DR. WILKINS' CASE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 11823, 28 November 1901, Page 3

DR. WILKINS' CASE.

CONCLUSION OF THE TRIAL.

VERDICT OF NOT GUILTY.

The re-hearing of the charge of manslaughter against Dr. John Wilkins was concluded at the Supreme Court yesterday, before His Honor Mr. Justice Conolly and a jury of twelve. The Hon. J. A. Tole appeared for the Crown. Prisoner conducted his own defence.

Mr. Tole called G. T. George, elerk, in the National Bank, who spoke as to the cashing of the cheque given to Mrs. O'Dowd by her husband on the day it was alleged prisoner performed an illegal operation upon her (Mrs. O'Dowd). This concluded the case for the prosecution.

When prisoner was challenged he said he did not want to give evidence himself. He had already been examined on one or two occasions. At this stage prisoner leaned over the dock-railing and consulted with Mr. W. R, Bloomfield.

His Honor wanted to know who it 'was instructing prisoner. Mr. Bloomfield explained that Mr. Button, prisoner's solicitor, had asked him to do so.

His Honor said that was all right. When he asked the question he was not aware who it .vas, and he could not allow outsiders to instruct the prisoner. The prisoner intimated his intention of calling witnesses. In opening his case he merely asked the jury to return a verdict according to the evidence, and said if they did he would be perfectly satisfied. The first witness called and examined by prisoner was Walter H. Burton, machinist, living at Victoria Avenue, Mt. Eden, who stated that on May 15 last (the day when it was alleged Mrs. O'Dowd visited Dr. Wilkins) he went to Dr. Wilkins' surgery at twenty minutes past twelve, and left at twenty minutes to three. Except once to answer the bell in the waiting-room Dr. Wilkins did not leave the surgery while witness was there, and then he (the accused) was only absent about a minute. Witness had tendered his evidence voluntarily. Alfred Ernest McClusky, in the Permanent Militia, deposed that at about five minutes past one on May 15 last he went to prisoner's surgery. There was another man there, and witness believed it was the last witness.

Steven Martin, master blacksmith, residing at Devonport, said in May last witness had in his employ a man named Lister, who was off work on the 15th of that month.

John B. Lister, blacksmith, living in Victoria-street, stated he consulted prisoner in May last. Oh Wednesday, the 15th of that month, he went to prisoner's rooms, at about half-past one or a-quarter to two. Prisoner said he was engaged, and asked witness to wait. There was nobody in the room when witness arrived, but a veiled lady came in shortly after. Witness left the rooms at about ten minutes past three. No other lady came to the rooms when witness was there.

Eva Fletcher, a married woman, said she used to attend at prisoner's surgery on Mondays and Wednesdays. She remembered Wednesday, May 15. tin that day she went to prisoner's rooms at about a quarter to two. She had on a thick black veil. The last witness was in the room when she arrived. No person came to the surgerv while witness was in the waitingroom. Witness went into the consultingroom after Lister. She left at twenty minutes past three, and while she was there Dr. ilkins did not leave the consultingroom. The evidence of G. Freeman Martin, of Fiji, given at the first trial, was read by the judge. Witness said his eyes were tested by prisoner on May 15 last. Witness arrived at the surgery between twenty minutes past three and half-past three, and he and prisoner left the surgery together at ten minutes to four. During that time he did not see any woman come to the surgery. This concluded the case for the defence. Before beginning his address to the jury, prisoner said not being a- lawyer he had no doubt given His Honor a great deal of annoyance, and he apologised for it. His Honor: Very good. I accept it, and that is past and gone. Prisoner then read a lengthy address to the jury. He contended that he should have been present when the so-called confession was made by deceased to Dr. Lowe and Mr. O'Dowd, as his name had been mentioned in the matter. Witness should also have bc«n warned to attend the postmortem, as was the custom all over the world. He had not been asked to be present on either occasion, and the jury could draw their own conclusions. Prisoner laid considerable stress upon the fact that at the post-mortem, examination the doctors did rot find any traces of an instrument having been used, and also upon the fact that the doctors had agreed that the appearances they observed were consistent with abortion —natural or otherwise. Prisoner devoted a good deal of time to showing that the proper thing to do in a case of incomplete abortion was to make it complete. He asked the jury to concentrate their attention on two questions: First, was Mrs. O'Dowd's death caused by an illegal operation? and second, was that operation done by the prisoner? He considered there was not sufficient evidence of tin illegal operation to deprive a man of honour and liberty, and he felt sure the jury would also concur in this opinion when they considered the evidence. Prisoner quoted from medical authorities to show probable causes of an abortion other than criminal. Turning to May 15, prisoner urged that the witnesses lie had produced had so overlapped each other, so far as time was concerned, that it was impossible for deceased to have come to his surgery that afternoon without being observed, by some of them. He asked the jury to consider whether the alleged death-bed confession of deceased was a voluntary state-. ment, and suggested that a woman was not always responsible for nor conscious of what she said in the state in which the deceased was at that time. When Dr. Lowe went into the room he said, " So you have been to Dr. Wilkins?" What was more natural than that a woman in such agony should say "Yes" to his name, or that of any other doctor suggested to her? Prisoner pointed out that when Mrs. O'Dowd was first asked if she had been to Dr. Wilkins she denied it. Which statement were they to believe? He reminded the jury that when Mr. O'Dowd suggested to call in a doctor he asked his wife who she would have, and she replied that she did not know any. What would have been more natural, if he (prisoner) had ; so recently performed an operation upon her, than that she should have sent for him first, because he would know all about it, and also because she would not want any other doctor to know what had been done to her? Prisoner suggested it was quite possible for the deceased herself or one of her intimates to have procured abortion. Such cases were well known to every medical man. He contended that she was in such agony, and was crying out for chloroform, so clamantly, that she would have answered any question suggested to her so long as she got the chloroform. Prisoner concluded his address (which lasted three-quarters of an hour) by asserting his innocence of any connection with the death of Mis. O'Dowd, and drawing attention to the degradation and loss he had sustained by reason of the charge. He left his case in the hands of the jury.

His Honor occupied an hour and five minutes in his summing up, which was not favourable to the prisoner. In the course of his remarks the Judge pointed out that Chief-Detective Grace and Detective Herbert had stated (and their statement _ had not been contradicted) that when they_ interviewed the prisoner on the day Mrs. O'Dovvd died, he had said he did not remember treating a person of the description given by the detectives, but remembered treating a mysterious young woman, who gave her address as Remuera, for womb trouble. Where, asked His Honor, was that young woman? It could not have been Mrs. Fletcher, who was well known to prisoner, and prisoner had called witnesses who accounted for his time on May 15, between twelve and about four, and they swore that no other woman came in during that time. Prisoner jumped up excitedly in the dock and denied that he said anything or the kind attributed to him by the detectives. It was a fabrication.

His Honor: Why did you not contradict it when they were in the box? Prisoner: You prevented me aim? questions.

His Honor told prisoner if he was not quiet he would have to be removed. Prisoner: Well. I will sit quiet, but I can't sit here and hear such things. His Honor went carefully over *he evidence, and concluded his summing j»p at five minutes to three, at which time the jury retired. Two hours later they returned to Court with a verdict of not guilty, and Or Wilkins was discharged from custody. There was no attempt at a demonstration on the part of the public when the verdict was announced by the foreman.