ALLEGED MURDER

Press, Volume LIX, Issue 17707, 8 March 1923, Page 9

ALLEGED MURDER

THE JOHNSONVILLE CASE. TRIAL OF THE COOPERS. (PBE3S ASSOCIATION TELEGEAH.) WELLINGTON, March 7. When the murder charge against. Daniel Richard Cooper and his wife wr-s called on at the Magistrate's Court this morning, before Mr E. Page, S.M., Mr P. S. Macassey, for the Crown, intimated that he would call Dr. Hector to-morrow. He did not address the Court in opening, but proceeded' to call evidence. The Court was not cleared. There -was an audience of over 100, including several women, during the morning. Both accused watch-;*], tho proceedings and listened to the evidence carefully, and showed no sign of undue concern. The First Witnsss. Margaret Mary McLeod. a. resid'oiil or Wellington, said* she was introduced to the male accused in February, 1821!, when she went tn liim for medical examination, as she thought she was pregnant. Witness said she was accompanied by another woman. Cooper examined her, and suggested trying to i'ct assistance from the person responsible. He said he would not give much for the baby's chances in view of the health of witness. Another interview took place in March, and she. saw accused again about June. Witness was then improved in health. He asked 1 her what she intended to do with the child. Witness was surprised at the question, as she did not expect the child to ho born alive. She saw f the accused again later. There was further conversation concerning the birth of the child. Cooper told her ho had a nice quiet place where she could go until her confinement, and that he knew of someone who would adopt the child, but a. sum of about £SO would be necessary. In consequence of this she saw Welsh, who was the man responsible. Then she saw Cooper again. After several interviews Cooper told her lie had a little "crib" near his place. She could pay a rental of 15s weekly for it. About the end of June witness called to see Cooper, and said she had been unable to get £SO. Cooper said she could go out in any case; ho would take his chanceof getting £SO from witness or from Welsh. On August 19th witness wentto Cooper's office and tho female accused introduced 1 herself. Prior to this, witness was told by Cooper that a. married woman at Palmerston would adopt the baby. Cooper said the child would have a good home, and the people, who were in "a, good position, would require no premium and would register the child as their own. At no time was she told' tho j name of the people. Cooper told her a condition was that she should not know where the child waa going in case she should ever try to claim it. Cooper was not present when witness met Mrs Cooper. Witness and Mrs Cooper went out to Johnsonvillo late in the afternoon. They walked to Cooper's home at Newlands. Cooper was at the house. After tea witness met Lily Lister, who wiis also living in the "crib." About the Child. A female child, witness said, was born on October 12th. She was sure it was a girl, and she thought it was healthy.. She was visited twice during the night, and Cooper arrived a couple of minutes after tho baby was born. A doctor was called' later in the morning and saw her and the child. After that Cooper attended to witness, and Mrs Cooper locked! after the baby. Witness was treated very well. After eight days in bed, witness got up on October 21st and went to Cooper's house. The baby was taken away the previous evening. After its birth, Cooper told_ her he would notify the Palmerston North woman. The following day Cooper told her the Palmerston people had motored through from Palmerston to Wellington, and had a Palmerston doctor and nurse with them. The clothing which witness had either made or bought was prepared by Mrs Cooper to send away with the child if necessary This clothing was produced Some was identified by witness, who said tho remainder looked very like what she bad on going to Newlands Describing how the child was taken, witness said on October 20th Cooper canio from Wellington. He asked if witness had heard a motor-car pass. He said the Palmerston people had been out to see where the • placo vf as,. and were to return after dark to take tho child away. About 7 o'clock Mrs Cooper came to the "crib." She said the people had come, for the child, and had brought all Ufe "necessary clothing for it. Mrs Cooper had a dark woollen rug with her, in whicli she wrapped the child and took it away. She child was wearing a napkin.' binder, and singlet. Mrs Cooper returned in a few minnutes' time, and witness asked who had come for the child, and the female accused said there were two people, a man and a. woman. Cooper came over about a quartet- of .-in liorn- afterwards. Witness' asked who came for the child, and h© said the husband and nurse. Ho also said they had brought a full wardrobe, with them. Witness asked that the things she had be sent to Missi Lister. The child was in good health the night, it was taken away. _ She had not seen it since. The following evening Cooper said he had seen the child and that it was well. Cooper said the child was at the house of tho sister of the woman who had adopted it. At various times during the ensuing week witness was told by Cooper that the child was doing well. One morning Cooper asked her whether she had noticed anything wrong with one of the legs of the child, and said that one leg was slightly stiff, and was being massaged. Cooper said the child was being registered in the name of the people who had it. Witness, in accordance with the agreement, did not register the child. Details were' given of tho agreement purporting to be between witness and Welsh, by which Welsh was to pay £95, which was to go to Cooper, and was all the liability incurred by Welsh in connexion with tho child. Alleged System. Mr Macassey: Did Cooper make any reference as to wliat was to be done) to Miss Lister's. child ? This question was objected to on the grounds that it was a leading question and had no bearing on the case. Mr Macassey said that what he proposed to show was that there was a system of getting rid of babies by stating they were being adopted by persons

who were unnamed. The children were not adopted, a.nd were not prodhiced when demanded. The evidence was admissible as an admission by accused. His "Worship: "vVhafc phase do you Tvant to prove? Air Maea.ssey said ho proposed to show that Cooper had had other children in his hands which he proposed to

have adopted, but they never had been adopted. His Worship: You say the professed adoption was really only a sbant? Mr Macassev: Yes.

His Worship decided to allow the question, .and note the objection with a view to deleting the evidence in case of the circumstances proving different. Witness, answering the question, said Cooper told her the otTicr be by was to be adopted by a woman in Paimerston ; North, who lived practically next door to the woman who waa adoi>lino; the. baby of witness. Cooper taiu he had -wanged for tho .adoptior. of several children. Sfie left Newl&nds on very good terms with the Coopers, and wrote them after reiurnins: to Wellington. The signing of the adoption papers was once mentioned, but not again, and was never carried out. The birth was finally registered in the middle of January, and wis arranged with the police. She could not keep the child herself as she had no money and had released tlio father from all obligation to getmoney JV.r Cooper. A fonoal demand, for the child was later made tn each c-V tho accused, but the child had not b-'/C!i produced. Ccoper frequently diecussed religion with witness, and appeared to bo religious. Cross-Examination. Cross-examined, witnees said she came fci> Wellington about the middle of 1921. Welsh was not aa old friend. Mr Jackson reiterated his objection to nearly all the evidence on behalf of tho female accused. Another .female witness was then called, but fainted, and was carried out. Welsh was called, but gave no evidence before lunch, as his Worship decided to hear argument on the admissibility of a telegram and letter. On resuming, has Worship stated that ho bad been asked to admit as evidence a. telegram and a letter signed by the solicitor acting on behalf of Cooper. Ho had decided beforo the documents could be put in, it must be proved that they were forwarded by the solicitor on behalf of the accused and at his direction . Other Evidence. Effie Adams said she knew Cooper. She accompanied McLeod to Cooper's office, where accused examiued McLeod. Later, she met Cooper and asked after McLeod. She was told she.was doing all right. William Welsh said he was sent by McLeod to make arrangements to have the child adopted. He saw Cooper, and came to an arrangement, witness agreeing to pay £35. It wns Cooper who told him the child had been born; and that he had made all arrangements for its adoption. Witness did not sign any adoption papers t Duncan McLeod, brother of Margaret McLeod, said that when he saw Cooper the latter said he felt it his duty to help girls in trouble and" humanity at large. He said he could not do it for nothing, but was not doing it for gain. After the birth of the child, Coopeil said a main! had come down in a oar from Palmerston North and taken it away, and' that everything was all right. Ethel Ttacker Florence Brown, formerly employed by Cooper, gave evidence of payments made to Cooper.' An 1.0. U. was signed by Mcleod.. Cooper said two children had been adopted. Witness thought it strange. Lilian Lister, who also visited' the home, said her child was 'born in Wellington. She identified articles of clothing which had been made for her child. , . The Government Analyst said lie. had examined the body of a child, and found no trace of poison. The hearing will be continued ic-mor-