THE ASYLUM ENQUIRY.

Evening Post, Volume XXI, Issue 58, 11 March 1881, Page 2

THE ASYLUM ENQUIRY.

TENTH DAY'S PROCEEDINGS. CROSS-EXAMINATION OP MISS BRIGDON. After vre went to press yesterday afternoon, Mr. Chapman, who appeared on behalf of Mra. Kettle, the ex-matron, commenced the cross-examination of the witness Elizabeth Brigdon, whoso evidence-in-chief we published yesterday. In answer to Mr. Chapman, Miss Brigdon said — Three or four weeks after I first went to the Asylum I acted as an attendant, and was paid a salary, for which I used to sign vouchers. Shortly after I went there - 1 could not say how long -Mrs. Kettle was laid up. About two months ago' she was, also laid up. Mr. Chapman — You say you were with Mrs. Kettle in Scotland. Wa9 that in the employment of Lord Kinnaird ?— lt was. Did you ever see Mr. Whitelaw at Lord Kinnaird's house?— Once or twice. You made his acquaintance/: 'there P— I spoke to him for a few minutes each time. For a few minutes only ?— Thab was all, &a far as I can remember. How long did he stay at Lord Kinnaird's house ?— I could not remember. Was it hours or days ?— lt might have been days. Was it weeks? — I could not say; I Baw Mr Whitelaw only twice. JDid you know he was Mrs. Kettle's son?— l *dfd. Did Mr. Whitelaw have any reason to suppose that you'wero Mrs. KetWß*B relation then r— Not then. Was he aware that you were no relation to Mrs. Kettle*?— Mrs.. Kettle told him that I was her niece. That was in- New Zealand ; is there anything to lead jou to suppose that Mr. Whitelaw knew you Wre not Mrs. Kettle's niece ? — I could not say.. In what capacity was she employed at Lord Kinnßird'B? — As housekeeper. And in what ofljpaolty wflrp you employed ?. . (The witness liesitatod. jmdL at .flrjrt rfdyueigJe. answer, saying the question was an unfair one. Eventually ? however, she consented- to answer it ) Well, I was there as oook. In that capacity you were brought pretty considerably into contact with Mrs. Kettle?— l was. You knew perfectly well you were not related to her ? — I did. Did you ever tell that to Mr. Whitelaw -lip^NewtZealandP-f-No. You allowed him to' ietleye yon were related to him ? — As Mrs. "Kestle had said so. The Chairman — Have you amy ground for thinking that Mr. Whitelaw believed at any time that you were his cousin?— No. Mr. Chapman— Was the relationship supposed to be one of first cousinship, or was it no more definite than cousin P— It was "cousin." You never did anything to remove the impression that you were his cousin ? — No, I did nbt. Chairman — You have told us it would be an advantage to be regarded as his cousin. In what way? — Simply because Mrs. Kettle thought I should be better protected if she called me her niece. It was her suggestion, not mine. Mr. Chapman — In her. evidence site denies that. Do you mean to say she is telling a falsehood?— Most decidedly, if she has not forgotten the circumstances.— WHen you signed her first voucher Mrs. Kettle was ill in bed. When you signed the second one where was she? — I don't know. Did you make any attempt to imitate her signature ? None. Did you receive the money?— No. You say he kept the cheque by her direction. Did you ever see hint take another cheque to her?— Not to my knowledge. Did you ever see him take another voucher to her? — Oh yes, on several occasions. Always with the same result, namely, that you were asked to sign?— Yes. Did Mr. Whitelaw ever tell you what he did with the money ? — No. Mrs. Kettle used to get it when Bhe wanted it; she very often did want it. I suppose yon can't tell us how much she received? — No, I don't suppose I can — not quite the figure. What do you mean by that?— That she must have had the best part of her salary. Why do you think bo P— Because when she wanted money she always asked me to get it for her from Mr. Whitelaw, and I used to do so. Did you ever get a receipt for it ? — No, 1 did not think ifc was necessa**' I have taken money to her in that • many times — on two occasions .£lO -'each, and several times -65. On ten occasions ?— I could not say.Twenty times? -I could not say; I Tjave taken it a great many times. Witness continued — I was not present when a gentleman from Government Buildings visited the Asylum to enquire about the vouchers. I got my cheques, .each, month from Whitelaw, and saw others get theirs. The complainant (Mr. J. H. Shaw) next Qfoas-examined the witness, who said— faring the time I was not on the Asylum staff I continued to reside at the institution. I helped Mrs. Kettle In her' duties, and passed as hsr niece, all the time. Com* plainant — I Bhould ljke to know something more 'particular aborrfc jour^ household relations during tUis residence. WHere did ydtt reside or sleep ?*» I Bhw© > srer •4V» "rooms upstairs. Three of them are bedrooms. Mrs. Kettle had one, -Mr. Whitelaw had another, and I had theihird. Do I understand that yourSelf," Mr" Whifelaw, and Mrs. Kettle occupied these room's upon the same floor during the wh«le.of this time ?— Yes. How difffyfu hare ? Did Mrs. Kettle have them at the same time as 'you and Mr. Whitelaw ? — Sometimes : when she was too tired to come up she had hers downstairs. As a regular thing she ate at the same table as you and Mr. Whitelaw except when she was too tired to come upstairs?—Ye3. You resigned at the end of 1878 What did yen do immediately after that! I—l1 — I was not well. What did y*u do when you were not well ?— I kept my bed. Did you.oontinue to reside in the Asylum all the time you were unwell? — I did. You never left the Asylum in consequence of that illness ?— Yes, for a fortnight; I went away for a change, and stayed at a friend's' house. Where? — In this town. Who was the friend ?—lt? — It is unnecessary to tell you. (To this question Mr. Edwards objected, and the Chairman said the witness could refuse to answer if ' she, chose fo do so.) Tie quesi tion' being" repeated, witness replied— -Mr. Chapman 'was the name of. the gentlman who had the place... Complainant; — Have you any objection to say' what was the nature of your "illness ?— Hard Work. You went 'for » fort* night' after that somewhere etee,-I believe ?— I wa« never away from the Asylum ercept the one fortnight, and that was when I was 1 getting better. Did you go nowhere else than to this house in Wellington to which you have referred?— No ; I visited a great many people, if that's what you mean. Did "you go to Eeatherston?— Yes. Where did yon stay there ?— At an hotel Which hotel?— I could not tell you. After you returned from this absence do you remember any | unpleasantness about keys between you and Mra. Kettle? -No; none whatever. L'o you know Miss Chapman? — Slightly. Did you one day take out of a book at the Asylum a letter of hers addressed to Mra. Wtiteiaw, hold i; over a cup ot hot water, and read it ?— I never did. I took a letter out of a book one day, but there was_ no address on it, and no signature. It "ac in a green envelope. I opened it and read it, and '

tossed it in the fire.— Do yon mean it was anonymous? —l don't know what it was. (Langhter.)— Was it sealed or open?— lt was closed. — You must have known it was not your own letter .'—Certainly I did. — Then why did yon open it ? — Curiosity. The Chairman — Was it very interesting ? (Laughter.) Witness— l don't Tomembef~*rhat it was. There were only _one or two words, in. it. Cross-examination continnpdh&tCH. Kittle always had her breakfast upstairs— in her bedroom.,. 1 did &Qt meal Sllfc thr oth*r attendants because I was supposed te be . Mrsi Kettle's &i«ee. * Tkat was-oqe of* the ''advantages. 1 ' (L&BghAt); I don't know that £he locks of Mrs. Kettle's boxes were femaahed during her>»bse>ee from the Asylum the. other weeL and her letters and aoon|.mentspulled^k '. 'lilf ' Vt . By the Chairman— l drew my salary last month from James Gray, the- clerk, andgave-r a receipt for it. I have known aU toonk « what I was signing when I signed on behalf ' of Mra. Kettle. I don't know the outsfof her bad eye a few months ago. Whitelaw called in Dri Grace to see hor, and she Was then ptftrtltftaaaTk room. Since then I h»v* : virtu*By'Mted as matron ; I can't say why she has not resumed duties. I have not bean appointed acting matron by Be. Skae t>t the Colonial Offioe. I Itave nothing further to Jenny Falkner Holman, attendant, said she had been in the Asylum 18 months, and had never seen the patients illn«ed. ' Alexander Bulwer Campbell, solicitor, knew Fearon (deceased), who had told him that he was not ill-treated at the Asylum. Alexander Robert Hielop, jertplilr,' 1 deposed to having visited the k patient: Alexander, but his evidence wug unimportant. John Walter Stevenson, master mariner, described some visits to the Asylum, where a relative was confined — a paying patient — ¦who appeared to be well-treated. . jCoastable Patrick Walsh, of Wellington, narrated the occurrence at Dr. Tripe's, Cnba-fttreet, when Fearon jumped out of the window. , - ' :¦' ' rp . *' '• il Constable' Shea corroborated. " Dr. Charles France, of Wellington, said— I"have resided, in this oity for upwards of 26 years, 19 years of which I have acted aa medical officer at the Wellington Lunatic Asylum. I visit the institution every day*. I go through all the wards and corridor*. There are very few patientS"whoin 1 don't see every day. * The "Superint-HniUllt ftocotn* panics rhe as a rule. When fitting the female side a female attendant accompanies us. The attendant wonld enter the rooms first, and if a patient happened to be stripped Bhe would cover her decently, while the Superintendent rAnained Outside. My duties are not confined to •urgioal superintendence, bat if I saw anything objectionable it would, be my duty to report it to the Inspector The Superintendent is quite independent of my control. The Inspector— Dr. Skae— inspects the institution about twice every year, bnt is there more frequently to see how things are going on. Whitelaw is very earnest and painstaking. SchulUe 1 have known for the last 20 years. In 1861, when he was a lad, I advised him, with regard to some noisea and uncomfortable feeling* he had in his head, whioh it was then thought wore tho result of a blow ho received. He was first oom* mitted to the Asylum in 1875. He is on* of tho most violent patients I ever had to deal with. His statement that ho was shut up for several days consecutively is untrue. It would be possible for Whlfcri law to conceal a patient by making an excuse* that such patient was out at work. Schultee's story about his having passed blood is untrue ; it was merely dark-colored urine. He could not be shut np for a week without my knowledge. I never saw him actually struggling. . He" is not Bane at present. * At 5 o'oiock, whilo this witness was still under examination, the Commission atU jonrned until to-day at 2 p.m. " . THIS DAY/ ,' ' ¦' The investigation was continued at 2 o'oiock this attefnoon, when Dr. France's examination was resumed. -, He aaid— ijohultze always tried to make but' that when* - ever ho was concerned in any quarrel he was in the right, while his 1 Oppohents were thb aggressors. Regarding M'lntosh, that patient was admUted on the 10th May. 1877. At the time of his admission, I received a communication from the Resident 'Magis* trate of Piotan> ' ' (The complainant objected - to this subject being pursue l, saying that if it were Dr. Franoe ' might And himself in r the Supreme Court to defond an aofcion for libel. After argument, the 'Oommueion ruled that with regard to this olass of evidence it.was admissible to show, the b*Mfid— -of the surgeon who .received, the communication, but they 'would not for a moment huppose, or allowit to b» fttppowd, that it WM Jais duty to be bound in any wov by such a communication— 4 Communication not con* templatod by the Act, and therefore an ea joitftt statement of, a DorsoiL *aoti**uL.-4**i ail M'lntosh I thought he would recover oftfev a few weeks' rest. He-wto tfiot sftne; ht} was excitable, and used strange expression?* It was, however, his history by whioh X 1 Was guided rather than what I aottuklly aaifoilpdlf {. examination. , • «•¦' [Left sitting.], „ ,^ d l