EX-SISTER LIGOURI

Otago Witness, Issue 3513, 12 July 1921, Page 17

EX-SISTER LIGOURI

SYDNEY, July 4. The Ligouri case wan continued to-day. Dr Tiney gave evidence that he had examined ex-Sister Ligouri at Wagga after she had left the convent. He found her quite normal. She showed no signs of insanity, and she appeared physically capable ot earning her living. Witness ad mitted that it was not an uncommon experience for a person who had been given nauseous medicine to think that poison had been administered, probably by the chemist who, it was imagined, had made the medicine up wrongly. The T, igouri case was continued to-dav, consisting principally of an examination

of the witnesses in regard to plaintiffs sanity. Dr Binns said that after a thorough examination of ex-Sister Ligouri when she arrived in Sydney, she im pressed him as being rather reserved and unsqphisticated. Mentally she was a normal person. He expressed the opinion that her story of attempted murder in the convent was a very exaggerated deduction for her to make, but it did not indicate insanity. The Government medical officer (Dr Gibbs) also gave evidence that, after having her under observation for five days in a reception house, he saw no traces of insanity. July 6. Public interest in the Ligouri case continues unabated. Each morning, wet or dry, a big queue forms outside long before the Court opens, and again after

the luncheon adjournment on the off chance of getting a seat in the small crowded Court. At the afternoon session the legal talent was numerously represented, and keenly watched the proceedings. So far little fresh evidence lias been adduced, and there are no sensational developments. The chief interest lies in the battle between the contending lawyers and with some of the witnesses, centring mainly round the question of ex-Sister Ligouri’s mentality. It transpires that since her escape her request for release from her convent vows had been granted. One of the contentions for the defence was that she previously was free to secure release from her vows, and to leave the convent without resorting to flight, had she availed herself of the proper methods provided.

Plaintiff, who was recalled, was questioned regarding the reference in her evidence to penances. She stated that no physical penances were ever imposed by the but the nuns voluntarily scourged themselves every Friday. This closed the case for the plaintiff, and counsel for defendant then applied for a nonsuit on the ground that plaintiff had entirely failed to establish the essentials in her case. Plaintiff must fail unless she produced evidence that the information under which she was arrested jvas wilfully false. In the course of exhausitve argument lasting the whole day counsel for the defence stated thtt the only purpose the Bishop had in obtaining an order for ex-Sister Ligouri’s arrest was to have the question of plaintiff’s sanity established one way or the other. No other course was open to him owing to the secrecy maintained as to her whereabouts. Counsel emphasised the point that it was quite immaterial to his case that plaintiff was, in fact, sane, as it was quite irrelevant to the determination of the question whether or not the Bishop had reasonable cause to think otherwise. At the conclusion the judge refused a nonsuit, stating that he preferred to take the opinion of the jury, and adding that if he were wrong it would be possible for the court to determine the matter without putting the parties to further expense. SYDNEY, July 8. Bishop Dwyer, of Wagga, gave evidence that he received a letter from Sister Ligouri explaining a wish to see him. He wrote in reply expressing regret at the course Sister Ligouri had taken before consulting him, and saying that he was willing to see her. This letter, however, was not delivered to Sister Ligouri, as her whereabouts was then unknown. Bishop Dwyer explained that he took subsequent action regarding Sister Ligouri after securing an opinion from Dr Leahy, who had attended her at the convent, to the effect that the sister was deranged in her mind. The bishop then came to Sydney, where, in reply to inquiries made in official quarters, he received a letter from the Inspector-General of Police stating that the police inspector at Wagga and Dr Tivey, who examined her, reported that they could find no traces of insanity, and that she refused toreturn to the convent. Her whereabouts was then unknown. At this stage an affidavit by Dr Leahy was produced, expressing the opinion that Sister Ligouri was of unsound mind, and should be placed under proper care and control. Bishop Dwyer then explained how he had secured the issue of a warrant after consulting the Solicitor-General’s Department and Mr Chambers, a magistrate, detailing the circumstances of the case. In cross-examination Bishop Dwyer was asked if lie had told the Court all he knew, without any mental reservations. He said “Y r es.” Pressed on the doctrine of mental reservations, he declared that he did not know one could properiy make mental reservations in a Court of justice on oath—a lie oil oath was perjury. It transpired that the application for a warrant which was’made at Wagga on the grounds of Sister Ligouri’s insanity was refused, but Bishop Dwyer did not inform the Sydney authorities of this when applying for a warrant there. Asked why, he replied: ‘'They did not ask me.” Asked if he took action because he was afraid Sister Ligouri might make disclosures, Bishop Dwyer said he was not afraid as to anything she could disclose. Tha Mother Superior of the Wagga Convent gave evidence that Sister Ligouri’s duties were not arduous or laborious as had been alleged. Plaintiff had comcomplained greatly of sleeplessness and headaches. For three days before hexescape she was greatly excited, and her mind was apparently unhinged, and on the morning of her escape she complained of headache. When she came back after escaping, she told witness that slie was sorry for what she had clone. Witness ilen led scolding or reprimanding Sister Ligouri in any way for her action, and in reply to a question Sister Ligouri said that everybody in the convent had been very kind to her, but certain things had worried her. Witness said there was no difficulty about a sister leaving the convent if dissatisfied. Her wishes would be conveyed to the Bishop who would do everything necessary. Sister Ligouri knew this. The Mother Superior smilingly denied having had any intention of murdering Sister Ligouri. She added that the worst consequences of plaintiff’s leaving the convent without permission would be that she would be compelled to leave the community, but her future would be provided for. There was not the slightest ground for the expressed fear of plaintiff that she would be compulsorily taken back to the convent. Dr Leahy gave evidence that he had known Sister Ligouri since 1915. He thought she was neurasthenic. She was highly strung and suffered from insomnia. When she first left the convent he was of opinion that she was suffering from delusions, that she was of unsound mind, and that she had run away while so suffering.