HORRIBLE TREATMENT OF A GIRL AT DUNEDIN.

Timaru Herald, Volume XXVII, Issue 1763, 25 June 1877, Page 6

HORRIBLE TREATMENT OF A GIRL AT DUNEDIN.

From tirno \o time the public have rend various details furnished by the Press Agency concerning the death of the girl Margaret Melniyro at Dunedin. We now givo the Coroner's lucid address to the jury m full :— The Coroner summed up as follows : — I need hardly asU you, gentlemen, to divest your minds of all reports you may hare heard outside the- room, and to return a verdict solely m accordance with the evidence before you. You are to say how Margaret Melnlyrc't death occurred — whether as a result of disensc arising m a natural way, or whether by the unlawful acf- of any person. The evidence of the parents, and of the eis'er Mary, shows Unit, up to the tiino of her entering Mrs Reid's service, which wai on the 16lh of February last, deceased was m good health and fair condition, nm), will) the exception of an attack of measles a year or two previously, had always been m- {good health. Evidence to the same effect wat given by Mrs Sheppard, of Portobello, m whose service deceased wns. Sho does not teem to have beon a good servant, was rathor dull and inactive, and had been m several situations. Two days after sho entered Mrs Keid's service — on Sunday, the 18th February — she was visited by her sitter Mary, who thought she eeeined quite well, that she was very comfortable, and that she liked Mrs Roid very well. This sister, who seemed to be the only visitor to deceased, had culled for the second time on Easter Monday, the 2nd April, and found Maggie looking much thinner. She gave her evidence m a very clear and trustworthy minner. From her evidence thero would seem to be a reasonable presumption that the deceased had tome came for unhappiness, and this would seem to be confirmed by the evidence of Lewis Harris, which was also given m a very f«ir way. He says tliut about 12 o'clock at night he heard a noise coming from the side of the house facing the buy, and from the evidence of Detective Neil, it would appear that the ncise certainly did not come from the servant's bed room, which was close to Harris' place. About a fortnight afterwards he heard (mother noise. Harris' wife also pave evidence, some of which, however, showed bia?. The part that was without bins was that she heard, on occasions different from those mentioned by her husband, noises of moaning, groaning, and muffled cries, as if of a person getting beaten. There is no direct evidence, but it will be for you to find to whom and by whom this severe treatment was administered. Then there is direct evidence of brutal treatment on the part of Mrs Reid, which was given by Labella Esplin. Mrs Stepheiißon's evidence docs not seem to bo of much importance ; at leait, p,rt of it. It appeared from her evidence that Mrs Reid's boy " Sonny " had kicked the deceased on Quod Friday, which was not m agrvi-ment with Frances Scannt-l's evidence. Other evidence of ill treatment is found m Miss Stewart's evidence, who saw Mrs Reid strike tho deceased twice with her fist after speaking angrily.- This was a month before her death. A few days afterwards Miss Stewart saw her dragging a bag containing wood, staggering a step or two, oud then stop ping to recover herself. John Henry Stephenson's evidenco is not merely of great importance as showing a deplorable condition of the girl, m which he was confirmed by Mrs Russell, but the joint evidence of the two directly contradicted the statements of Mrs Reid and her daughter. Mrs Reid's description of the personal appearance of the deceased differed considerably from that of tho other witnesses to whom reference had been made. Mrs Reid said that Maggie caught a (light cold a fortuight before her death whilst at a fire, where she remained about two hours, or for certaiuly more than one and a half, Mrs Stephenson raid the girl was only away twenty minutes. lam not aware that thero is very much m this. A person might exaggerate time a little, still it is worth while drawing attention to the circumstance. This did not interfere, however, with her work, which was done ju»t as usual until Friday afternoon, tho 11th, when Mrs Reid found, on her return from town iv the afternoon, that Maggie was ill, suffering from headache and giddiness, for which she was sent to bed at once. Miss Reid said the same thing, but these statements are directly contradicted by Mrs Russell and Mrs Stephenson. After this, little seemed to have been seen of the deceased, except by Mrs Reid and her daughter, whose evidence mainly agreed. Young Stephenson, as before stated, saw her on the following morning, The milkman's evidence goes to show

that Mtggie had elept for some time m the room from the window of which the milk was latterly taken from him, nnd not for the one daj merely b.fore h'T death, where, as Mrs R?id say.', she was then removed for the convenience of rendering her asti-tanee, and of preventing injury to herself. Tlie only pirl of Kate Telfer's evidence which 1 think is admissible, is iv reference to this bedroom. She says that a week after sh>' went into Mrs Reid's service, she was removed from the servant's bedroom into the children's p'ayroom. You may judge whether there is lut a presumpliou that the incoming servant would no into the same bedroom as her predecessor. On Wednesday morning, the dty of her de»th, Mrs Rrid for the first time procured assistance, m : the persons of Mrs Brooks and Mrs Lennon, and subsequently, about mid-day, m the persons of Drs Batchelorand Rrimer, who found deceased m a collapse! and dying state. The medical eTidence throughout w-»s given mo«t lucid'y, and the -post-mortem examination was evidently made m a more accurate nnd exhaustive manner by Drs Batclielor and Reimer. You will probably depend m a great measure for jour verdict on the evidence of these gentlemen. There was rennrkable unanimity m their opinion as to tli>> cause of death. [The Coroner here read the important parts of the medical evidence.] From the medical evidence you will be entitled to jwd^e that death was not the result of disease occurring iv a p-.ircly natural way, but wns induced ly the treatment which the deceased underwent. If this be y"iir conclusion, you must. next, decide by whom this treatment was pursued ; whether, m other words', the girl voluntarily subjected herself to starvation and the effects which followed it, or whether her mistres", Mrs Reid, was culpable m the m-itter. If you decide the latter— that Mrs Rrid was so culpable — you must next say, und on this point, depends the important point of your verdict, to wh it extent Mrs Reid is hlameable — whaJirr triuiiijjly so, or being guilty of manslaughter, or even of murder. Jt is important lhat I should define these lermi to you. Murder as defined by Lord Cuke is where a person of found memory and discretion unlawfully kills another per*on with malice aforethought either expressed orimplied anl manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a person without malice. You will observe thit malice then forms the grand distinction between the two — manslaughter and murder. Malice m law means something more than is understood m the ordinary acceptation of the word. Ordinarily it means a settled anj;er m one person against another, and a desire only of levenge. But iv its leijal sense, it is not so properly spile and malevolence to the deceased m particular, m an evil design m general, the dictate of a wicked, depraved, and malignant heart — a disposition .to do a foul deod. In the grosser casei of murder, stabbing, drowning, and the. like, the malice is self-evident, or as the law calls it, "express." But there is a large class of cases where the malice is not so evident — whore it is, as the law calls implied, presumed. You ran eatily see that m this large class there may bo many, and the cas" before you appears to me to be one where it is diflicult to say whether malice, tho distinguishing criterion, is or is not present. Thero are tho transition or intermediate cases, gradually leading down from murder lo that gross and culpable negligence, without malice, which characterises a large section of manslaughter; and for the purpose of your verdict, I will draw your attention to that settion only where a person involuntarily kills another by culpable neglect. It is for you, then, to say, m the case before you, whether the slow starvation, accompanied as a consequence by inflammation of the bowelsand congestion of the lungs — those bruises and scratches and abrasions, inflicted but a few days before death, and which Drs. Bakewell and Batchelor comider could not all have been self-inflicted — the compulsion (for euch you may presume it) to drag the blue gum branches — too heavy to carry up Manor Place and to bo engaged m this work whilst staggering and exhausted from undoubted illness, at 9.30 on Friday night — fire days before death ; nnd the following morning at 7.30 — four days before death — to be teen on tho verandah with a bucket of water, when Mrs Reid said to tho deceased, if she did not be quick aho would box her ears ; the neglect- to get medical or any other assistance, when Dr*. Batchelor and Bakewell both state that the girl might have lived had medical advice been obtained ; and the removal of the girl to a cold, damp room, for, according to Mrs Reid's own account, at least some hours before death ; — I repeat, that it is jour duty to say whether thesis facts, taken altogether, indicate culpable negligence and that only. If you will consider this to b« the case, tho law is that you mu«t return a verdict of manslaughter. But if you consider these facts indicative of more than culpable negligence — of muline, of barbarity, of indifference to the life of a human being — the. law is, it will be your duty to return a verdict of murder. In deciding upon your verdict, you must give great consideration t<) one fact which appears, and that is that the deceased made no attempt to escapo from her situation. Here, as a ru ; e, irasters and mistresses are the servants of their servants. The deceased was evidently no prisoner, and had opportunities of running away to her home, which was not far distant, and where, according to the evidence of her sister and mother, she was sure of a welcome. Apparently she remained of her own free will. You must examine the evidence on this point carefully. The sister, who gave her evidence remarkably well, said, m (peaking of the interview she had with her mother on the 2nd April, "She saetued frightened of Mrs Reid." And again, " 1 think she was too frigh encd of Mrs Reid to run away." The butcher, who knew her eighteen months or two years ago, also said she was very soft, easily led, and a girl who might be compelled to do what »he was told. You will therefore have to consider whether, with mental characteristics of this sort, fhe was courageous enough to exercise her free will and run away, or whether she was really frightened to run away. It ia very important that you should give this question great consideration. You will recollect Pr Bakewell'e evidence on the point, who thought it probable that her character would be deficient of energy and firmness of will. I Bupposr you must alto presume that, stnrvation woidd produce weakness of mind as well as of body, whereby tho deseased would not have heart and courage to escape. It will now be for you to consider your verdict. Putting them to you m a few words, tjie points you will have to consider are — Whether the girl came to her death by natural disease, or whether the disease was caused by the act of any person, whether that person was Maggie herself or Mrs Reid. If you consider that it was Mra Reid, it is your duty to say m accordanco with the definitions I hare laid down whether she is guilty of murder or manslaughter. The jury returned a verdict m effect attributing to Mrs Reid cruelty and negligence towards the girl, amounting to manslaughter, and she (Mrs Reid) was committed for trial on that charge.