THE NORTON CASE.

Otago Witness, Issue 2744, 17 October 1906, Page 18

THE NORTON CASE.

THE INQUEST ON GEOHN". SYDXtf, October 10.

The inquest on the body of Grohn, who was alleged by a, witness in the libel action brought by John Norton against Mr Haynes (the proprietor of the Newsletter) to have been struck on the head by John Norton on the night before he was found dead in Bed, was continued to-day.

Counsel for the Crown stated that the original certificate of death, which had been posted to the registrar, was missing, and apparently it had never reached him. The undertaker who buried Grohn, at the registrar's request, supplied the necessaiy particulars two years later.

The undertaker gave evidence to the effect that Grohn gave every appearance of having died from the effects of drink. Witness saw no wounds on the body.

Morris repeated the evidence given by him at the criminal tiial to tho effect that on November 9, 1902, witness was present in Norton's house when Norton and Grohn were drinking. In the midst of an argument he alleged he saw Norton hit Grohn on tho top of the head. Grohn fell forward on the carpet while Norton kept the bottle in his hand. Witness picked up Gr' hn, who appeared to be paralysed 'and was bleeding fiom the nose. Witness went to Grohn's room between 3 and 4 a.m. and found him dead, but at Norton's request he did not communicate, with ;i doctor until 7.30 a.m. The witness added that ho had not stopped Norton once, but a thousand times, knocking down Grohn. Norton had, ho said, treated Grohn more like a dog than a man. The inquest was adjourned until Friday. October 12.

The inquest on the bedy of Grohn, who was alleged by a witness in the libel action brought by John Norton against Mr Haynes (the proprietor of the Newsletter) to havo been struck on tho head by John Norton on the night before he was found dead, in bed, was continued to-day.

Dr Palmer, who made an examination of Grohn's body, deposed that he found no marks of violence on the skull, which was remarkably thick. One part of the brain was pink, with what witness took to be a bloodstain ; but he did not think that that indicated anything. It might have been from putrefaction. Witness had formed no opinion at all as to the cause of death. It «a.s possible to get concussion of the bi.iin without a fiacture or external mark.

The Government pathologist, who assisted Dr Palmer, endorsed his statements. ami declared that there was no evidence at all of violence.

Mr Moss (e-.olicitoi ) gave evidence stating that he had had a conversation with Morris, \who told him that Hayne» had given him £10 to give information about CJrohn's death, and that he had been promised a further sum of £20 by a man connected with Hayiips's office. Morris said that he was pulling their legs for all he was worth, and asked witness to tell Norton go. He said that if he pulled their legs, Norton ought, to stand £50. The inquest has been adjourned till Monday.

October 13.

At the inquest touching the death of the man Grohn, who it was alleged by a witness at the hearing of a recent libel action had been struck on the head by John Novton late on the night before he died, the witness Morris, in his evidence emphatically denied Moss's statement that he had received any money. A preliminary meeting was held at the Town Hall to raise funds to reimburse Mr H&yaes for his expense* >v defending the

late criminal libel action. It was decided to issue subscription lists.

October 15.

At the inquest touching the death of (irohn, who was alleged by a man named Morris to have been shuck on the head by John Norton on the night before he died, a witness testified that Morris, owing to his being turned out of Norton's house, suggested to him that they should conspire against Norton by stating that he killed Grohn.

John Norton, in his evidence, denied that he struck Grohn. The latter came home drunk and fell down. -JMorris dragged him upstairs to .bed. -. The Coroner stated that the, evidence of Morris was unreliable. It was that of* an accessory after the fact. In the absence of more minute medical exami-

nation at the time of death he did not think it possible to find the actual cause of death. There was not sufficient evidence to say how the man came by his death.