THE SYDNEY BIGAMY CASE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 12931, 29 July 1905, Page 6

THE SYDNEY BIGAMY CASE.

A NEW ZEALAND MARRIAGE.

A SENSATIONAL STORY.

Sydney, July 22. At the Newtown Police Court yesterday, before Mr. Macfarlane, S.M., Lenora Howard Drummond Jamas, or Baker, was charged with having, on April 1, 1885, at Wellington, New Zealand, married Henry William James, and then did, on December 13, 1900, at Narromine, in New South Wales, marry Herbert James Baker, the said Henry William James 'being then alive. Mr. James W. Abigail appeared for the prosecution.

Mr. Abigail said it would be necessary for him to briefly outline the case,' as it possessed most remarkable features. He proposed to prove that the accused was married to Henry William James on April 1, .1885, at Wellington', New Zealand, by the Regis-trar-General. The accused lived with her husband, James, in Wellington for over 12 months, and a son was born to them, who was christened Reginald Drummond James. They then removed from Wellington to Napier, where the accused and James lived' together as man and wife lor over eight years. Two other children were born, named respectively Linda and Lily; the lastnamed girl had this week been concerned in the prosecution of Constable Baker •ou a capital charge, which ended in the complete vindication of Baker. James had an employee in his shop at Napier named Joseph Barry, with whom he accused his wife (the present accused) 'of misconduct, which brought about domestic dissension, followed 'by a separation between James and lht> accused. It would be shown that some 10 months after James left his wife,' she and Bsrry, with the two children, Reggie and Linda, came to Sydney by the steamer Westralia, and after living at various places as Mr. and Mrs. Bentley, finally ' opened a confectionery shop in King-street, Newtown, and traded there in the name of Bentlcy, where they lived together as man and wife. Some' 10 months later the shop was closed, and the two children were turned adrift. Finally, through the kindness of a Mr. Bell, und the Children's Protection Department, they were boarded out to Mr. | and Mrs. Sargent. Barry and the accused, as. Mr. and Mrs. Bentley, then occupied positions as a married. couple in various places in the country. Finally Barry went to South Africa with one of the contingents. and on December 13, 1900, at Narromine (N.S.W.), the accused married the prosecutor, Herbert James Baker, a police constable. At this time, counsel alleged, she well knew that her first husband was alive, and was living at Waverley, near Napier, New Zealand. Further, she was in constant communication with her husband, James, after she was married to Baker, and was receiving money from him for the support of the children. She went further, and obtained 'the custody of (he child Lily, by writing to her husband to send her over to Sydney. In New Zealand the accused had a child, of which Barry, alias Bentley, was the father. In answer to these charges the accused had set up a, defence that she was not married-to James; that she never was in New Zealand, . and that the children were not-hers; and that her sister was the wife of James. 'Edwin Quarterly, contractor, Newtown, said he. first met the accused seven or eight years ago at Newtown. ■ Witness did about £40 worth of work to her shop, and the only payment he could get was pawn tickets, for a ring (produced). Mr. Abigail asked that the ring 'be impounded, as he would prove that it was given to the accused by a doctor in New Zealand. ' •

: Witness did not see the accused again, until about a month ago, when she came t'J his shop and asked him if he could not identify her as Mrs. Bentley's sister. He told her at once that she was Mrs. Beutley, and he- was positive that she was the Mrs. Beiitley that lie got the ring from in pay-; ment for his work. William Henry James, now residing at Waverley, near Napier, New Zealand, stated that the accused, whom he had known for 20 years, was his wife. He first met her as Miss Nellie Stone. She was then employed at house and parlour maid at the house of the Hon. Mr. Rolleston, Minister for Mines in. Now Zealand ' After keeping company with her. for six or eight months:they were married.. The accused, was married in the name of Lenora Howard Druinmond. She told witness .that Skmo was an ■ assumed name. Witness had seen the children in Sydney 3nd was positive the accused' was their mother.

The 'Accused.:. You are the.father, but I am not their mother. ' , To the Accused: Witness said that he did not first meet his ■wife in Old Drury Lane Theatre, London. The Accused, to the Jiench: "That man's wife was a married woman with four children. I know all about him, but I never saw him in my life before he came to Sydney on this occasion." Herbert James Baker, a police constable stationed at Petersham, said he had known the accused for live years. She made certain 'representations to him, and witness obtained permission from the Police department, and married her in the Church of England at Narromine. He then found out that her representations were false. When .witness first'met her she took the name of Beutley. They were not married above a few days when he found' her writing a letter. The letter van something like this: — "My darling, Will you send me money to tike me out of this. I married this silly fool of a policeman out of spite. He did me an injury, and although he loves me, I married him for revenge." After they were married a little while, his wife got a letter* from the State Department, stating that some provision would have, to be made for two more children. • This was, done, but it was the first time witness knew. she had any more children. Accused had told witness that she had 'been in every part of the world except China, and .that whilst in America she shot a man. She had been on the stage, and travelled a good deal with a theatrical troupe. In India, she" said she contracted black fever, and to this day she had marks on her back between the shoulders, which she said were caused by the fever.' Witness left her in December last, and- them she got a maintenance order, which witness applied to set aside in February last. ! The further hearing was adjourned until Tuesday.