THE RUSSELL CASE.

Press, Volume XLIX, Issue 14588, 12 February 1913, Page 2

THE RUSSELL CASE.

PRISONER DISCHARGED.

In the Supreme Court, before Mr Justice Denniston, yesterday, Charles James Russell was charged that, on Juno 28th last, at Christchurch, he unlawfully used an instrument, with intent to procure the miscarriage of Marjery Hilda Murray. Mr T.. W. Stringer, K.C., Crown Prosecutor, appeared for the Crown, and Mr S. G. Raymond, with him Mr W. J. Hunter, for prisoner. Prisoner pleaded not guilty to tho charge.

The following jury was empanelled: Thomas Armstrong (foreman), John Coloman Garner, John Bryden, George Harris, Thomas Martin Rico, Alexander Wilson, William David Robinson, Harold Ernest feapsford, Phillip Rivers Harman, James Ciothier, Henry Aikon Hooker, and Alfred John Collins.

Mr Stringer, in opening, said the facts which he would lay before the I jury were very short and simple. It appeared that the girl Murray became E regnant, and alleged the father to o Stanley Robinson. She had been living at Dunedin and Timaru, and then at his request she came to Christchurch. After being a day in Christchurch she would say they proceeded to Dr. Russell's house, and she was introduced to the doctor, apparently as if somo previous interview had taken place between Robinson and the accused.

Marjory Hilda Murray, a singlo girl, eighteen years of ago, said that in June last she was pregnant. A man named Stanley Robinson was the father of her unborn child. She was living in Dunedin when she first became pregnant. She subsequently came to Timaru and then to Christchurch. Stanley Robinson, who was then in Christchurch, met her at the station. A day or two after her arrival in Christchurch Stanley Robinson took her to prisoner's house in Manchester street. They went into the doctor's surgery, and Robinson informed prisoner that witness was the lady he had been to make arrangements for. Prisoner then told Robinson to go out of the room, and Robinson did so. Witness gave details of an alleged operation. At tho conclusion they re .oined- Robinson in the waitingroom, where Robinson gave prisoner either £10 10s or £10.

Harry Witty Robinson, letter-carrier, a brother of (Stanley Robinson, said that he remembered going to accused's house with his brother in June last and seeing accused. Witness introduced his. brother to the doctor, and his brother explained the position, and asked could accused give him any medicine. Prisoner replied: "I don't use instruments," but added that he could arrango the matter to their satisfaction. Witness then left his brother with the doctor. 'Ihe fee was mentioned, and witness thought it was ten guineas. Thomas Gibson, police detective, deposed to arresting prisoner on September 4th on the charge. Prisoner did not say anything for some time, but stood up against the fence. He then said: "Very well; so ifs the way of the world." On tho way to the polico station he asked witness to give nim the name of the girl, and where he went. On the same day witness went to his surgery. There was a couch in it and a cupboard, and in the cupboard, all together in one drawer, were the instruments produced. The defence called no evidence. Addressing the jury, Mr Raymond said the evidence upon which the Crown entirely depended was that of the girl Murray, who was an accomplice and a participator, if an offence were committed. If the evidence of the man Robinson was corroborative, he was also an accomplice. Therefore, the evidence of the Crown depended in the first

place on two accomplices. Now, had the evidence of theso two stood every test? He asked the jury to regard tho evidence of the girl Murray with every circumspection. Ho submitted that the evidence for the Crown in this respect had utterly failed. Ho furthermore submitted that there was nothing inculpating prisoner in the girl's narrative, iie put it to the jury: If a medical man/like Dr. Russell wished to procure f ah/abortion, could ho not havo obtained it? He, however, submitted that prisoner had mado but an examination of the g.rl. His Honour, in snmrainc-ur>. said tho jury had to satisfy themselves on two points—first, ' whether :an instrument was used, and secondly, whether it was used for the purpose of procuring an abortion. If tho evidence rert in their minds any reasonable doubt, the jury must acquit, but if tho jury wore satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt that there had been an attempt at abortion, thoy must convict. Tno evidence of accomplices must be looked at from the point of tiow of commonsense. Their evidence must bo reviewed with, especial care. The defence, as stated by Mr Raymond, did not, as far as his Honour could gather, suggest that tho girl had concocted her story, but that though tho Robinsons and the girl had gone to tho doctor with intent he had acted without intone nnd innocently. What was tho intention of these people in going to prisoner's place? And then there was the question in regard to the ton pounds. They wero told by counsel that tho ■; doctor's fee had nothing to do with tho - case, but tho jury were justified in asking why should such a feo be charged.

_ The jury, after fifteen minutes' retirement, brought in a verdict of not guilty, and prisoner was discharged.