THE INVERCARGILL SENSATION.

Otago Witness, Issue 2273, 23 September 1897, Page 29

THE INVERCARGILL SENSATION.

THE ACCUSED ACQUITTED.

Invercargii.l,, September :<SL. In the Supreme Court, Btr Justice Denniaton, in the course of hie charge to the Grand Jury, referring to the charge ag&iasfc Caroline Matthews and Richard W. Hall (the former with adminitsleririg to herself or permitting to be administered noxious things, and the latter with counselling her to do so), said that the peculiarity was that the principal witness for the prosecution (Dr Torrance) had Bworn that: what he administered was given in such email quantities aa to make it impossible that the result boped for by the accuied could have happened. It seemed to him (Judge Dcnniston) that the doctor's evidence amounted to this that whfct had happened was a natural occurrence. In tbafc ibateiaent Dr. Torrance was supported by other medical evidence for the prosecution. The Grand Jury brought in a true bill on the second and third indictments—for conspiring to procure Dr Torrance to produce the result; desired. la the hearing of the charge of conspiracy, the evidence taken up to the adjournment did nob vary from that taken in the Police Coarb and recently telegraphed. Dr Torrsnce, ia croat-examisation by Mr Solomon, said ha attended Mrs Matthews in October, 1895. Ho went to England iv April, 1896, aud ne.v«

hoard a whisper abcub the alleged offence till he returned in June, 1897. He wai greatly surprised that it was sought to make an < fFence of Mrs Matthews'u case. He neither received nor was offered any reward for his professional services to her, and the case was entered in his books in the usual way as a miscarriage, the ordinary fee being charged. He did not, at r.ny time, give the woman auythiug to procure an abortion, and he did not know of anything givea or done which would have that cftcfe. He cculd not account for the miscarriage on any other supposition than that it was a natural premature birth. In cross-examination, Mrs Gorman, in whose boarding-house at the Bluff the offence is alleged to have been committed, ea:d that when she got £5 and the promissory note for £95 from Hall she did not believe a criminal offence had been committed. The money was gi?en, she considered, to beep Mrs Maltbewa's name quiet. Hall did not dare her to inform the pohce, and she bad not done so. She thought £100 wa3 HUls enough compensation for the damage to her business. Ikveecabgilt,, St-p.tember 22.

The Supreme Court was occupied all day ■with the hearing of the chwge of conspitiug to procure aboition against Caroline Matthews and Richard W. Hall, tie jury, afber half an bout's retirement, returning- a verdict of not guilty. ' The defet cc was that Hall simply consalted Dr Torrar.ce to attend Mrs 'Matthews in the event of a natural miscarriage.