MULLINER v. IVESS.

Wanganui Chronicle, Issue 20161, 2 September 1914, Page 8

MULLINER v. IVESS.

:> -■< ■; ; ; JTHE. JURYTI«£MitEE& ■;;■; -^f* (Before Mr Justlc^rE^d^rds.)■.-^ ■-"' The civil action. M^m^~%: Iv^s«,; a claim for £1000 .^alleged' indecen;t:aissaultj was-.-continued the Supreme Court .yesterday,•■= ; : ■ . -: Mr^T-M. JWilfbrdyajy^a^for-iii© plaintiff, .and: Sjr John FindtSLay, with vhim *Mxi 'repMe&eateid!: %&- defehdant. %:' \ - l-^l.:: -f^:t, ■.-, \\ ■ WJhen;; the" Court o.pened.Sir; John^Findlay-- continued his* cross^examinationi 6i the plaintiff. . --r <•..', :vEvidence for .the .otaintiiff -was. gdye^n by Ikiith Ellen AshbV land Albert Ashby' (ar "married coiiple, r«sidi^g. at the hotel at the time),' Evaline, • Jan©. MuMmer (daughter of the plaintiff, who bore out her mother's statements), 'and! by ,a serviant in the house." Th^& plaintiff's 'casg' thSn ; closed.- •■.•■.•i,.v. .\ • . , Sir John -Findlay,,in opening the..de,fendiSnt's case,' described, the action as \runprecedented in .the aoihals ■-of New Zealand cases. The. charges levelled against, his.client were the two most serious .inownj to ci-imihal law. ;The first.iDharge was" that if stupefying;iii,ordier:tp <cpmmit a crime, for which a irian found guil3tyi was iiaMe^to" -imprispnmenl - for Jife | the isecdhd charge of. rape was punish-, table by imprisonment for life and! three ■floggings.' Had the. case been Heard in England % civil action could nol^haye been heard until the criiiiinal cliaJges had been heard. It was the duty io"f|the plaintiff^, if her,charges were tM^V^to prosecute the* man. In counsel's opinion he was now standing has trial. sel denied the allegations a s untrwe. " ;Sir John Fmdlay-:-oalled';l>r^-. v;M;: M. Ear.le> who testined that, lie haicß examined Ivess and found that he "suffered1 from hip disease of long standing. The^right hip had. little movement, andi" the right knee'e movements wereJimit^ds' ;: ; .Evidence- was:.als6'givenf<3r the defendant by Ellen v-Cfecfoah:e.'^ii;^."'BbgJiialid . Pejpperall^ ■ dnmatea -. of .the f b6ard.'in^g house:'^ '■•■■•■•- ■':-. w :--.;.- •^.:-U.:-,.r:,.. i ; ■•'•'■- Joseph Iyess,. the, defendant, .said1' -he had been, in the -Dominion/-£<>iv thirtysix years, and-during that time he had filled) a; number*'of. public positions, in--cludihgvth^.^;.Ji!i^nibe;r:m O^arJiament ;f^:jA^b%*£^|of j^x- years';: andi^that Provincial Cpunca y te?fn#l;^.!^^Cof" 0^ Aeebih^oda^o^^^ Il^'ni^tj Mrs; to putting her •in change of the place. Arrangements were niadefor her,to take .ever tKe place. He found that Bhe was' hot suitable, and proposed to keep her on wages until ihe Muldi.vd^pose of the hotel. .Getting to the unpleasant kernel of the story, .witness said that he and Mrs iMiilli'-ner-met- in the,smoke-room Sh© partook of alcohol every night. an<i often ibj the day. Evei-y niglit 'Mrs; ■Mullinef and tjie,daughter 'smokecli ci,garettes. The,;; diaughter lalways went to bed -.first; leaving her mother in the witness's oompjany.- iQn thie njigh't of : Noviem'ber 26th-,, Mrs Moilliner had iiiree iwhfekies hot. -, On the -mwrming sifter .Mrs Mulliner arrived, elie.made overtures for a ,kiss, which she ;.got: She suggested that -members of the liouseholdi be aocoSamod^ated lin iaofcordance with a wiah-'of Ihers that he should^ occupy the'room;next to hers.for the pxtrpbse '■ of visits. admitted having 'beenlimproper!^ intimate ivith Mrs.. Mxil.liner two 'days", after she arrived, ' -and again on tlie following evening, and oi the evening of the 26th.. Witness knew jihat the Avtomanywas committing adulteiy T Tlie story about drugging wls absolutely false: ■Witness had no drugs with Kirn on the night of the-26th; ; He described the" plaintiff's story as to what took pk-oe -id her room on^the,26th as -a wicked iah. rioatdon. On the morning of the 27th, witness- went>to Mrs Mulliner's rooir and' knocked at the door. Ha found 'Mrg^Ash.byMn ?the- room..;' Mrs -Muildnei explained that . slie wiisill; ajidr "in a certain condition! Witness offeretl to^caJl a.dbctor, but she demurr-ecl."©lie demanded £50 from, him.; He,.<refu'Sed point blank, stating tha.f'iheiHvan-bed: tc blackmail him. Later:in tire '- day sh"< came to him and renewed the demand, and threatened to mill' down the" house! Witn-ess offered! her .-£lO, -two weeks' salary, and: her fare to Wellington.' He vrai .71 years. :of age next Aprils -He deniea iin/^otb tlie lallegations madie againsi him. ;€rouniel laddressed the jury ut son« Jengtn, and at 9.30 p.m. Jliis Honoui summed up. He did not deal with th< Facts, but referred to the points of l'awi The- onus ■was aipon the plaintiff tc prove her .case. Bhe must prove it tc satisfy reasonaWe men iipon tile evidence wKch would induce them to act up'O7i it ithemselves. In crimiriial cases the criminal was given 'the benefit oi the doubt. The degree was not so sever* m a civil case. He did! not agree witl: Sir John JTindlay that a defendant waj T>eing oharged iwith a criminal offence, The case,' he said, presented some extraordinary features. The iurv retired at 9.40 p.m. ."" .After fouv hours' retirement the jury announced that they oould'not agree.' "■