SENSATIONAL CASE

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVI, Issue 10716, 9 October 1920, Page 9

SENSATIONAL CASE

application to strike doctors from roll

SEQUEL TO STRANGMAN SEDUCTION SCANDAL

ALLEGED COMPLICITY OF WELLINGTON MEDICOS

An application for orders removing the names of Dr Francis Wallace Mackenzie and'Dr Henry Arthur Herbert Claridge from the ■, register of medical practitioners in New Zealand was made yesterday to tho Full Court, which was comprised of His Honour Sir Bassett Edwards, Mr Justice Chapman, and Air Justice Herdman. Tho action was brought under tho Medical Practioners Act ,1914, by tho New Zealaind Medical Board with tho consent of tho Attorney-General. Mr P. S. K. Maeassey, of tho Crown Law Office, appeared for the Medical Board, Mr C. P. Skerrott, K.C., and Mr Arthur Fair, for Dr Mackenzie, and Mr H. F. O'Leary for Dr Claridge. Mr T- M. AVilford watched the case on behalf of Howard Nattrass and Edith Kathleen Strangnmn. hearing, APPLICATION MADE AND REFUSED. Mr Skerrett asked that the proceedings be heard- in private, and in sup-' port quoted section 22 of the Act to show that it did not require the evidence to he taken in open court. There was no statutory direction that such an application should ho heard in open court, whereas there were very grave reasons why , it should not he so heard. “I am not sure that the publicity given in these cases is not a safeguard against the commission of offences,” said Mr Justice Edwards. Mr Skerrett pointed out that _ m making the request ho was not acting in the interests of his client, but for the girl, who had no locus standi. The court conferred for some time, and finally Air Justice Edwards said: “We are of opinion that the public are too deeply interested in this matter to justify us in departing from the ordinary rule and that these matters should he heard in public. We have considered what has been said in regard to the girl, and we rely upon the Press to exercise a proper discretion as to what they publish.” THE CHARGES DETAILED. ALLEGED GRAVE IMPROPRIETY. The application in respect of ' Dr Mackenzie was made upon the grounds that the said Francis Wallace Mackenzie, on the 7th day of March, 1919, committed a grave impropriety in a professional respect, in that ho conspired with one, Howard Nattrass, the seducer of one, Edith Kathleen Strangman, being then eighteen years and three months of age, and being a patient under the' care of the said Francis Wallace .Mackenzie, to ‘ take the said Judith Kathleen Strangman out of the custody of her parents and deliver her over .to tho said Howard Nattrass; and in that on the date aforesaid he, the said Francis Wallace Mackenzie, did in pursuance of such design by deception, induce the mother of Hie said Edith Kathleen Strangman. to take her to, and leave her at, Nurse Vickers’s Private Hospital, m Brougham street, Wellington; and in that late at night on the date aforesaid, with the aid of one, Henry Arthur Herbert Claridge, of Wellington, medical practitioner, he, the said Francis Wallace Mackenzie, took the said Edith Kathleen Strangman from the said hospital without tho knowledge or consent of her parents, or consent of the matron of the said hospital, and delivered her to her seducer, the said Howard .Nattr;|;s. The ohargo against Dr Claridge was that he also conspired with Howard Nattrass, and that he assisted Dr Mackenzie in abducting the girl. Mr Justice Herdman: Were criminal proceedings taken . against Nattrass? Air Maeassey; No. The parents nrocecded for habeas corpus, and subsequently took action against Nattrass for damages. In respect of this latter action, a compromise was reached, Nattrass paying damages. A SENSATIONAL CASE THE FACTS REVIEWED. “These proceedings arise out of a case in the Alagistrate’s Court that created public interest and indignation,” said Air Alacassey, in opening. “I propose to review tho facts. Some 18 months ago, an attempt was made by Howard Nattrass to take a young lady named Edith Strangman from her parents’ house against tho will of her parents. She was then just over 18 years of ase and was living with her father and mother in Hay street, near Wellington College. -Miss Strangman was employed toy tho Nattrass and Harris Motor Co., Ltd., of Wellington. Howard Nattrass. was the manag-ing-director. Nattrass, a married man, seduced Alias Strangman and she became pregnant about the month of November or December, 11918. This fact was not known to her parents until tho middle of February, 1910. It appears that about the end of January, 1919, Miss Strangman consulted Dr. Alackenzie unknown to her parents, and telephoned' to her mother to come down to his rooms, which she did. Alackenzie there informed her that she had adenoids and must have an operation performed, and , desired her to fix a date to take her to the Brougham street Private Hospital. However, no date was arranged uj) to this point, and the Strangman family had become a happy and united family.” PURSUIT OF THE GIRL. “The next thing that happened was that on February. 4th, 1919,” he continued, “Aliss Strangman stayed away from 'home all night. The ~ parents called oniNattrass next day and asked whore sho was. Ho said he did not know. They then said they would go to the police. Aliss Strangman and a Miss Knight had gone to Napier ana Hastings, .and Air Strangman wont after them by train. Nattrass went by motor-car and picked up tho twt, ladies and went to Alount Egmont. Strangman went after them post baste, but missed them, and they returned to Wellington about February 11th. On the following day. Strangman wont to Nattrass’s office and insisted upon taking his daughter home, but Nattrass refused, and it was only by means of going to the police that he succeeded in getting his daughter home. About one week

later the daughter complained of her nose and saw Dr. Alackenzie, who said she should have an operation. He said sho was pregnant and suggested sho should be examined by Dr. Claridge. A few days afterwards, she was examined by Claridge, who stated that sho bad been pregnant for three and a half months. On Alarch 7th, Dr. Alackenzie called at tho Strangman house and said to Airs Strangman, ‘What about that nasal operation ? Bring the girl to my surgery at 1 p.m.’ Ho wanted Dr. Claridge to examine her again. Airs Strangman took the girl there; Claridge. Alackenzie, and Nattrass (the latter unknown to Airs Strangman) being present. it is suggested that here a scheme was arranged to get tho girl away from her parents and hand her over to Nattrass, her seducer. Aiackenzio told Aliss Strangman to take her daughter to Aliss Vivkers’s Private Hospital, Brougham street, at 8 p.m., and Alackenzie made, tho necessary arrangements with tho matron for the admission of Aliss Strangman. The mother duly left the girl at the hospital at 8 p.m. ALLEGED ABDUCTION: A SENSATIONAL CHASE.

Alackenzie, ■: Claridge, and Nattrass met at ClaridgeV'house, and the three proceeded in Nat trass’s car to tho Brougham street hospital at 11.30 p.m. the same day,’’ counsel went on. “Mackenzie entered first, and spoke to the night nurse, asking for some writingpaper, so that he could write out a prescription. AYhcn the nurse left the room, Alackenzie spoke to Aliss Strangman, and, said, ‘Get on your things; we are taking you away.’ Nurse Rowe returned with .the paper, and Dr Alackenzie'wrote out a., prescription, and asked for a' cup of tea. Ho accompanied the nurse to the kitchen, and then wont to the front door, opened it, and whistled, after which he returned to the kitchen. Dr Claridge entered the house in response to the whistle, and told Aliss Strangman that Nattrass was in a car outside, and they were taking her away to Otaki. She put on a dressing-gown, and went outside without;-anything.' 0n.,, her foot. Nattrase ..drove. Miss Strangman and Claridge to Claridge’s house, where some clothes were obtained for Aliss Strangman, and Nattrass motored her out to Waikanae. The matron, hearing talking in the kitchen at a late hour, got up arid went into tho kitchen. Alackenzie told her that Alisci Strangman had escaped, whereupon tho matron asked him to let tho girl’s parents know. Alackenzie called . at Strnngninriie house : a,t f ; 12' : 'pAri;“;tlfat night, Of ‘ 'Atarchj arwT "said, ‘Your daughter has gone. Sho musthave either walked in her sleep, oi rang up Nattrass,’ Strangman said ho ‘would go for the police,’ and Alackenzie retorted, ‘Leave her alone; she is over age.’ Strangman went off for the police, and Mackenzie ran down the road, pursued by Air Strangman’* other , daughter. Nattrass left AVaikanae, and sent the girl by launch from Island Bay to Picton, then by car to Nelson. The ’ father went across to Neluon, and brought her back. Nattrass missed her, and hired a fast launch, and came across the strait at 28 miles per hour to "Wellington. On Sunday, the day when Nattrass returned, the girl again disappeared, and was in tho South Island with Nattrass. Tho next incident was Nattrass, Alackenzie, and the girl being seen coming out of a picture theatre toy the father The latter knocked NattrasS down, and took the girl’ home. One Sunday in June, 1919, Miss Strangman was al lowed out to go to church, and again disappeared, and Ims not since been r.eon by her parents. It is understood that she got away to America with Nattrass, and is now back in Wellington. DEFENDANTS’ ALLEGED COAL PLICITY.

“Aly submission of facts,” continued Air Alacassey; “are (1), That Nattrass desired to have an abortion procured and sent the girl t,o Alackenzie, who was nofc the family doctor, he being unknown to the family. (2) -After an examination toy Alackenzie the girl waa sent away to have an abortion procured, but as the father went to the police Nattrass became frightened and brought the girl back. (3) Alackenzie under pretext of performing an operation had the girl examined by Claridge, and being satisfied .sho was pregnant, a plan was hatched between Alackenzie, Claridge and Nattrass to get, her out of the control of her parents, and hand her over to Nattrass, which was successfully done by tricking tho parents into the belief that a nasal operation was absolutely essential, whereas in truth and in fact it was never intended to perform such an operation. Now the defence to the motion will bo that Alackenzie and Claridge believed and have sworn that tho parents intended to have an abortion procured on the girl, and in tho interest of the girl they decided to get tho girl away from tho parents’ control and hatid her over to Nattrass, who would look after her and prevent her being aborted. Such a defence is preposterous, because it will be shown that the girls’ parents' are good Catholics; that they were making arrangements with tho parish priest to take her into a home, where tho child could be born, and had also informed the Commissioner of Police of tho condition of their daughter. “I have given notice that 1 intend to call evidence, viva vooo, on oath.” said counsel in conclusion, ‘‘as that course appears to me absolutely essential because my instructions are that Dr Alackenzie toy his sworn statement has committed _wilful and corrupt perjury to save himself from tho fix in which he has placed himself by his diabolical actions, and it will bo necessary, I submit, that the court should have tho witnesses befor them in person to ascertain whether credence can be given to Dr Mackenzie's or Dr Claridge’s evidence. My submission in law is that even if it bo true (and it is denied) that the parents approached Mackenzie and Claridge and asked them to procure an abortion they have brought themselves clearly within section 22 by committing a grave impropriety in a professional respect. While acting and advising tbc mother professionally they so advised and acted for

tiie purpose of taking the girl away from parental control and to place her undei the control of her seducer.”

THE EVIDENCE THE, GIRL’S AIOTHER .TESTIFIES. "Mrs ' Strangman gave evidence on the lines of counsel’s opening address, and in so doing said that on February 4th, 1919, the girl did not return homo at night. U'n the fol. lowing- day she saw the police and Nattrass, and learned that tho girl had gone to Napier. After a few days her daughter returned to Wellington, and Airs Nattrass informed witness that she had seen her riding in a motor-car with Nattrass. , She then saw Sergeant Fahey and they went to the Alidland Hotel and saw Nattrass, and got the girl. The next day Nattrass told her that her daughter was pregnant, and that he would have bad her fixed up if witness had not gone to the police. On Alarch 17th Dr Alackenzie visited deponent’s house and told her that he Lad seen Nurse Vickers and arranged for the admission to the hospital of Edith Strangman for the purpose o£ an operation-for nasal trouble. Later in Hie same day deponent went to Dr Mackenzie’s 'surgery and there saw Dr Mackenzie, Dr Claridge, and her daughter. After tho girl left the boaivital she went to Nelson, but tbo I father got her back. A short time afterwards the girl again disappeared, and with the exception, of but one occasion when she saw her daughter jn Nurse Alurphy’s Private Hospital m Abel Smith street in July, 1919, witness had not since seen her. WITNESS IN TEARS. To Mr Skerrett: I did not find any letters from Nattrass to my daughter. Nurse AUckers found them. , AVhen? —After my daughter left the hospital. Where are they ?—I gave them to my solicitor, Air Haggard. Air Skerrett: Arc you quite satisfied that your first interview with Dr Mackenzie was subsequent to the visit to Napier of your daughter—Yes, How much money did you got from Nattrass? —I didn’t get anything. I was not the plaintiff'. Well, how much did your husband get?—l don’t know; about £370, after expenses bad been paid. Are you sure? I am told the amount was about £6so?—Oh, no, it was not that much. AVo got it for the girl. Whore is the money?—We are keep, ing it for our daughter. It is in the savings bank. At this stage the witness began to cry, and sho told Air Skerrott that he bad no right to ask her questions about money. They had got the money from Nattrass because it was tho only way to punish him. Counsel informed the court that ho would not press tho point then; ho would get tho information later. THE HOSPITAL MATRON. FINDING OF THE LETTERS. Isobcl Vickers, matron of thp Brougham street hospital, said that Edith Strangman was admitted on . tho representation of Dr Alackenzie as a nasal patient. AVhen witness visited the hospital lato tho same night she found Dr Alackenzie there, and that tho patient had disappeared.. It was not unusual for Dr Alackenzie to_ visit tho hospital at a late hour at night. Mr Skerrott: Did you discover some letters after the girl had gone? Yes. AVo sent them to Sir John Findlay. AA’hcn did you find them ? —About two days after sho left. Where?—Under the mattress. To Air O’Leary: Sho did not know anything of Dr Claridge in connection with the matter. AVhy ?—There is no particular reason. None of us accept patients from him. Is it because be is not a member of (Continued on following page.)

tho British Medical Association? — No. You know that he is not a member of tho association? —Yes. Hiavo you anything- against him ■personally?—No, but wo do not accept Friendly Society patients. MR STRANGMAN. EVIDENCE AND CROSS-EXAMIN-ATION. The father of the girl, William Strangman, said that when they got tho girl homo after her visit to Napier in February Nattrass nad visited the house and told them _ that if they hnd not gone to the police ho would hare "had the girl fixed up.” Wit. i ness’s wife told Nattrass that he was Iscoundrel ard ought to bo in gaol 'Nattrass ran away. After tho girl had been taken from tbo hospital, he forced Nattrass to disclose that she was at Nelson, from where he recover, ed her. Witness recovered the sum of £750 from Nattrass by way of dam ages, but after paying expenses only about £3OO regained, and this money had boon placed in tho Savings Bank for his daughter. To Mr O’T.oarv: Prior to February, 1919, he was on friendly terms with Nattrass. At the end of 1918 ho and his daughter went for a motor tour at the expense of Nattrass. . Directly she disappeared early in February he went to tho police. Mr O’Leary: From the time she returned from Hastings until she entered the Brougham street hospital vour daughter remained at home? — That is so. When you went to the police ! on the first occasion you did not know your daughter was pregnant ?—No. And you did not go to tho polices again until after she left the hospital? —No.

When did you first meet Dr Claridge o—Early 0 —Early in March. Will you swear that you did not meet him at an earlier date? —YeDr Claridge will say that, on February 26th or 27th, you met him in Tinakori road, accompanied him to his surgery, told him that your daughter was pregnant, and asked him to perform an operation for which you would pay the sum of £SO. What do you say 'to that?—lt is an absolute falsehood. You sent for Dr Claridge on a Sunday ?—Yes. . For what purpose?—To ascertain how long my daughter was in a certain condition. But Dr Mackenzie had already told you that? —He had told my wife something. Do you know that your wife has told the court that Dr ■ Claridge was sent for to examine the girl to see if sho was strong enough to undergo an operation for adenoids ? —No. _ Then what was your object in sending an urgent call to a doctor on a Sunday afternoon?—! did not regard it as urgent. . ■ Then why send?—The witness did rot answer.

Dr Claridge will say that it was for the purpose of again asking him to-per-form an operation:—That is a falsehood. Mr Skerrett: You hat e told the court that Miss Knight, of Wanganui, was the first to tell you of your daughter’s trouble?—Yes. That was the first' you had heard .of it?—Yes. When you returned to Wellington Nattrass told you your daughter was in trouble? —Yes. : And that if you had not gone to the police he would have had her fixed up ? —Yes. Bv a doctor in the country whom he knew ? —Yes. Then did you understand from that conversation that Nattrass had given up all idea of any such thing?—Witness did not answer the question. THE GIRL’S CONFESSION. “I AM IN TROUBLE.” John William Wolff, a friend of the Strangman family, said that after Edith Strangman returned from tire Hawke’s Bay trip she confessed to his wife that she was in ’ trouble. Edith Strangman asked witness to telephone Nattrass, and ask him to make a clean breast of everything to her parents. He did so, and Nattrass agreed to do as requested. So far as deponent knew, Nattrass had done so. To Mr Skerrett; He did not know whether or not Edith Strongman’s parents know of their daughter's trouble. QUESTION OF JURISDICTION. REMARK BY~MR SKERRETT. ' “It seems to mo the court has no jurisdiction to proceed,” said Mr Skerrett at this stage. Mr Justice Chapman: “I suppose this arises out of some formal proceedings before the Medical Board. Mr Skerrett said he did not desire to disclose his hand just then. He wanted to hear all the evidence in support of the application. Mr Macassoy said he proposed to call formal evidence as to what happened at the board inquiry. Mr Justice Edwards: In view ot what Mr Skerrett has said maybe the evidence will not be purely formal. At this stage the court adjourned until 10 a-m. on Monday.