MADAME'S REPUDIATION

NZ Truth, 7 June 1924, Page 6

MADAME'S REPUDIATION

"Would Not Do Such A Thing"

Abortion Charge Denied.

I A denial of guilt was entered by Margaret Roberts, alias Madame Azu» cena, a married woman, of 198, Vivian Street, Wellington, when charged nt the Wellington Magistrate's Court that oh March 16 last with Intent to. procure the abortion of a young imml-. grant girl, she did unlawfully use an instrument. The accused is wellknown, her name having received publicity m a recent prosecution for for-tune-tolling. Tho case for the police was conducted by Chief Detective Kemp, while Lawyer Perry appeared m the Interests of the accused. Magistrate Orr Walker was on high. The girl m the case told the Court that she was single and 19 years of age. She arrived m New Zealand m Januaryi 1923, under the immigration scheme, and had known the accused for about ten or twelve months, having first met her m tho capacity of a for-tune-teller. Last January witness, who was thon employed at an hotel, i found that she was pregnant. She consulted tho accused, and oh the latter's advice wont to stay at her place. This was m March. On the 21st of that month accused performed an operation on hor. Witness subsoj quontly' experienced pains and a doctor was sent for. Accused was not willing at first to have the medical man m. and said that if anybody know what she had done she would got seven years and witness would got two. Dr. Robinson was called, and the girl was taken to the hospital. On leaving the house tho accused begged witness not to Bay anything to anyone. She said she would make it all right with the doctor. Dr. Alexander Robinson gave evldonco that he was summoned to the house of the accused to see "one of hor boarders." Witness asked the girl what she was suffering from, and tho symptoms pointed to a miscarriage Ho advised her to go to the Wellington Hospital. Detective McLennan gave evidence of having searched tho houso of the accused m company with Detective Jarrold. Certain instruments wore found, and when questioned regarding them the accused said nothing. The detectives also found a letter, and when she was questioned about this accused said she received It from a lady friend fit hers. Tho accusod was then arrested for the present offence, and when chargod said she was innocdnt and would not do a thing llko that. REQUEST FOR MONEY. Another slnglo girl, 23 years of age, said she knew the accused, having gone to her m trouble m April, 1922. Accused was then living nt 198, Vivian Street, Witness said sho called upon Accused to see -if she could bring on a miscarriage. Accusod did hot decido straight away, but asked tho girl If .she had any money. Witness replied that sho had nothing beyond her wages. Witness was told to come back again, nnd eventually was informed that sho could stay at acpused's placo. Shortly afterwards accused used an instrument on witness, nnd about three days after ' the operation a mlscarriago occurred. The girl had about £i 10s on her, which i sho gavo to accused, Thcro was ho agreoment as to how much accused was to be paid, but witness wan told that »ho could pay Roberts afterwards when sho got work. About six months j ago, when «ho wft« employed at on j hotel, witness received a lettor froroj the accused asking for money, and seating that sho was m need of it. Accused did not say what tho money was for. Tho girl wrote back and told accused she would pay the next week or tho week after, but she did not send any money. Witness recognised the letter produced as here. On May 24 lust accused called on witnoss and told her she fiad been arrested on nn abortion «lso. The detective, said the accused, would bo auro to come to witness; and make hor speak. Roberta <old the girl to kocp her mouth uhut. as wjtactiii'M lettor had been found mi accused's house. i

The accused on pleading not guilty, was committed "to the Supreme Court for trial. Bail of £ 300, as before, was allowed m two sureties of £150. \ ■ . . . : ■■". 1; . ■■■'■■' .-5 - AN UNREGISTERED FIREARM. Tho accused was then charged;Avith being m possession of an unregistered firearm, a six-chambered Union revolver, which was found when tho police searched tho accused's premises. The only explanation given by the accused at* the time of the- discovery, said the Chief Detective* was. that she did not know tho revolver was there Under the Act the accused was liable to a fine of £60. She had another firearm which was registered, ana j seemed to be well supplied In thla respect. The accused pleaded guilty, and Lawyer Perry, In extenuation, said, that the weapon was left with the acoused m 1912 by a man who had not been seen since, and the accused had, forgotten about it. There was no deliberate intention, said counsel/of evading the Arms Act \ In reply to his Worship, the Chief Detective said the weapon did not y •show signs of being usod recently. The accused was convicted and dia- ' charged and ordered to pay costs, the weapon "being forfeited. ——^mw—m— —————— ■