"FOUL DEEDS WILL RISE"

NZ Truth, Issue 912, 19 May 1923, Page 5

"FOUL DEEDS WILL RISE"

COOPERS TRIED FOR MURDER

THE MASSACRE OF THE INNOCENTS

OUT-HERODING HEROD

"Murder will but — that see we day by day." Never m the history of criminal investigation m New Zealand has there been a case to equal m dramatic incident and human interest that of the notorious Coopers, Daniel Riohard and Martha Elizabeth, husband and wife, whose trial on a joint charge of murder of a newlyborn infant, with other charges pending, commenced m the Wellington , Supreme Court on Monday. Of the private life of the "polygamist" Cooper and of his accused wife, and of dark doings at Newlands m the house of death, well back from tho road and concealed by trees, among which three dead bodies were buried, the publio heard much m preliminary hearings. An intense interest was aroused and at 9 o'clock m the morning a queue formed outside the Court waiting for the commencement of the trial' at. 10.30 a.m. When the doors were opened to the public the ladies' gallery filled and tha body of the Court was crowded to the doors. A police guard had to be placed at the outer door to prevent blookagos m the passageways through which it would have otherwise' been impossible for official* to have moved. Among' the exhibits to be produoed In the trial are two tiny skelo* tons, the mortal remains of Infants which the Crown declares wont into Cooper's tender care for adoption. Tho charges are being taken separately. Tho first to be dealt with is that referring to the child of Margaret Mary McLeod. Whether it will ever come to a hearing of the others will probably be decided by the verdict m this.

they come to a man's house and do a thing like that. If I had anything to tell you I would. It's the terriblest thing that a man could do to bury a child like that instead •of giving it decent burial." "At that time," said Mr. .Macassey, "they had not found the body of Miss Lister's child." Mr. Treadwell protested against reference, In the opening address to other bodies than that of McLeod's child. Mr. Wilf ord also Objected. His Honor: The matter may more properly be discussed when it comes to evidence of the kind being tendered. ', Mr. Macassey agreed then' to make no reference to these matters' in his opening address and, continuing, stated i that when written demands were made to 'the prisoners for the production of Miss McLeod's child the female had nothing to say and Cooper declared he could" not produce the child while he waß m gaol. The police had been ready to investigate any avenue he might suggest. Cooper • knew it. He was told so several times, but had offered no suggestion nor given any, clue. Neither birth, death, nor adoption registrations were made,, and if the child had been, adopted it was surely possible for them to point to the people who* adopted it. If it died from natural causes, why was the death never registered ? The child that was found at Cooper's place was McLeod's, and the Crown's contention was based on several points, namely, aex, color of the hair and age, and the t fact that -the doctors' estimate of the i Lime it had been buried brought the time of burial back to the time Miss McLeod's child disappeared. The child had no clothes on and Mrs Cooper had said none were required. The Rpade marks corresponded with the unr usual type of spade found on the property, and for another thing the child was born on the property. The Crown's contention, of course, was that Cooper did away with the child and Mrs t( Cooper was • a party ..■&>.■■ the crime.. [ "What was the motive?" he asked. Mr. s Macaesey related the fact that Cooper obtained £38 15s out of his dealings with this child besides the 15/- a week he received from Miss McLeod for her accommodation. "She will tell you," said Mr. Macassey, "that if she had not been led to believe that the child was to be adopted she would never have parted with it." Dr;^ Hector was then called m connection with- a photograph of the body of the child taken at the morgue. Mr^ Treadwell urged that the thing waa of, little value and the melo-dramatic-.effect of producing such a photograph was likely to influence the minds of the jury. His Honor: I don't think we have a jury here who are to be # TURNED FROM THEIR. DUTY by an ugly sight, and that is what it is. Margaret McLeod was called next and gave her evidence as previously published at length m "Truth" and outlined m the Crown Prosecutor's address. Jtr. Treadwell: In reference to the rent of 15/- a week, did that include food? Were you. m fact, kept? — Yes. Did you get any coal? — Yes, there was some coal .there, but we used a lot of wood. ' Were you aware while you were out there that the Coopers had two children of their own? — Yes, they were there. Did you know that Cooper prepared ointments for women?— l knew. he prepared them. Did you use any of these ointments? — No. Or powders?— He brought some? powder out for the baby's use. Witness, m reply to further questions, said she had many talks with Cooper on matters of religion. Cooper appeared to be a religious man then? — Yes, Did he take an Interest In Lister and you and your child and his own children, and did he appear to be a kind man ?■— Yes, he was very kind. Mr. Wilford made a formal application that all matters In Miss McLeod'a evidence which had no bearing on the case against the woman prisoner, such as Cooper's financial arrangements, and early examination of -Miss McLeod to .ascertain if. she. wore pregnant, bo noted by his Honor m order to prevent its submission "to the Jury. •His Honor said ho would note this all through tho trial. Mr. Wilford: Was the crib furnished when you went there? — Yes. Habitable, though not lavishly or ornately furnished? — Yofl. . Can yon toll mo if you noticed when you wont there any BRIGHTLY POLISHED DISC or reflector such as you would see on a gao lamp? — There was a reflector behind the lamp m the hall. Was your attention attracted to it by its brilliant lustre?— No. Now don't answer m a hurry pleasp. Was there any other highly-polished disc? It may have been only tho size of half-a-crown? — Witness said she remembered no such disc. In reply to further questions she stated that after tho child was born she slopt m a slnglo room In tho Coopers' cottage, but there was no ahlny disc there or m any other part of tho house, except a reflector behind tho lamp In the kitchen. Was there anothor In the dining room ? — No. Did you ever see the reflector off that lamp, loose or m tho hand of the male accused? — No. How old wero Cooper's children? — One was about 9, I think, and tho other about 13. Their sex? — Both girls. Did they play about outside a lot, and Uig, and play nuid pies? — Oh, yes; and they had a Httlc garden. Did you ever see them digging with spoons? — Xo. Mrs. Cooper looked after them, didn't nhc? — Yes. And were they very fond of her, and ■he of thorn? — Yes.

Do you think Mrs. Cooper was away for two minutes when she took the baby away m; the blanket? — It may have been anything between two and five minutes. Witness added that her impression of the time Mrs. Cooper was away was about the time it wouldhave taken her to walk to the house and back-^-40 yards each way. To test witness's idea of a minute, Mr. Wilford resorted to the timehonored dodge of asking her to judge a minute from a given, moment. She called "now" ia 14 seconds. Mr. Macassey:' How long after Mrs. Cooper returned did Cooper come m? —About a quarter Of an, hqur. r Was there any injury tp the child's leg when it was handed over, such as a bone protruding from the knee.?— -Oh, no (surprisedly). There was nothing like that. There was nothing the matter with Its leg that 1 noticed. Effle Muriel Adams was the next witness. She appeared with her collar turned up so/ high and her hat pulled down soi low,- that the existence of ( a head was purely a matter of supposition. She looked up, however, when she got into the box arid when bis Honor eyed her closely and informed her that he would like her to be told once and for all to speak up she lisped out her replies with a sibilant "sir" at the end m fairly audible style. She related having taken Miss McLeod to see Ctooper. Was Mrs. Cooper there then? — No. . Mr. Wilford. protested that the last question had done no harm m that the answer was m the negative, but had it been m the afllrinative the method of obtaining the answer would have been through suggestion. "It was an unfair way to suggest that she was present," declared Mr.-WiKord.

(Mother of the child whose body was first unearthed.) Mr. Macassey: I object to ray friend's allegations m the very strongest terms. I asked that question expressly for the purpose of showing that Mrs. Cooper was not present. I strongly resent your allegations, Mr. Wilford. They are most improper. He added that had Mr. Wilford been following his copy of the depositions made m the Lower Court he would have seen what the answer would be. His Honor didn't look too pleased about the squabble and Informed Mr. Wilford that the Crown Prosecutor might have quite properly put the question m a still more leading manner, considering its purpose and the reply it would elicit. William James Welsh came along next and related his dealings with Cooper, and the fact that after a week or so Cooper used to blow along REGULARLY EVERY WEEK and collect his £1. Mr. Treadwell: Have you been m Wellington long?— All my life. How long is that? — Twenty-three years. After some hesitation, witness said he had intercourse with tho girl the first night he met her, and the meeting was a casual one. He was friendly with her for about a week only. As Cooper lived at Newlands It was quite convenient for him to call m and got his £1? — Oh, yes. Who suggestod It? — He did. One letter didn't- have a stamp on it when I posted him the money. And he had to pay extra. Of course, that was a pure oversight on your part (Ironically)? — Yes (equally as ironically). Duncan McLeod. a brother of tho pirl, then gave evidence. He said Cooper told him he would do anything to help fjirlß In trouble and he wanted to h«lp witness's sister. Ho would hnvo to get enough to cover expenses though — a matter of £50 would do it. Witness eventually paid him £23 14s. Mr. Treadwell: Did Cooper tell you It was his outlook m life to help girls m trouble and that he did it not for money, but for humana reasons? — Yes. Before leaving the box, witness made some observation to his Honor about his sister "throwing tho glad eye." "I don't understand this." said his Honor, looking slightly puzzled. Witness then said it was made to nppour In the Press when the Lower Court proceedings wore published that his sister was "picked up In the otruet." "This is quite unfounded," he wont on. "Wherever my sistor has been she has been hold m high esteem." Ethel Tucker, a chic little widow who was employed m Cooper's oince. gave evidence m regard to money she had collected on Cooper's behalf from tho previous witness In connection with his sister's child. Mr. Treadwoll: You have been to Nowlands. haven't you? — Yos. Did you find the Coopers a happy family, affectionate towards one another?— Yes. To Mr. Wilford, witness said she had navor seen any bright metal disc m Cooper's office. Cooper is a man of fairly DOMINATING PERSONALITY is ho not?— -Oh. I don't know. He seemed quite nice and considerate. Strong minded? — I don't know.

Weak minded? — Oh, I don't know. I've never studied the. man. Mr. Wilford: Oh, I thought you had. Florence Brown, a young married woman, said she had stayed with the Coopers at Newlands and waa there on. a visit when the agreement between Cooper, Welsh and Miss McLeod was drawn up. She wrote the agreement. Mr. Wilford: You have been to Coopers frequently, have you not? — Yes, I have often stayed there. Cooper is a very soft-voiced man, is he not?— Yes. Is he a mesmerist? — I don't know. Has he ever had you tinder his influence? — No. Is there any singularity to you m his eyes?— Not that I am aware of. Do you know anything of the control he exercised over his wife? Did he not have an extraordinary control and influence over her? — He seemed to have a lot of influence over her, but I don't know what influence he had. Was she not putty m his hands? — I don't know. I couldn't say. Did she not appear to have no will power at all as far as he was concerned?— Witness said she had not noticed this. Supposing he said to her: "Go and sleep m that room," what would she say? Would she go and sleep m it? — I don't know. She could please herself . Were you there long enough to know that her days and nights were devoted I to her home and his two children?— Yes. Do you know that she has slept alone since 1919? — I don't know.

(Father of Mary' McLeod's child.) You were the one chosen to write the agreement, although Mrs. Cooper Is a well-educated woman? — No, it was optional who did it. She was busy. She spells and writes much better than he does, does she not? — Witness said she thought that was a fact. Mr. Macassey: You say you were asked to write this agreement because Mrs. Cooper was busy m the house? — Yes, that is so. As far as you know they were on good terms — qu,ite friendly and quite happy? — Yes. The next witness was Lily Lister, who was staying at the crib, awaiting a confinement herself, when Miss McLeod's child saw the light. Mr. Treadwell: How long were you there. Miss Lister? — From the beginning: of June to November 23. Did you pay anything? — I never paid anything. I didn't have any money and they didn't expect it of me. How did the Coopers treat you? — Both Mr. and * Mrs. Cooper could not have TREATED ME BETTER had they been my own mother and father. Mr, Wllford: Do you remember that there was a dark grey blanket on the children's bed? — Yes. Did you ever see a rug there? — No. Dr. .Wright, of Jfohnsonville. was giving evidence when tho Court rose for the day. •When the erse was resumed on Wednesday morning the doctor continued his evidence. Beyond relating the fact that he attended Miss McLeod's confinement and informed Cooper that ho was infringing the nursing home regulations by having more than one case In tho house at once without a license — Mlsw Llstor was there too — he described tho condition of the child awhen removed by him from the grave, and then proceeded to detail the conclusions drawn from the autopsy at the morgue, as mentioned by tho Crown Prosecutor m his address. Mr. Treadwell: When a child has lived for eight days and has kicked and cried and all tho Indications am that it has been vigorous you would expect Its lungs to have been fully expanded ?— Yes. Would you say the child had been under the ground for four or five months?— Witness aald his opinion wits that the child was underground for two months. Do you agreo with Dr. Hector's statement that he did not think it safe to say that the child had not been underground for four or five months? —After considerable thought tho doctor eaid he would have to stick to hie original answer. Pressed for a decisive answer, yi»g or no, tho doctor finally said "no/ 1 Mr. Wilford: Did you fail utterly to find the cause of death of this child?— Yes. Mr. Macassey: Why wero you unable to ascertain the cuubo of death? — Because we could find no traco of disease and had no clue to whether tho injuries to the abdomen nnd knee were antemortem or post-mortem. Dr. Hector, who conductod the autopsy m collaboration with Dr.

Wright also related the results of the investigations. Cross-examined by Mr. Treadwell, witness said he had applied the hydrostatic test to the apex of the right lung, the portion least affected by putrefaction, and found that it sank. The inference was that this part of the lung had never been inflated. The whole of the lungs floated, indicating that the child had breathed. His opinion was that the child had lived anything up to 5 days. Dr, McLaurin, Dominion Analyst, deposed to having found NO TRACE .OF POISON m the body. Minnie King, at whose place m Martin Street Lily Lister was comflned m October last, after Cooper had made arrangements for her reception, identified a number of garments which Lily Lister had brought to the house for. her baby's use. An auburn-haired girl, Mary Cornick, came next, and the bundle of clothing identified by Miss McLeod and Mrs. King, was also identified by this witness. She received the clothing from Mrs. Cooper when she was confined m December last. Attention was turned- at this point to the grounds of the house of death at Newlands, when the sinister-look-ing long-handled spade was produced, and Detective Jarrold deposed to having found it on Cooper's property. Ho then narrated the exhumation of the child m a shallow grave 20 yards from (.the house, and stated that the spade produced fitted the marks on the grave exactly. Inspector Mcllveney related having charged the female at the Central Station m Wellington, when she had nothing to say. Mr. Wilford: Where did the interview take place?— ln the dining room m the matron's quarters. Who were present. Now, one at fc time. .There was yourself? — Yes. And the next ? — The matron. And the next? — Senior Detective Lewis. And the next?— Acting-Detective McLennan. And were there any other officers m the station at the time? — Oh, of course there were (surprisedly). Senior Detective Lewis read Cooper's statement made to the police, and added that when Cooper was apprised of the finding of the child's body he asked on which side of the house it was found. • Hugo Lupl, the father of Miss LisUr's child, an Italian fisherman, said he once visited Cooper's place prior to the confinement. All. Treadwell: Why did you go to Cooper's place?— Witness said he went out to see Cooper regarding some work to be done, some building work he had promised to help Cooper with. Was Miss. Lister there then?— Yes.' Did you know that before you went? — Yes, of course I did. Acting-Detective McLennan gave evidence of the interviews when the accused were separately charged. Mr. Wilford: How ldng have you been m the Police Force? — -Three years m New Zealand. Where else? — Inverness. How long there?— Pour and a half I years. I Have you had experience there In taking evidence as well as here? — Yes. Were you present at the interview ; when she beseeched the officers for her solicitor to be present? — She asked for Mr. Maule, that is all. And was he brought to her? — No. ■ Why wasn't he? — I don't know. I Here is a woman surrounded Witness: She wasn't surrounded. Mr. Wilford: There were four police witnesses there. — Witness admitted there were four, including the matron. Mr. Wilford: Yes, the inspector, two detectives und the matron. When the four of you were interviewing THIS LITTLE WOMAN HERE and asking her for a statement she aeked for her solicitor? — She said she wanted to see her solioitor. Why didn't you let her? — She could have gone if she wanted to. She was not then charged with any offence. ' You said she was m charge of the matron, did you not? — Witness said the matron was with Mrs. Cooper" but not actually m charge of her. Well, what was the matron doing there if she was not m charge? — There Jh always a matron there when a woman is brought to the police station. She wasn't allowed to see Mr. Maule. Why didn't you go and 'phone him ofetch him round?.— lt was not my duty. If she had asked me I would have gone. Why didn't you?— She didn't ask me. You wont to her houso on December .80. did you not? — Yes. You have an observant eye, I suppone? — Witness said he thought so. Did you notice a photograph of n man with only the back of the hem! showing? — Witness said half the faco was showing. Some cllKcusslon occurred then and a compromise was arrived at botween the two that a portion of tho face wuh fhowlntr. The photograph was of the male prison®-. Did you notice any nick-nacks on thn ir.antlopiocc under th<> photograph? ~- There wore several nlok-nucka there. Were there uny nlck-nacka m the way of .shining diecn, metnl disc*, thero? — No, 1 saw none. Are there any Bhlny dlacs amon? Cooper's effects at the police station?— Witness said there woro few effecta of Cooper's thero, and certainly no such dines. Have you ever so<?n such discs uh(hl for any purpose? — Witm-ss mftdo «omo remark indicative of a desire to know what counsel meant. Do you know what they might he used for?— No. , When you were interviewing Mrs. Cooper at the police fltntlon that time, where was Cooper? — In the cell. Did you ever a«k her any questions Ir. th« pro«onc« of Uor husband?— No.

Did you take care that no questions were asked while she was with her husband?— l didn't take any special care about it. At this stage the Court rose for the day. WJhen the case was resumed on Thursday morning, the Crown Prosecutor said he proposed then to call evidence regarding three other babies that were handed over to Cooper or Mrs. Cooper on the former's undertaking that they were to be adopted andto show that the bodies of two other babies had been exhumed near Coop- , er's house. The proposal was strongly opposed by Mr. Treadwell on the grounds that the evidence of similar facts was not admissible when the corpus delecti had not been established, and m consequence of which a prima facie case had not been presented. In the Minnie Dean case the corpus delQcti was established beyond question, but m this case the medical evidence went to prove a strong probability at least that the body found was no.t that of McLeod's child. Furthermore there was no evidence that McLeod's child was dead or had been murdered; "Unless this other evidence is admitted," went on Mr. Treadwell, "there is no evidence from which a jury could infer that either the child whose, body was found or Miss McLeod's child was murdered. His Honor: There are rflany cases where the bodies have been destroyed. There is the Australian case where THE BODIES WERE BURNT. The find-ing of the body is the best evidence, of course, but obviously a case cannot depend on that alone. The destruction of the body may bo part of the crime. In reply to further submissions by counsel, Kis Honor said he was not going to decide that, the, body .was not that of McLeod's child. That was unquestionably a matter for the jury. Mr. Treadwell urged that m the Minnie Dean case the body was identified, and there was a strong case before evidence of system was admitted. The cause of death by laudanum had also been established. I After quoting various authorities which his Honor said were hardly parallel, Mr. Treadwell submitted there was no authority to decide whether when a prima facie case had not been established — as m this— further evidence such as proposed could be brought m. He submitted there was no evidence on which a jury could convict. It was for his Honor to decide, and if he considered there was not, whether the Crown's proposal was admissible. Mr. Wilford supported the application on behalf of the female prisoner. After Mr. Macassey*s submissions'

(Mother of Hugo Lupi's Child.) In support of his expressed intention, his Honor said he had no doubt It was his duty to admit the evidence. Mr. Treadwell's contention that the body had not been proved to be that of McLeod's child was a matter for the jury, but he could not possibly withhold thA other evidence from them. His Honor instanced the Mackin case m Sydney and the Dean case In New Zealand. In the former a man and his wife who had taken a child on the pretence of nursingr it, were charged. The body of the child was found buried m their garden, and at the hearing of the case evidence of system was admitted. The only point of difference between that case and this was the more positive identification. The Dean case was similar, but the identification was not a necessary fact. "What was necessary was to jsati«fy the jury that the child was dead, that it was murdered, and that the accused murdered it- This kind of evidence was now regularly admitted in 'this type of case. His Honor then ruled that the evidence was admissible. Mr. Treadwell: Seeing that the matter is of such moment, will your Honor reserve the point (meaning for the Court of Appeal)? [It may he explained here that m the event of a conviction being secured, Mr. Troadwell, having raised the point, .could go to the Court of Appeal, when i>i the event of the appeal being upheld a new trial would have to take place without the evidence of system. An appeal was made unsuccessfully m the Minnie Dean case.] Evidence was then proceeded with, ,and the first witness was Lily Lister, who stayed at Cooper's place and was confined at Mrs. King's, m town, on November 13 last. Cooper made the arrangements, and said he would have the baby ADOPTED INTO A GOOD HOME by people who were very well oft and who wanted a child, as they hod none of their own. On November 23 Cooper and Effie Adams came to Mrs. King's house an* took witness and her baby to JohnsonvtUe. Cooper went on his motor bicycle and the women went m the train. Mrs. Cooper met them at Johnsonville Station and Cooper was there, too. Witness went on the back of the bike to Newlands and left Mrs. Cooper and Eflie Adams and 'the baby on the railway station. On arrival at the house Cooper went back, saying he was going for his wife. Mrs. Cooper appeared shortly afterwards. Cooper remarked a day or two afterwards that the baby had "a new outfit." To Mr. Hanna (for the male prisoner) witness said the Coopers were very lclnd to her all the time she was there. Mr. Wilford: What did Efflo Adams come for?— To carry the baby. I couldn't. 1 At the Johnsonvlllo Station, who had the baby when you left? — Effle Adams. In reply to further questions witness said Cooper stayod with her for a few moments beforo going back to Mrs. Cooper. Do you know from your own knowlodgo whethor Cooper wont buck on the motor-bike. Did you hear .It starting?, — WUnesH wild sho didn't, but U was -a very windy night, and «he would probably not have heard it lv any cuse. When Mrs. Cooper came back did she tell you the people hadn't arrived? —Yes. Did Coopor arrlvo within half an hour nftrr Mrs. Coopor?— I don't think it w»s half an hour. nw you »Hk him if the baby was all right 7—Yck.. and he said "Yo«." Ih the shawl that won Hhown you tho shawl that \va« on your baby?— Witness said It won n, Hlmilar shawl. Did Coopor pay the faro for you and finio Adams to JohnaonvHlo?— .Ko ga\e me the fare for both. How long wcro you Htnying with tho Coopent?-— From the beginning of Jutm to the end of Octttlxr. ami from November 23 to December 30. Were you In vory close nHsoclallon with Mr». Cooper?— Witness said »he whr her constant companion. In reply to further questions witness Raid «ho hft<l not noticed nny particular influence or control which Coopor hHd over hi* wlfo. but she always did what h» told her to.

Without question or argument?— Sometimes she -would say she didn't like, but she would always do it all the same. Mr. Macassey: As far as you knew were they always on pleasant and happy terms? — Always friendly and happy, as far as I know. Asked to give an instance of when Mrs. Cooper had expressed her dislike of doing Cooper's bidding, witness said that one day she said to Cooper that she (Mrs. Cooper) was going into town. Cooper refused to give his permission, saying, "No, I want you to stop home to-day; there is someone coming." She pi-oiested: "You make me the DUMPING GROUND FOR EVERYONE, but Miss Lister is the last." Evidence was then given by Dr. Hector m regard to the remains of the two other babies found". One appeared to have been In the ground for 12 months. The skeleton of this child m a glass case was then exhibited and shown to the jury. A spoon and fork which appeared to have been through a lire and which were found m the grave were produced at this stage. Regarding the third baby dug up, the skeleton of which was also produced, the doctor stated that it appeared to have been underground for six months. The skull of this child was burst open. He considered the pressure of the earth was insufficient to have caused this, and it seemed by the posture m the grave that it had been caused by the person who buried the body forcing it into the grave with his foot. Hugo Lupi was recalled, and he stated that when Miss Lister's condition rendered kier retirement imperative he had thought of having her confined m his own house, but the position, as witness was a married man, was so suggestive of the possibilities of domestic strife that he arranged to have her stay at Cooper"B place at Newlands. His idea was to put the child m a home until something turned up. What do you mean by "till something turned up"?— Well, I was expecting a SPLIT-UP WITH THE WIPE, and m that case Miss, Lister could have come to the house. Continuing, witness said Cooper told him later, however, that for a trifle of £50 or £60 he could have the child adopted. He didn't visit Miss List,erat Newlands very often, because he wa3 afraid his wife would get to know. When did you hear that Miss Lister had had a baby?— Some time m November, when I met Cooper on the Quay. What did he tell you?— He told me it was a big, healthy baby boy. Did you ever arrange to go out and take the baby from Cooper? — No. Cooper had everything to do with tho baby. I never had anything to do Witt it A statement made to the police by Cooper to the effect that he had handed the baby over to Lupi, who arrived at Newlands m a motor car at night, was read over to Lupi by the Crown Prosecutor, who asked: What have you to say to that? — Witness: He's . mad; it's a nightmare he had when ho was locked up. Have you made any payment to Cooper In this matter? — No, he waa supposed to get the money when the adoption took place. Mr. Treadwell: Did your wife know Miss Lister was going when she went to Cooper's?— Yes. Did you tell her?— Yes. At that time did she know that Miss Lister was .pregnant to you? — No, she did not. When did she learn that? — She never knew until this case started. ' She would never have known had it. not been for this Court case, I suppose? — No, that is why I sent her to Cooper's. ; Did you think your wife would not forgive you?— l wasn't very particular whether I was forgiven or not. You wanted either your wife or Miss Lister?— l wanted someone. And if you are still living with your wife, and your wife knows all about it, why did you think she would leave you? — Because any woman m her position would have done so, I thought. > Salv« Greco, an Italian fisherman, and Vincent Barnao, a carrier, were called to prove that on the evening of November 28 : — tho night McLeod'a baby disappeared— Lupi was doing repairing work on the roof of a house at Island Bay. Minnie King was recalled and related having been requested by Coo pep to take the girl Lister m for her confinement. She identified the same old bundle of baby's clothes once more, She was paid between £4 nnd £5 for her services. Cooper told her Inter that the people wouldn't take the baby because she had notified the birth. However, it was doing fine and SHE WOULDN'T KNOW IT. Subsequently. In front of police ofilcora, Cooper said she had made the arrangements for the adoption. She denied It and called him a liar. Mr. Treadwell: Did you get £4 or £6 m a lump or In small amounts? — Witness said she had to make repeated trips to Cooper's office to get tho money. . , Dr. Wright was called next to giva evidence m regard to the second and third babies. Dr. Hector recalled, said tho wouna m the abdomen of McLeod's child would have been quite sufficient to have caused death. Effle Adams had to come m once more, and she related having gone by the 9 p.m. train to Johnsonville with Miss Lister and the baby. Cooper and his wife met them at the station, and witness hantiod the baby over to Mrs. Cooper and caught a train returning to town. Miss Lister and Cooper arranged to go on the motor-bike ta> Nowlands, while Mrs. Cooper was to walk on with the baby. Cooper suid h» woukl come straight back and moot her. Cooper told witness that someone was waiting at Johnsonville to. adopt the child. Doctor Smyth, who ushered Lily Lister's baby into the world, said h« was Instructed to send his account to Cooper. He did so, but hadn't been paid. At this stag© the Court rose for th# day. Further evidence for the prosecution was being heard when "Truth/* wont to press. It is not expected that the case will conclude this week.