AN OPEN VERDICT.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 889, 15 March 1889, Page 29

AN OPEN VERDICT.

The inquest into the circumstances attending the death of Martha Astridge, at Newtown, on Friday last, was continued by Mr Robinson, R.M. (District Coroner), and a jury of six at the Newtown Hotel on Monday afternoon. The police were represented by Inspector Thomson. Mr Jellicoc (by his clerk) watched the proceedings on behalf of Mrs Thorpe. Albon Charles Astridge, husband of the deceased, continued his evidence as follows : —My wife went out a third time, saying she was going to see Mrs Thorpe. I can’t remember the date. She returned home about 10 o’clock at night (having been away two hours). I asked her if she had been at Mrs Thorpe’s again, and she said yes, I asked her what Mrs Thorpe said, and sho said Mrs Thorpe was greatly annoyed at her coming again sq soon, remarking that ‘ ■ she (his wife) hadn’t patience to waitthat Mrs Thorpe then took her upstairs to the bedroom, and introduced a sponge ; and that dulling the operation she suffered such great pain that Mrs Thorpe had to The operation was then finished, and Mrs Thorpe said the sponge was to bo kept in its place for three or four days, and that if sfie could not then remove it she was on no account to go to her mother-in-law, or to a doctor, but to come to her (Mrs Thorpe). On the fourth day after this my wife told mo she had succeeded in removing the sponge, and destroyed it byburying it in the garden. About a week or eight days later she again left the house to go to Mrs Thorpe’s, and was away an hour, or an hour and a half. When she came back I asked her “ what did she say ?” and my wife said she had inserted another sponge ; and that owing to the pain of tfie operation Mrs Thorpe had to stop occasionally. The sponge was to be removed after tfie third day, which was done on Monday (my wife having been to see Mrs Thorpe on the Friday). Oil the Monday evening I went over to my brother’s, opposite, for about 15 minutes, and when I re-entered the house I met my wife in the passage, supporting herself by the wall. When I asked her what was the matter, she said she was in great pain, having just succeeded in removing the sponge. She said she had attempted to remove it twice before on that day, and once on the previous night, and that she had buried it in the garden. I assisted her into bed. On the following Sunday (last Sunday week) my wife was poorly, and I got her breakfast. At about midday she was getting better, and said that “it was all right now.” (Here the witness described the condition of his wife and the circumstances of the miscarriage, whichoccurredatabout 2 o’clockthat afternoon). The body of the child was formed. I buried it in tlie garden. . My wife then went to bed, and never left it alive, since she died on the following Friday. On Monday afternoon I tried to gee Dr Porter, but was unable to find him, and in the evening Mrs Patterson, a midwife, came to the house and saw my wife. She told me to give her brandy, put hot poultices on her stomach, and wrap her in a blanket. Dr Porter came at about 9 o’clock and prescribed for my wife. As he did not come next morning (Tuesday) when I sent for him, I then got, Dr Collins, who came to see her between 4 and 5, and continued to attend her until her death. 1 got a neighbour (Mrs Conder) to

attend my wife, being unable to get a regular nurse. Dr Porter deposed that he went tS> see Mrs Astridge on the night of the 4th instant, and was informed that she had miscarried. The bleeding had stopped, and witness prescribed, and agreed with Mrs Patterson’s treatment. He said he would call on the following day. He was sent for before he was able to leave his surgery, and received a second message that he need not come, as Mr Astridge was going to send for his own doctor. The deceased was very low, and in pain when he saw hei’, but not worse than would be expected in the circumstances. Understood distinctly that he was just called in on an emergency because they were unable to get their family doctor, and that he was not to attend the case regularly. Nothing was suggested to him as°to the miscarriage being otherwise than natural. Mary Ann Patterson, certificated midwife, deposed to attending on the_ deceased on the Monday night, and giving instructions as to her treatment. Heard nothing of the particulars of the miscarriage. _ Sarah Ann Astridge, wife of George Astridge, and sister-in-law of the deceased, deposed that she was aware of what happened to her sister-in-law on Sunday week. About six weeks’ ago deceased told witness she was pregnant, and had been to Mrs Thorpe to take away the child She described the operation performed on her (with a glass instrument, witness understood), and said the first time it didn’t hurt her, but the second time it was like tearing her inside open. She also described the use of the sponges. On Monday week deceased sent for her and said she had miscarried. Saw her every day after that till her death, but never had any conversation with her upon the subject. Deceased had told her in the first place that her husband objected to her o-oing to Mrs Thorpe. By the foreman'! My sister-in-law said she was to pay Mrs Thorpe L2. Harriet Conder, wife of Joseph Conder, living in Green-street, deposed that on Tuesday, the sth instant, she saw the deceased, and subsequently attended her until her death. Deceased was in an excited and troubled state all the time. 33y the foreman : Deceased never mentioned Mrs Thorpe’s name to me, but spoke of “a wicked woman several times, and begged her friends not to go near her. When she made these observations she appeared to understand all that jvas said to her. Georye Henry Astridge, brother of deoeased’s! husband, deposed that in consequence of hearing from the nurse that a sconce was wanted which had been buried, he had on the previous evening du<v in his brother s garden, and K /p&e of sponge buried about, 6m below the surface, in loose ground. Tie sponge produced, with a looped silk thread attached to it, was die one he found. He showed it to Dr Collins, and had had custody of it since, till he sent A to the police that morning. Dr Collins, recalled, deposed that articles called sponge tents were sometimes used. By soaking them in mucilage they were compressed into a very small space and then inserted. The mucilage becoming moist the sponge dilated and forced the neck of the uterus open so as to admit an instrument. The sponge invariably had a loop attached to it for the purpose of withdrawing it. It was not much used because of the danger of it, and it was a sponge of the same sort as the one produced. If these sponges were used ip „vr were removed within six hours. _ By B snaAor Thomson : 1 should consider it very dangerous to leave the sponge m for three days. The sponge was _ absolutely certail 1 to produce » .mscamage, if- was nronerlv introduced. If the use of unTstmKtm fl.e first place fa.led to procure abortion the sponge would probably he used.. It wouln be ous then than if it had been ns ‘ , • Any instrument introduced or class or other material, would be i±k& y cause abortion. Had since seen gie uterus, the neck of which was sufficiently, dilated to allow the sponge to enter. Had : not, as yet, made a chemical examination of the sponge. „ : Harriot Fountain, wife or William; George Fountain, and mother ol de- : ceased’s husband, deposed that she saw. her daughter-in-law on the afternoon of Tuesday, the sth instant (after the mis-j carriage). Deceased complained of pains : in her 3 hack and stomach, but said nothing as to what had led to her miscarriage. She was unconscious, and was not conscious until nine hours before her death. Witness saw her twice every day. J ust before her death she got quite sensible, and her talk was of the Lord all the day Witness asked her whether she thought she would die, and deceased said . No Witness said, “You are very ill, indeed, Martha ; you are very near death. bne deceased said, “ I might get better, but I don’t think I shall.” This was all the evidence. Inspector Thomson said it was competent for Mrs Thorpe to give evidence, if she wished. Mrs Thorpe, asked whether she wished to give evidence, said “ Noj I prefer waiting till my lawyer is here. . An adjournment of a few minutes was made until Mr Jellicoe arrived. . Mr Jellicoe wished to address the jury. His Worship ruled that he could not do so seeing that the inquiry was simply a preliminary one, in which no person was Cl, M?Jellicoepointed out that in an inquiry

into a fire, in which a verdict of arson was returned against Hind and Collins, counsel were present and addressed the jury. His Worship then allowed Mr Jellicoe to address the jury, on the distinct understanding that the jury were to take anything in the shape of direction from him (Mr Robinson). * Mr Jellicoe, addressing the jury, asked whether they were satisfied that the death of deceased was the result of any criminal act. The doctors, having held a postmortem examination, could not say that the death was to be attributed to a criminal act inflicted upon lier by any person. He pointed out tbat tlie wbole of the history given was based on the story told by deceased to her husband told at a time when slie was in a condition in which women, as was well known, said most extraordinary things. Was it reasonable to think that the husband would allow Ins wife to do such an act ? If it were, so, the husband was a party to the crime ; and they therefore had tlie statement of a party to the alleged crime giving evidence of a statement the other party was. said to have made. It was open to the jury return an open verdict, and to decline to decide what person, if auy, was guilty of a criminal act on the deceased ; and m that case the police would investigate the matter, and justice would be done. Mrs Thorpe, very properly, did not give evidence, preferring to wait till what was apparently a charge against her was formulated. The jury must bear m mind that they had here in Mrs Thorpe a most respectable woman who had . lived for some time amongst them, against whom no one could say a charge had ever been made; and before they allowed the character of their neighbour and fellowtownswoman to be assailed, they would, he believed, require better evidence as to the cause of death and to connect her with it. He invited them to return an open verdict, leaving any possible charge against Mrs Thorpe to be made in the usual way. , ~ . „ His Worship addressed the jury. He pointed out that the evidence as to abortion having been committed must he.taken with great caution, and much of it was not what would be accepted in a judicial court. The deceased told her husband, sister and others that she was going to Mrs Thorpe, and subsequently that she had been. The deceased had said to Dr Collins that she hoped none of her friends would go to that horrid woman, but no name was mentioned. No statement had been made by her with the full knowledge and belief that she was going to die ; and such statements, to be receivable in a court, must be made with such knowledge and belief and must be in respect of the death. The whole of the allegations against Mrs Thorpe were based upon statements that were not evidence ; and therefore he. did not see that it was possible for the jury to connect Mrs Thorpe or any other person with the death. It was competent for a coroner’s jury to find on knowledge they had, but it was not usual ; it was usual for them to find on evidence. He did not suggest that they should find that the deceased’s death w r as due to natural causes, for it was evident that there had been malpractice on the part, either of the woman herself or some other person. There was sumcient, therefore, for the jury to affirm that something had been done ; and the verctiet be thought they might find firstly that death resulted from blood poisoning caused by a miscarriage ; and secondly, they should consider whether the miscarriage was occasioned by natural or other causes. An open verdict, as Mr Jellicoe had said, left it open to the police to take any action they thought necessary. , ... The jury, after deliberating for half an hour, returned a verdict that the deceased Martha Astridge died of septicaemia in consequence of having suffered a miscairiage ; that there was grave suspicion that such miscarriage was brought a.bout by unnatural means, but how or by what means there was not sufficient evidence to show. --