NEWLANDS MURDER CHARGE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16984, 7 March 1923, Page 8

NEWLANDS MURDER CHARGE.

COOPERS BEFORE COURT. (Special to the “ Star.”) WELLINGTON, March 7. ! The circumstances surrounding the sensational discovery of the body of a female child at New lands, Jolmsonviile, on January 3, were investigated 1' in the Magistrate’s Court to-day be- , fore -Mr E. Page, S.M., when Daniel Richard Cooper, forty-two years of ago, i and described as a hair dresses. and his 1 wife. Martha. Elizabeth Cooper, turn- ; ty-nine years of age, stepped into the i dock to answer a charge that on Goto- j her 20. 1922. at Newlands. they iiad j murdered the infant child ot Margaret i Mary M’Leod and William James ■ "Welsh. Both of the accused preserved a calm j demeanour in a crowded court, and i listened very attentively to the evi- j deuce w ithout displaying any signs of ■> nervousness or agitation. Cooper is of short and slight build, j He is sharp featured, and wears his rather grey hair long and well brushed back from a high forehead. Mrs Cooper is also rather diminutive, and appeared in a coat with a. high collar, which she kept well up around her face. The case for the prosecution was conducted by Mr P. S. K. Maeassev. while Mr C. A. L. Treadwell appeared for the male accused and Mrs Cooper was represented by Air P. Jackson. The Crown Prosecutor said that he did not intend making an opening statement, but would call evidence in the usual way. j The first witness was a well-dressed voting woman, Margaret Mary M’Leod. She said she had made the acquaintance of Cooper through an introduction hy ALiss Effie Adams at his office in Wellington in February, 1922. Ihe accused had examined her with an instrument. and after informing her that she was in a bad state of health observed that ‘‘ he would not give much chance for the child being born alive.” Early in March the accused again examined her, and advised her to keep in working. “ About three months later. oofitinned tho witness, *' 1 saw him in his office, and he told me 1 had improved considerably, and asked me what I was going to no. with the child. [ was rather surprised, because lie had said that the child would not be born

alive. . Mr Treadwell: Is this evidences Mr Macassoy : There is not much in the point. Continuing, the witness said that the accused had that evening, or a little later, told her that he knew aperson who would adopt the child. The fee would be £SO, which would cover the expenses of confinement and those iu connection with the adoption. He also said he had a quiet place where she could st-av until her confinement. Ihe money would be required, as soon as she proceeded there, and Cooper had told her to try to obtain the money. Mr .Maeassev: Was any reference made to Welsh? . . Witness: 1 toid him I would try to get the money front him. The witness added that she had not mentioned the matter to Welsh, as she wasst.il under the impression that the child would not be born alive. At one interview the accused had referred to a “ crib neiix bis place at Johnsonville. Mention was made of a weekly rental of los to be r aid for this “ crib.” Finally, she had

called at the accused’s office to tell him that she had been unable to get the money, but Cooper bad invited her to conic out to the ” crib, ’ remarking tl at. he would take his chances of gettm„ it from her later, or from Welsh On Saturday, August 19, she met Mrs Cooper at tile Lambton Quay office. Mr Maeassev: Did you i emember what Cooper told you about that woman at Palmerston Norto Witness: He told me that she was a carried woman who would tell her friends that she was expecting a child. She would take mine and no one was to know that it was not her own. Tic caid the child would have a good home, as the people were in a. very good position. No premium would be required and the child would be registered Ht never told me tho name of the people. 1 did not ask because a condition on which they were to take it away was that I was not to know where it was going in case l should try to claim it, Mr Maeassev: Now tell us- what hap pen eel after you met Mrs Cooper. The witness said she accompanied the female accused to Newlands. Johnsonville. by train, and the “ crib,” a smal cottage near the house, was allottee to her. There she met Miss Lily Lister. with whom she lived for a period Most of the meals they cooked them ;-elves, but occasionally rations were obtained from the house. Mr Maeassev produced an agreomen which the witness had signed, air which purported to be signed also In Welsh and Cooper. The substance o the agreement was that "W elsh was b pay the accused £35 at the rate of £ weekly, and that the parentage ceased Defending counsel objected to th< admission of the agreement. : On „the morning of October 12.* continued the witness. ” T gave birt! to a female child.” She then outline--the circumstances which ensued They treated me very well,” she add

■eel. “ Cooper had said that ho would notify tho woman in Palmerston North. Witness had gained the impression from this that Cooper was to take the child away, but a little later lie said that the people had now reached Wellington, in company with a doctor and nurse. The witness M ’ Lood was* shown various articles of baby attire which were similar to those her child had worn. She could swear that the gown belonged to her. as the lace embroidering on ATr Maeassev : “ How was tho baby (taken away on October 20? Witness: ‘‘On Friday afternoon Cooper asked me if 1 bad heard a car pass with people from Palmerston who were down to see where tho plaeo ] was. She said they would return after dark to take the child awav.” Mrs Cooper, the witness added, visited her I at 7 p.m. and told her that the peopi? I bad arrived for the r-liild. All's Coon er wrapped the child up in a dark woollen rug and took it. away. Witness described how the child was dr-•*«!«-

ed. When Cooper appeared a quart »r of an hour later she asked who bid come for the child and he replied. “ The husband and the nurse.” Mr Maeassev: “ Was the child in good health when it was taken aw .»v on Friday night?" Witness: “Yes.” Mr Macassey : Have yon seen her 1T “ No.” “ Did Cooper make any reference lo the child?” “ T asked him when he returned from the office next night whether it was well. He said that he had seen it r-d that it wn= well. During the next week.” added th> I witness.” T- asked him several time-. He said flint he had nine* the >-*or> ffe , up and he told me that the child was doing fine. They were feeding it on

his formula for humanised milk. Good er told me that it was being regisro-. ed in the Palmerston peoples’ name.” “ Did Cooper make reference to ht y

other children?” “ Ho told me that be had placed several other children in the same manner ns he hail placed mine.” Did he say how many? “ No. he said that he ahvnvs kept in ■ touch with the people for long enough j

to know that the child was being well j taken care of.” "When further questions had been o ;- : jeeted tc by defending counsel. M "Maeassev declared: “I will show at j the proper time that 1. am entitled to j call evidence of the other act*. "* j propose to disclose a system of getting ; rid of babies and T will cell evidence j to show that other i abie.s which canr.i into their hands on the representation that they wore to be adopted were not adopted The demand was made for i thrnn but tbev were not returned. T submit that the eriUencP is relevant. j Hi« Worship; K Yon sav. then Mr j Warassc- that the adoption was onh [ His Worshin : “ T propose to admit the evidence.”

FURTHER DETAILS OF HEARING. (Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON, March 7. j After a number of remands, the hear- j ing of the more sensational charges in | the Newlands case was proceeded with at the Magistrate’s Court to-day, with Mi E. E. Page. S.M.. on the bench. When the first charge that they did at Newlands on or about October 20, 1922, murder the infant child of Margaret Alary jM’Leod and William James Welsh, was preferred both accused appeared calm and undisturbed. The age

ci the child was given as ten days. The first witness. Margaret Mary M’Leod, said she was introduced to the male accused at his office in Lambton Quay in February. 1922. She went t-> him for medical examination, thinking she was pregnant. She was examined with an instrument. The male accused told her she was about one month pregnant, and in a bad state of health ; and that he did not give much

j chance for the child being alive when born. | “ f explained,” said the witness, “ that T was a single woman, and that it would he hard for me to go through i it Ho advised me to get financial j assistance and told me to come back J later.” The witness added that she | did not see him until about three ! months afterwards. He asked her what i she was going to do with the child. 1 I was rather surprised.” said the j witness. •• because f was under the t impression that the child would not be i born alive. Air Treadwell said that this was not l admissible, and the Magistrate agreed. Hie witness said that Cooper informed her that lie had quiet place wher* she could stay until her confinement j She was told to occupy a cottage in j which there wp« also another young woman, named Lister. Cooper told ! her that Welsh refused to pay £59. but was agreeable to pay £35 on condition that vshe signed an agreement releasing hiriSt (Welsh) from any further responsibility. The child was born on the morning of October 12. Cooper afterwards attended her and Mrs Cooper attended to the baby. She was in bed for eight days. The child was taken away on October 20. Cooper ; stating that the people from Palmerston North, with a doctor and nurse, had motored down to Wellington ?o~ iu Witness asked that as the child’s clothes were pot wanted they should be given to Miss Lister. When the child was taken a Way it was apparently in good health. At various times during the subsequent week witness asked the accused about the child and was told it was doing fine, though on one occasion the male accused mentioned that one of his inquiries from the people who had the child revealed the fact that one of the child’s legs wa» slightly stiff and the people were Having it massaged. Cooper informed her that he had placed several children in a manner similar to that in which he had placed hers and always kept in touch with the people taking the children. Witness was treated well by the CoopRegarding an objection by the male accused’s counsel, the Crown Prosec itcr stated that he proposed showing that Cooper had been carrying out a. scheme for getting rid of children. The accused’s statements about- adoption were a sham as lie could not produce the children when asked. I The witness, continuing, said she toid i her people in Auckland that, she ha J had an operation. She consented to the adoption because she thought sin was doing the best thing possible for the child. Cooper informed her that Miss Lister’s child was also being adopted by other people in Palmerston North. Witness identified her two lctI tors to the Coopers demanding her child, which, however, had not boon p furthcoming. } The next witness. Muriel Adams, I fainted on entering the witness box. Tlie Court then adjourned until this afternoon. (Proceeding.)