CHRISTCHURCH MYSTERY

New Zealand Times, Volume LII, Issue 12116, 18 April 1925, Page 5

CHRISTCHURCH MYSTERY

INTERESTING EVIDENCE IN MOUAT CASE

WHAT A LITTLE GIRL SAW

BLOOD STAINS FOUND BY ANALYST

Evidenoe in the charge against Frederick Peter Mouat of the murder of his wife, Ellen Louise Mouat, was continued in the Magistrate’s Court, Christchuroh, yesterday. As the case proceeds, it is apparent that the Crown is confronted by one of the most sensational mysteries in the Dominion's police annals. It is expected that the evidenoe for the Crown will be oonoluded to-day.

(By Telegraph.—Special to “Times.”)

CHRISTCHURCH, April 17,

The features of the proceedings today. in the charge against Frederick Peter Jlouat of having murdered his wife. Ellen Louise Mouat, on or about February 20th, were the evidence of the analyst and biochemist, who contended that the stains on the bed and clothing and in the bath-pipe were bloodstains, and the deposits on the hack of the dining-room grate animal matter. There

was material from the hath with the appearance of being flesh. Further, there was evidence of neighbours and friends identifying all the missing woman’s clothes and false teeth, and testimony regarding the

fires in and out side the house

Perhaps one of

the most important witnesses was a little girl, who saw Monat patiently poking the diningroom fire and using a disinfectant. The Crown built up a damning case in support of the presumption of dismemberment. The court sat all day, and adjourned till to-morrow, when the last four witnesses will be taken. Again the court was crowded, hut the crowd were spared the gruesome bone exhibits, and the skeleton was neatly shrouded in a corner. Mouat was composed throughout. Mr Wyvern "Wilson, S.M., was on the bench. Mr. A. T. Donnelly, Crown Prosecutor, appeared for the Crown, with ChiefDetective Gibson, and Mr C. S. Thomas and Mr W. J. Sim appeared for Monat. ARTICLES PLEDGED BY MOUAT The first witness to-day, Ernest Friedlander, pawnbroker, said that at 4 p.m. on February 20th a man giving the name of F. Mouat, 10, Beckford' road, came to his shop and sold him a gold wristlet, watch, expanding bracelet, and gold nugget brooch for which he was given £ll Os. On the same day he also pledged a diamond and sapphire pin for £1 and other articles were straightout purchases. On March 2nd the articles were handed to the detectives. onat. said that he wanted *he pit; back. In Noveni-; her Mouat pledged his watch and! chai l. j

Detective Charles Knudsen said that on March 4th he packed; up at Mouat’s home a box of women’s clothing (produced) in a box. He included a pair of corsets, the only pair in the house There were eight pairs of women's footwear, and there was a blue costume buttoning up at the neck. He found two sets of false teeth in the house on the same date. They were on the mantelpiece in the front bedroom in a box having no lid. A woman’s handbag, containing a small gold chain, two pearl earrings and two 3d pieces was found in the house, and in a shaving cabinet, in the bathroom, there was a ring. George Merrett. father of Mre Mouat, told the court that the last time he saw his daughter was on February 16th at his house. He saw Monat on February 23rd at Mrs Edwards’s horns in Worcester street. “1 said—‘What's up with Nellie?’ ” and Monat replied that ehe had gone away on Friday morrdng. Witness said that it was a funny thing for her to go away like that. Jlouat replied Brat they had arranged to go to see Mount's mothir hut witness thought, it queer that his daughter should go alone. Mouat said that he had gone to the train on Saturday to meet her but. she was not there. In answer to questions Jlouat said that he had not much money so witness lent him £l, and sail that if it was not enough he would meet Jvfouat at the trayi and give him £5. Jlouat said: “I will make the money do.” Later he received a telegram from Mouat from Oamara stati lg that Mrs Mouat was not at his mother’s. The barman at the Rotherfield Hotel, James Heeney, stated that he worked for Mouat for 15 months when Mouat was licensee of the Glenavy Hotel. He often visited the Jlouats at St. Martiu’s, and sometimes slept in the house. A room had been fitted up for his use. The last time he visited their house was on the night c-f Thursday, February 19th. He and the Mouats had tea together, and afterwardd scent the evening at the house of Mrs Prosser, who lived nearby, and ihen he returned to the hotel. Mouat and his wife were on the best of terms, apparently, and Mouat was always joking. The following evening, about 11.30 o’clock, the licensee of the hotel told him that Mouat wanted a bed and had been hooked for one in witness’s room, which had two single beds. When witness got up next moiring at 7.10 or 7.15 o’clock Mount had gone. He thought Jlouat was in rite bar on -Satinday afternoon hut he was not sure.. He" was in the bar that evening, and again slept in witness’s room on Friday' and Saturday. Nothing was said about Mouat’s reason for being at the hotel. He did not remember any conversation about Mrs Jlouat, but ho had an idea on Saturday i.bat sho was not at home. ON GOOD TERM WITH WIFE On Saturday Mouat said that he was going south on Sunday. He and Mouat had dinner at the hotel and then went to Mouat’s house about 3 o’clock in the afternoon. Mrs Jlouat was not there.

Jlr Donnelly: Did Mouat sav anything about her on Sunday?—No. When did you leave the house on Sunday?—About a quarter past seven W’e had tea there.

Did Jlouat stay at the hotel on Sunday night?—Yes. What time did he come to the room? —About 9.30 o’clock. Ho ■was in bed before me.

When did he get up?—Early. He said that he was going home to get mme things because he %vas going louth. He was back at 8.30 o’clock on Monday evening. He slept at the hotel again, and got up early on Tuesday to catch the express.

Did Jlouat say that he was going to see the Merretts?—Yes. On Saturday he eaidi that he was going to see if Nell was there.

To put the matter generally, he slept in the hotel every night from the night of the party (Thursday) till he left for the south ?—Yes. Was Jlouat the same as usual while he was staying at the hotel? —Yes. How did he and his wife appear to get'on?—All right so far as I could see.

He was a temperate man?—Yes. Witness said that on the following Monday, March 2nd. Jlouat came to the hotel about 7.30 o’clock in the. evening, and said that he had been to his house, and his wife was not there. He went to" bed 1 at 8.30 o’clock, and' witness retired two hours later. He had gone before witness got. up the next day. He had left his overcoat behind.; Witness did 1 not see him again before; ho was arrested.

The magistrate: When yon went to the house on Sunday what rooms were you in?

Witness: On the verandah, and in the dining-room and kitchen.

Thomas Pheloung, drainage contractor, said Mouat was working for him until February 13th, when Jlouat asked for his wages, totalling £5. He said he was going to Oamaru on business. Jlouat said that he would return to work on February 22nd. Witness saw Mouat near the Rotherfield Hotel talking to Heeney. He asked Mouat when he would return to work, and Mouat replied' that he was going to Uamaru or Dunedin. He . was not sure what Mouat said as witness had to catch a tram car.

Mary Eleanor Warlow, married woman, said that Mouat bought the house »n Beckford 1 street about four months ago. On February 19th. she went to collect the rent from. Mouats, and Mrs Mouat handed witness a cheque for £lO. John "Warlow, husband, of the previous witness, said that Monat bought the house in November for £1220 on £IOO deposit and £2 weekly. There was to be a further deposit of £SO on March 27th, 1925. Witness paid an account with the cheque for £lO, hut it was dishonoured. Witness obtained possession of the section on March 31st. 1924. There had been a crop of tomatoes on it that summer, but there were no buildings on it until witness built. Only the usual plumbers’ fires in tins; were on the property at that time, i Witness bought the section from ’a Mr Here. NEIGHBOUR'S STORY Lucy Prosser, married woman, of Beckford road, St. Martin’s, said that she knew the Jlouats since they went to the locality four months age. On February 19th, in the evening, James Heeney and the Mouats visitei’ her home. Heeney left early, and the Mouats at 9.45 p.m. The last witness saw of them was when ehe war itandmg at the front door, and the Jlouats were going out of their gate. Next day, about 12 o’clock, witness was at Mr Bore’s place next door to the Mouats. Mouat went over to tho fence, and said Mrs Mouat had gone to her brother’s place. He said there was a party there, and Mrs Mouat would not he home that night. He added that he would meet Jlrs Monat the next day to go to Dunedin. Witness was surprised as she had expected Jlrs Jlouat over to see her that morning. Mouat went to her place for lunch, and stayed till about 2.30 ,p.m. when, he left to go

home. She next saw ‘-Mouat about 7.15 o’clock on the same evening at the corner of Beckford road. Mouat wont with witness and her daughter to her home. Witness askedi if Mae Jlouat was going away in the morning, and he replied that he was going to see if she was at the train.

Mr Donnelly: Was something said about clothes?—On Saturday there was. He said he would pack a hox of clothes and take it to her. On Friday, February 20th. witness saw a sheet and a blanket on the clothes line. She asked Mouat if he had been washing, and Jlouat said Mre Mouat had washed some articles before sho went away. Mouat was seen by witness hanging the blanket on the line.

About 3 p.m. on Saturday her attention was attracted by smoko coming out of Mouut’a dining-room chimney. Mr Donnelly: What did you do?—I sent -Mrs lew’s daughter down to see if Mrs Mouat was home.

Was sho away long?—About hnlfan hour. Jlouat returned with her.

Did ,rou expect in see Jlouat? —No. I thought ho had gone to Dunedin. I asked him why he had not gone anil k said that Mrs Mount wan not on tho train.

Did he say he had gone to the train?—Ho said that ho looked in the train.

What was said about the fire?—l asked him why ho had a fire and he sold that he was heating water for a bath.

Did you see any other fires in the place at the time?—l saw a small one on Friday near. the fence -by Bere’s place. I saw smoko but not a fire. Witness continued that Jlouat had tea with hen* that afternoon and went away about 6 p.m. On the following day, Sunday, about 4 p.m., Jlouat told her that ho was going to Dunedin at the -beginning' of the week to see if Jlrs Mouat was there. She asked Mlouat if ho had gone to see if Mre Mouat Was at Jlrs Hardy’s or her brother's. He said that thoy would be away for the week-end fishing. Jlouat told her that he .slept;, at the Rotherfield Hotel on Friday night.

RECOGNISED MRS MOUAT’S CLOTHES •

Jlr Donnelly: Did you know what clothes she had?—She showed them to me Most of them were in her bedroom.

Whin did she show you her clothes? ■—At different times. I know what olothes she wore since I knew her. Witness identified the dress and timer- worn by Jlrs Mount at the evening at tho homo of witness.. Mr Donnelly: You visited the house after the disappearance?—There were no frocks or dresses that I knew missing from the house. I saw the blue frock which buttons up to the neck.

How many hats (lid Mrs Mouat have?—A feather toque, a black hat, a red felt and two grey hats. Did you examine tho bed when you were talien there?—Y’es.

Was J he bed on tho 27th the same as when you saw it after Jlrs Mouat had made it?—No; one of the top blankets was under the sheet. Any top sheet on tho bed?—No.

Did you find another sheet?-—I saw Mr Jlerrett find another sheet in the cupboard in the breakfast room. The! sheet was stained hrown. It was not a large stain. The sheet was not quite dry. What teeth did Jlrs Jlouat have? — She had false teeth, two full sets. Did you notice anything about her . *!, p —T'-m.-p was s"-iio green let into teeth at the top. This could he seen when -ho cmiled.

Davie Greig .Prosser, husband of the preceding witness, said that on, Saturday, February 21st, he was at home and saw the chimney in Jlouat’s house smoking. A fair quantity of blue grey smoke was issuing from it. The next afternoon Jlouat visited his house. He rr.tni ioned that he had not found ‘Nell’-' yet. On Friday evening he and his wife had met Mouat in the street and Mouat had said that he wondered where his wife had gone to. DID YOU SMELL ANYTHING Ada Bert, living next door to the Mouats’, said that she had not 1 seen Mrs Mouat after February 20th. On that day, about noon, Jlouat told her and Mrs Pressor, over the fence, that his wife had gone to Panama ’ and would not -be back that evening. They were going, ho said, to Dunedin tho following morning. 'She had packed, her suitcase and he -would take it with Him. The following afternoon she saw Mouat near the fence and said,' “I thought yon had gene to Dunedin to-day.” He replied that he had gone to the train but couldl not see his wife. Witness remarked: “She wouldn’t go without her things,.’,’ That ended the conversation. A fir-s was burning on Mount’s property that day. Mouat asked her and her husband whether she smelled anything as he was burning old potatoes. The smell was the usual smell of burning rubbish. She next saw him on Tuesday, February 24th, when he said that he was going to Dunedin that day. On Saturday smoko was coining from the- diningroom chimney of Jlouat’s house.

Albert William Bere said Mouat’s section had belonged to -him and he had sold it in Jlarch, 1924, to the witness Warlow, who had- sold it to Mouat. He had never had a fire upon the section except one to bum the tops of a crop of tomatoes. Ho saw a fire near the lavatory on Saturday, .-February 21st. There had been other fires on the property during the Mouat’s occupation. On February 21st, Mouat asked him if the fire smelled had, as he was burning a lot of rotten potatoes. In answer to Jlr Thomas, witness said he was building a shed at the time close to the Oft dividing fence.

USED JEYES' FLUID A smart little girl of six, Norma Alison Low, whose parents live in Beckford road, said that she remembered being sent by Mrs, Prosser to Mouat’s house. Mouat. answered when, she knocked at the back door. She went inside with him. There was a fire in one room. Mouat sat in a chair and poked it. She saw him put Jeyes’ fluid round the fire. The fluid was in a bottle. She knew it by tho smell, as her mother had some. Mouat told her that he had the Ifire because lie wanted to have a bath. He left the house with her. and thoy went to Mrs Prosser’s, leaving tho fire still burning. Tho little girl said that Mrs Mouat waa not in tho house. Mouat told her “Nell” was not tlierq. The fire had coke and Wood on it, and was not burning very brightly. Jlouat was wearing a slurb and trousers. The day was Saturday. Sho knew it was because Jlr Prosser was at home. In answer to Jlr Thomas, tho child said that she went through the kitchen to the room in which the fire was , burning.

The next, evidence related to Mouat's sojourn on the hills. William George Queree, a quarryman, stated that about 7.40 a.m. on March 9th ho saw the accused lying asleep in tho open above the quarry at St. Martin’s. A little later he went up to tho man and awakened him, telling him that he was in danger from blasting. He said, “All right,” and went farther up the hill. Witness no--1 ticed that he had some tomatoes in his pockets. He next saw Mouat at the bottom of the quarry at 1.30 p.m. He went away. FOUND ON SCULLERY FLOOR Francis William Kelly, railway porter, said that from January 10th to June 2nd, 1924. he was employed at Glenavy and lived at the Glencoe Hotel.' of which Mouat was the licensee; Mr Donnelly: How did Mr and Mrs Mouat get on? —Generally pretty well. Was there any trouble between them ?—Perhaps the "drink. Were there any rows?—l remember two.

Mr Thomas here entered a formal objection to tbe evidence on the ground that it was irrelevant, the alleged incidents having occurred more than a year ago.

Tho objection was noted. Witness said that the first row occurred in the hotel scullery. He found the scullery in darkness.' and the couple lying on the floor. He heard Mrs Mount say, “Let Fred,” but what Mouat said he dici not hear. They got up after a while. The two were lying on the floor tor possibly a quarter of an hour. Witness went to the scullery and asked Mouat for a drink, because ho was sent to stop the row and get Mouat away. -The second row occurred a month or two later. He heard Mouat saying in a passage of the hotel that he had found a bottle of brandy under his wife’s pillow. His words were*: “Fancy having brandy under her pillow,” or something like that. The Mouats’ room faced his. While he was lying in bed he heard a sound of one or two blows, and heard Mouat sav. “Wait till I see you* father.” iHe did not hear Mrs Mouat say anything. v Mr Donnelly: > What was Mouat’s condition on these occasions?—l think be was under the influence of liquor. How did lie behave?—Perhaps he was inclined to get a bit cross.

Mr Thomas: Was he inclined to get a bit cross after one or two liquors?—

Otherwise, be was quite a genial, good chap P^Yes. Cicely Baker, of 14. Beckford road, the house next door to Mouat’s, said she last saw Mrs Mouat on February 19th. On Friday she saw -Jlouat at lunch time going over to the Prosser’s. Onf Saturday she saw him about 9 a.m. in his front garden. She asked him how Mrs Mouat was—she had not seen her tho day before, and thought she had gone away. Mount said that his wife had gone to her father’s place at Papaaui, and that he was -going south. Witness told him she did not think there was a train, hut Jlouat did not rejflv. Between 11.30 and 11.45 a.m. she was cycling along, when- she saw Jlouat talking to a man outside the Waltham Arms Hotel. Ho was not carrying anything, and went along Waltham road and up Wilson’s road. Just after passing Rogers street she saw Mouat walking towards home. Ho was not carrying anything. .That would be between 12.10 p.m. and 12.15 p.m. Witness said to him, “Hullo, you’re hack again.” She reached home just after 12.15 p.m. That afternoon she saw smoke coming out of the dining-room chimney and from rubbish fires in the garden. On Friday, February 20th, when gardening, she saw the 8 a.m. and- 8.30 a.m. tranns pass the corner of Beckford road.

Charles Arthur Baker said he last Saw, Mouat between 12.10 and 12.15 o’clock on Saturday, February 21st, between. Rogers street and Wilson’s i road bridge. Jlrs Baker was with wit. ness. They said “good-day” to Mouat as he passed them. Thomas Harris Yorath, -plumber said that he cut away the whole of the hath' waste pipe and handed it over to De- ; teotive Bickerdike. He cut the pipe j down the middle lengthways. The pipe, was split in Jlr Bickerton’s laboratory.' BLOOD STAINS ON SHEET Dr Robert Jlilhgan, biochemist at Christchurch Hospital, was called. Jlr Donnelly: Did you examine a pillow?—Yes, for bloodtsains. What- did you examine ?—A small brown stained area. I came to the conclusion that blood was present. What tests did you use?—l used several. The witness gave particulars of these. One test failed, that was the Haemin crystal test. Did you examine the blankets? — Yes. . Witness held up a blanket to show that much of the stain was still on the blanket. He concluded, he said, that blood was present in the large stain. There were several smaller stain areas, and the results. of the tests indicated the presence of blood. Again the Haemin crystal test failed. M? Donnelly : What stains were on the sheet? —I examined -several stains, and concluded that blood was present wherever the stains appeared. Jlost ol the stains were faint. The stains don’t look to be of blood, do they ?—To the unpractised eye, no. If the articles were washed would the stains be faint?—That would account for faintness. Is there any doubt in your mind about the results?—None. Is that affected by the failure of the Haemin crystals?—No. It is recognised that exposure to high temperature and sunlight destroys the power of the Hacmin crystals formation. The crystal was positive only when there was a certain amount to give it. You examined the bath exhaust- pipe for blood?—I came to the conclusion that blood was present in certain areas of the pipe. 1 found it present around the trap part, but 'there were other stains. Would blood be readily deposited on the pipe?—The clotting of blood, in my opinion, with hot water would make it liable to deposit. Jlr Thomas: Do you say human blood?—i am unable to say. That applies to all my tests. Can you tell the age of the stains?— No. ‘Hie magistrate: Any person making a test of tbe pipe stains now would probably not have the same amount of material to work on as you had?— That is so. Mr Thomas: Is there material there now that other doctors for the defence might test?—lt is possible. Alexander Bickerton, Government analyst, said he examined the waste pi®, from the bath for blood stains. He found the colouring matter of blood. 1 rom Dr Pearson lie received two pieces of blanket. These were also examined for blood which was found. On March 24tli witness went to Mouat’s house, nnd from the edge of the hath he took a piece of coloured matter. A stain on tho edge of this was examined and tested, and had tho appearance of a piece of flesh. Ho also examined some sooty material from the fireplace. Some of the matter removed from the fireplace contained 23.6 per cent, of fat and 25 per cent, of proteids. This -prov- .

ed' that animal matter was contained in tho material from the fireplace. Thomas Shanahan, senior-sergeant of police, Oamaru, said he interviewed Mouat at the Glenavy Hotel, when he made tho following statement: — STATEMENT BY ACCUSED Mouat said he had resided at 10, Beckford road, St. Martins, for the previous four months, with his wife. They were the sole occupants of the house, except that Jim Heeney, barman at the Rotherfield Hotel, had stayed with them some nights. He had been employed on drainage works in Christchurch on a contract by Thomas Pheloung.- The last time he worked was on February 13th, when he left in order to visit Oamaru to collect accounts from Jlr Sumpter, solicitor, who was supposed to collect accounts owing to Mouat when he was licensee of the Glenavy Hotel. When he returned to Christchurch on February 14th his wife had arrived home from Little River, where she had spent the day. He then occupied his time gardening. On the morning of February 20th Mrs Mouat left home at about 9 o’clock, by the third tram for the city. She said: “I am to meet Jlrs Hardy at 10.15 a.m. in Cathedral square, to go to Papar.ui.” She said that she was going for fruit, and added: “If I don't come back to night, take- my bag along to the tram.” He understood hqr to mean the second South express, as it was arranged on the evening ot the 19th that both should go to Purakanui to see Mouat’a mother. She did not return, so Jlouat thought that she had stayed with her father, Mr G. Merritt, of 22, Gordon avenue, St. Albans, or with a Mrs Hardy, as she had done on previous occasions. On February 21st he went to the South express; she was not on the train, so he returned home, had some lunch, and then wpnt to Mrs Prosser’s place in Beckford road to see if she had seen. Mrs Jlouat. But Mrs Prosser had not seen her, and he had tea with the Prossers and then went to ask Heaney if he had had a ring from Mrs MouatHe said: “1 have not seen or heard of her. Have you had any words?” Moaut replied, “No; only that I told her tho same about the shoes as you did.” That was that there was too much grey in the shoes. The remark was made about the shoes at Prossers on the night of February 19tli, when Heaney was present, and Jlrs Mouat was not pleased about the remark. Heaney said that later he would go down and stay with Mouat, but Heaney was too busy, and Mouat stayed at the Rotherfield Hotel that night. Mouat cycled home early on Sunday, February 22nd, and after feeding the parrot, went to the home of Jlrs Hardy, whom he awakened. She said that she had waited in Cathedral Square for Mrs Mouat from 10.15 a.m. till 11 p.m., hut Jlrs Mouat did not appear. Mouat then returned to the Rotherfield Hotel, and after lunch he and Heaney went down to the bungalow by train, stayed there till the evening, had tea there, and returned to the hotel. About 8.30 p.m. Mouat went to Mrs Edwards, 252, Worcester street, whose sister was married to Jlrs Mouat’s brother, but she had not seen Jlrs Mouat. Mouat then wrote to Jlr Jlerritt, his father-in-law, inquiring for Nell. He informed Mrs Edwards by ’phone that he had not seen his daughter. Jlouat did not communicate, with Mr Merritt on the Sunday, as he was usually away for the week-end. The Merritts were not on the ’phone, and were some distance from the tramline. Jlouat stayed at the Rotherfield that night. On February 23rd Mouat went to his home, and by ringing: Jlrs Edwards learned that Mr Merritt had not seen his daughter. He spent the day between home and the Rotherfield Hotel. In the evening, at Mrs Edwards’s place, Mr Jlerritt suggested that Mount should go to Purakanui to his mother’s place, as Mrs Mo.iat might have gone there. He did not telegraph to his mother, as she lived about two miles from the railway station telegraph office. He stayed again at the Rotherfield Hotel on Jlonday night. Tho next day, February 21th, he went to his home, procured his wife’s and his own bags, and caught the 8 a.m. South express. His wife was not at- his mother’s place. On February 25th he stayed at the Prince of Wales Hotel in Dunedin, went to Oamaru on the 26th, and called on Mr Sumpter and on Mrs Foley, cook at the White Havt Hotel. He returned to Dunedin the same day. and' spent that night with Ted Dalargey, Anderson’s Bay road. He returned to Oamaru on February 27th, called on one or two people regarding accounts, and stayed that night with a Mr Bradfield. On February 28th iie travelled to Waimate to see Jlr Dickson about an account. Having missed the Tinwiru train at St.udholme Junction, he returned to Glenavy. PARTY AT PROSSER'S

Speaking of the party at the home of the Prossers on the night of February 19th, Mouat said that the paity broke up at 10.30 p.m. Jlrs Prosser accompanied Jlouat and his wife to their gate. Husband and wife were on good terms, and went to bed about 10.45 p.m. He .nose at 6.15 a.m. on Friday, made a cup of tea, and took it to his wife in bed. He then wont into the garden, dug some potatoes, and started to clean the brass around tho house. About 8 a.m. his wife called him in for breakfast, and lie went out into the garden to grub some grass. Jlrs Jlouat came out of the house about 9 n.m., dressed in a blue serge c- stume, small-fitting straw hat of dark colour, with red and blue feathers, hrown leather shoes, and brown stockings. She had a purse-bag in her hand, and said: “Well, now I’ll go, as I don’t want to disappoint Mrs Hardy, and if I don’t come back tonight, take my bag to the station.” He had not seen nor lieaid of her since.

From Purakanui ho advised Mrs Hardy by letter, Mrs Edwards "by letter. Mrs Prosser by letter, and Mrs Mterritt by telegram, that he could not find his wife. Jlouat said that he had been married since 1910, and they had always got on well together. . They had never had any quarrels except in 1914, in Christchurch, when Mrs Mount went off with another man. Jlouat was in Melbourne at the time, returning from West Africa. She then went with a. man named Blackmore, of Fitzgerald avenue, near the river.

Mount And his wife decided to go South after the party at Prosser’s. Mrs Mount soaked a blanket and ** white countervail* on Thursday, Pchruary 19th. Before breakfast on February 20tli he put them on the line for her. Ho took them in on Saturday morning. They were off the bod where Jim Heaney sleot when lie was at the house. The bedding on ono bed consisted of three blankets, white counterpane. and one sheet Mount and his wife generally slept together. Sometimes, if ho were going to hed early, ho would take a. newspaper and rro into the spare room and sleep there. But both slept together the night boToro she left. He did not know if his wife was friendly with any other man, or likely to have gon«* off with anv other man. Mouat said that ho did not report the matter to the police, as thought that she might have come home. IDENTIFIED FALSE TEETH Annie Hardy, married woman, said Mr and Mrs Mouat lived with her for

about ten weeks in rooms they rented from her. Witness often visited them, and Mrs Mouat visited her. She last visited Mrs Mouat on February 18th. She made an appointment for Cathedral Square at 10.15 a.m. on Friday. Mouat heard the appointment being made. Mrs Mouat did not turn up. Witness saw the 10.15 a.m. tram reach the city but Mrs Mouat did not arrive. She also watched for two following trams, and finally went home at 11.30 a.m. On February 22nd she saw Mouat at her own house. Mouat said that his wife had gone to meet witness, and he had not seen her since. Witness told Mouat that he must know where his wife was. It was the opinion of witness that every man must know where his wife was. She knew all the clothes that Mrs Mouat had. Mrs iMouat was like a sistet to witness. There was no dress or frock missing that she knew of. There was only one costume, the blue b.viidad one produced. Mrs Mouat had only ono pair of corsets. Thcv were elastiu and of vorv pale pink in colour. . Mr Donnelly: Did Mrs Mouat have false teeth ?—I aaw he; take out the top set. We compnr«4 our top plates. 1 could identify her’#. f The teeth werte. produced, and witness identified them as those of Mrs Mouat.

Have you any doubt about the plate ? —That plate is tho one 1 saw.

■ Did she have a toquo hat?—Yes, red and blue with feathers round it. All Mrs Mouat’s hats were in the house except the toque.