BIGAMY CHARGE FAILS.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 183, 4 August 1932, Page 11

BIGAMY CHARGE FAILS.

IDENTITY PROBLEM. UNUSUAL COURT STORY. OTAHUHU MAN DISCHARGED. Failure by the Crown to prove beyond reasonable doubt that a marriage was contracted in England by an accused person led Mr. Justice Smith to direct the jury to bring in a verdict of not guilty at the Supremo Court yesterday. The accused was Evan Bert Davies, labourer, Otahuhu, and ho was charged with bigamy, the allegation being that, having married Mary Jane Kigby at Bolton, England, on December 28, 1901, he went through the form of marriage with Ethel Ruby Montgomery at Otahuhu on December 30, 1914.

Donald Edward Stacey, company manager, said that in July or August, 1914, the accused stayed with him at Waiharara, and witness knew him as Ted Davies. Accused said he came from Lancashire and had been in Bolton. Thoy came down to Auckland on August 3, 1914, and a few days later the}' parted. Witness did not see accused again till September of last year. Accused then came to witness and asked if witness could recollect accused telling him a man had offered to pay his fare to New Zealand if accused would take the other man's name and correspond with his wife. Accused said an allegation that he had committed bigamy had been made against him, and if witness could recollect accused telling him about the matter mentioned, and would communicate with accused's wife it would considerably relieve her. Witness had no recollection of the story. In answer to counsel witness said he remembered accused saying that his home life had been a very hard one. A copy of a marriage certificate was put in showing that a man named Evan Bert Davies had married Mary Jane Rigby, at Bolton, Lancashire, on December 28, 1901. Woman's Evidence. Mary Ann Bennett said she came to New Zealand from Lancashire in 1909 and went to live at Hamilton. About four years later she returned to England, but again came to New Zealand in January, 1924. She went to school at Bolton, her girl companion being Florence Davies. The latter had three brothers, one of whom was named Bert. Witness frequently visited the home of Bert Davies and his parents and remembered him leaving his father's house. Subsequently she three times visited a house in Bolton which was occupied by Bert Davies and a woman whom witness supposed was his wife', but only on one occasion was Bert Davies present. He called J;he woman Mary Jane, and as a single woman witness knew her surname to be Rifby. In the beginning of November or°end of October, 1923, when witness returned to England from New Zealand she an-ain visited the woman she knew as Mrs. Davies. In June of this year witness went to the Otahuhu police station and identified the accused as the Bert Davies she knew in Bolton. His father was an inspector of police m Bolton.

The next witness, Ethel Ruby Davies, said her single name was Ethel Ruby Montgomery. She first met accused in May and knew him as Egbert Davies. On December 30, 1914, they solemnised their marriage at the Otahuhu Methodist Church. In the marriage certificate the name of accuseds father was given as John Davies, retired police officer. Detective McWhirter said he saw accused at Otahuhu on December 29,1931, and told him it was suggested he was identical with Evan Bert Davies who had left his wife in England and came to New Zealand on the Rimutaka in 1908. Accused denied that he was Evan Bert Davies. Witness showed him two photographs, also a copy of a marriage certificate. Accused's Denial. Accused made a statement in which he denied that he was the man suggested. He had not married Mary Jane Rigby at Bolton, England, in 1901, nor did he have any brothers or sisters. He said lie was born at Welshpool, that his father was not a police officer, although he had given that as his father's occupation when he married Miss Montgomery at Otahuhu in 1914. He did that to create a good impression with Miss Montgomery's people. Aucused said that in 1908 he met a man in England who offered to pay his passage to New Zealand and they travelled together on the boat. On the voyage, said accused, the man Taff Davies had given him lessons in handwriting and he had learned to write the same as Taff Davies, who had asked him to write letters to his (Taff Davies') wife. On April 18 last after receiving a letter from accused he interviewed him and was shown two diaries, one for 1910 and the other for 1919. One diary showed entries of accused having received £1, £10 and £5. In a notebook was an entry stating that he had written letters t'o England for "T.D." When told that he had been identified in photographs as Bert Davies, of Bolton, and was also identified at the Otahuhu Police Station, accused said he could produce his double, as a lot of people had doubles. When arrested accused said he was sorry for witness as he could prod\ice a man named McDonald who had seen him on the boat with Taff Davies. Constable William Thomas Lee, of Otahuhu, said he interviewed accused in September last. Accused denied that he was the Evan Bert Davies being inquired for. Henry William Scott, handwriting expert, said he had examined the writing in letters written by Evan Bert Davies to his wife, also the handwriting of accused in his signed statement. In the statement he thought there had been an attempt to disguise the handwriting. He was of opinion that the letters and statement were written by the same individual. Accused Discharged. After discussing legal points with counsel, his Honor told the jury there was not sufficient evidence to identify accused with the Evan Bert Davies who married Mary Jane Rigby. It was most essential that the first marriage should be proved, and the parties identified, beyond doubt. There was no definite evidence that the woman named Mary Jane was Mary Jane Rigby. However suspicious the circumstances might be, the evidence failed in the essential proof. The jury found a verdict of not guilty without leaving the Courtroom. Accused was discharged.