been paid to me. I gave the money to my father to do as he liked with it. By the Bench i I am not living with my father. I have three children. Order made for the pa.vment of the amount, £31, in monthly instalments of £10, in default of payment, two months' imprisonment. M'KENNA V. PfcASKETT, This was a clam for 14s 3'i, for County rate. Defendant did not appear, and judgment was given for the amount claimed and costs. The Court then adjourned.