A MURDER CHARGE.

Evening Star, Issue 14636, 4 August 1911, Page 10

A MURDER CHARGE.

| In the Auckland.Police Court yesterday I Martha.' Jane o"Shaughn©ssy was charged \ with the murder of Klsic Alexandra .Hoi-' land. I " Mr Mays . (Crown . Prosecutor) ,faid the , deceased,' "accompanied; far a raari.'named - James Warner, went to within a few "yards of the house occupied by Mrs O'Shaugh.nessy en Monday night, June 12.. Warner went away, and the deceased, who was carrying a" dretss basket, walked on. That vai' the last occasion on which she was seen alive outside of accused's house. The story told by the inmates of the house- was that deceased went there; shortly after 11 o'clock p.m., not on the Monday, bur. on Tuesday, Juno'l3. and was then carrying a dress*basket. She asked to be admitted'. Mfs'-Ha*.eell opened the door to her, elio "said/ and then went away, and Mb Holland wandered into a bedroom, went to bed, and died within an hour. That was the explanation given to the police by tho inmates of tho house. Of course, taat storv was untrue on the face of it, and "could be disproved Without any difficulty at all;'"but it was not so-easy-to prove what actually took place. It. was perfectly clear that the woman died of blood-j*>i«>n-ing caused by the performance upon her of ail illegal operation, and that she died about midnight on Tuesday, June 15. Medical evidence went to -show strongly that the operation which caused her death could have taken place on the Monday night, and that death could have occurred, on the Tuesday. The post mortem examination showed that an illegal operation had been performed, and clumsilv performed. No one except the accused could sav at what hour that operation was performed, but the medical men would iav that it was not only possible, but probable, that the opsration was performed on the Monday night. Had the matter rested there it would have been bad enough, but it was quite clear that some person, at the moment of deatn or immediately afterward*, placed per-chloriue of mernirv in deceaseds mouth. There was corrosion or. the mouth, lips, and tin oat. and tho prosecution claimed know now who put the poison in the deceased's mouth, and why it was done. The position, shortly put, was tna-t the woman had been murdered in the house Tho prosecution held that the principal person, and the person who performed the j operation, was tho accused. After medical evidence had been given, the hearing of the case was adjourned till to-dar. . -at The other accused persons—-Mrs Hartley. Mrs Hassell. and J. E. 0 Shaughnessy—were remanded.