DUNEDIN MYSTERY.
Death of Single Woman.
Probably Profound Toxaemia.
Excessively Rare Disease.
(From "Truth's" Dunedin Rep.)
On last Friday a young woman named Mary Donnelly, aged 23 years, took suddenly ill in a Dunedin boardinghouse, and died about 9 p.m. in the evening. The circumstances of her lonely end, and the peculiar nature of the cause of death aroused much sympathy and strange speculation in town, and finally resulted in the police taking charge of the case.
Deceased lady came to Dunedin towards the end of last month and took, up her abode at 49 Hope-street. She remained much in the house, and did not seem to have any relatives in town. However, it transpired at the inquest on Saturday that her step-brother, a well-known dentist, resided in Dunedin, and that she had been employed as a clerk by an Invercargill firm. Deceased was a young woman of superior education and ability, and decidedly a favorite in the far South town.
On Saturday, before Coroner Graham, at the morgue, the various circumstances in connection with the woman's death were Investigated. It was remarked, however, that the lady in whose house deceased had lived was not present to give her version of the affair. Having regard to the fact that the latter lady had summoned the doctor, it was naturally expected that she would be in attendance to render material evidence. Her evidence might have been material apart from any medical testimony.
The first witness in the inquiry was Henry James Donnelly, a dentist, who resides in Dunedin. Mr. Donnelly is the deceased lady's step-brother, and in his evidence stated that she was a single woman, and earned her living in Invercargill as
A BOOK-KEEPER. He did not even know she had come to Dunedin, and was not aware of any of the circumstances of her death.
"Yesterday morning at about 6.15,'' said Dr. Fleming, in his evidence, "I got a message, to go and see a young woman who was very ill with jaundice. Some minutes later the messenger, who was a woman, said that it was a mishap, and she accompanied me to the house, No. 49 Hope-street. I found the patient in bed deeply unconscious, profoundly jaundiced, and practically pulseless; she had a temperature of 103. I discovered she had a certain mishap, and was manifestly dying. The woman of the house — she who came for me — said that if I considered deceased any way seriously ill I had better get another medical man. I accordingly rang up Dr. Macpherson, and we consulted together. We left about. 7.15, and I called again at 8.45. The girl died a minute after I had entered the room. I duly reported the matter to the police, as I found I could not give any satisfactory certificate of death. On instructions from the Coroner, I made a post-mortem examination yesterday afternoon, and found that there had been a mishap of the nature referred to — an early one which had happened quite recently. The internal organs .showed signs of profound toxaemia, and the cause of death was probably profound toxaemia of pregnancy, an excessively rare and little understood disease, and quite distinct from septic absorption, the common cause of death in such cases. One thing that could cause similar symptoms was phosphorus poisoning, and though I do not think death resulted from phosphorus poisoning, I have forwarded the contents of the stomach to the Government Analyst.
Senior-Sergeant Dart: Can you say, doctor, whether the toxaemia caused mishap, or the latter the toxaemia?
Dr. Fleming: I cannot exactly say. If she was well beforehand, as I understood her to be, then the toxaemia followed the mishap. There was
NOTHING TO INDICATE whether or not the mishap was natural. The conditions were consistent with a natural mishap. There was no evidence of external violence. I do not think that the woman who came for me said anything but that deceased came to her on a Tuesday. I am not aware that the lady who come for me was a nurse or not. There was nothing about the place to suggest it is a private hospital. The disease is a frightfully obscure one, and though markedly associated with pregnancy, it sometimes occurred quite apart from it.
Dr. Macpherson agreed in the main with the previous medical evidence, but said he would not like to state that toxaemia of pregnancy was the cause of death until the examination of the organs by the pathologist was made. A lot would be cleared up then. The conditions he found were quite consistent with a natural mishap.
Evidence was next delivered by Ephraim Barbour McKay, auctioneer, Invercargill. Deceased lady, he said, had been in his employ for eight years. She left Invercargill at midday on Tuesday to come to Dunedin in order to see some acquaintances and was due back Friday night to take up work on Saturday. Her holiday was evidently not premeditated, for, as a matter of fact, it was when she had been informed that she was promoted to the position of head book-keeper that she then suggested she might take a few days before starting to prepare for her new duties. "I had been on my way to Christchurch,' said Mr. McKay, "when I saw the paragraph in the paper about the girl's death, and I at once made inquiries. She had done splendid work, but was not very strong."
Coroner Graham adjourned the inquest sine die in order that the report from the Government Analyst might be received. -NZ Truth, 11/10/1913.
DUNEDIN SEPTICAEMIA MYSTERY.
REMARKABLE DEVELOPMENTS AT THE INQUEST.
WITNESSES DECLINE TO ANSWER.
Dr. Macpherson's Disclosures — He took Legal Advice — Invercargill Auctioneer's Strange Attitude — Declined to Answer Questions which might Incriminate — No Information from Chemist "Jimmy" Hayne — The Significant Silence of Miss Inglis — Is there a Mrs. Ritchie or Not? — The Coroner's Conclusions.
(From "Truth's" Dunedin Rep.)
On Friday last the inquest on the body of Margaret Mary Donnelly was resumed in the Magistrate's Court, Dunedin. Coroner Graham, conducted the inquiry, and the police were represented by Senior-Sergeant Dart. Lawyer Callan watched proceedings on behalf of the Donnelly family, Lawyer Hanlon saw to Miss Inglis's interests, and Auctioneer Ephraim Harbour McKay, of Invercargill, was represented by Lawyer Hay.
Deceased lady belonged to Invercargill, and had been employed as a book-keeper by McKay. She came to Dunedin towards the end of last month, and died under painfully distressing, and singularly mysterious circumstances, in a house kept by Miss Elizabeth Simpson Inglis at 49 Hope-street. At the original inquest at the morgue, Dr. Fleming gave it as his opinion that death was probably due to profound toxaemia, and the inquiry was adjourned.
On Friday, 10th inst., the inquest was resumed to consider Miss Inglis's very important evidence, but that lady declined to answer several necessary questions, and finally assumed a comatose condition, with evident symptoms of probable collapse. As a consequence, the inquest was further adjourned until the 17th inst.
On this occasion, additional evidence was taken, and the reports furnished by the experts — Mr. Bickerton, Government analyst, Christchurch, and Drs. Roberts and Champtaloup — were to hand.
In answer to Senior-Sergeant Dart, Dr. Fleming, recalled, said he had seen the various reports mentioned. At the time he visited deceased, she was evidently suffering from acute toxaemia, From what he saw of deceased, and having considered the experts' reports since, he would now attribute
DEATH TO SEPTICAEMIA. Septicaemia often occurred after a mishap, but it should not happen after an ordinary miscarriage or confinement. The use of an instrument would increase the chances of septicaemia when not carried out under thoroughly aseptic conditions. There was always a big element of risk after an instrument had been used, unless proper aseptic precautions were taken. He had no conversation with any interested party either before or after the girl's death.
Senior-Sergeant: Did anyone speak to you about a death certificate? — No.
Had you any conversation with any chemist regarding the cause of death, inquest, or certificate of death? — None whatever.
Did any person call to see you in connection with the death? — Yes; on the 4th Inst., Mr. McKay of Invercargill come to my house and said he had noticed in the papers that Miss Donnelly had suddenly died, and he was anxious to know where the body was. I directed him to 49 Hope-street.
Did you see any douche affair in the room in which Miss Donnelly died? — I saw an ordinary douche-can commonly used for cleansing purposes.
Could such an article be used to arrest septiceamia? — It might by administering an aseptic douche.
Can you say if it were used in Miss Donnelly's case? — I cannot.
To Lawyer Callan: Miss Donnelly's was one of the most acute attacks he had ever known. He understood she was quite well on Tuesday and Wednesday — all happened within 30 hours. The girl was in a dying condition when he saw her. The symptoms had made their appearance on Thursday morning; witness was called on Friday. He could not do anything, even if he had been called in on Thursday, the thing was too acute.
Lawyer Callan: Could not some fresh incident take place between Thursday morning and Friday? —
What do you mean?
Now, Dr. Fleming, please confine yourself to answering. — I can't see what could probably take place.
And that is all you can tell us about this remarkable case? — What more is there? The case was unusual in running a very rapid course.
Dr. Macpherson, recalled, said he saw deceased on the morning on which she died — about 7 a.m. He agreed with the previous witness as to the probable cause of death. Septicaemia might occur from an open wound — a fresh wound. A miscarriage would make it more probable, and, if artificially produced, it would become more risky,
Senior-Sergeant: Had you a conversation with any person either before or after the girl's death? — Yes.
Who was the person? — Mr. Hayne, the chemist.
I HAD A CONVERSATION with him before the girl died.
When did he see you? — He called at my house about 8 a.m. on the morning the girl died. I was in bed at the time, and I found Mr. Hayne in my surgery when I went down.
What did he say? — He said he wanted to take me into his confidence, and asked if I could go and see a patient who was dangerously ill in Hope-street — near by. He said the patient had had a miscarriage on Wednesday night, and was very yellow; and he considered her to be very ill, but did not think there was anything septic.
What did you say? — I declined to go, or to be mixed up with any case in which he was in any way connected; but I said, after a while, that if I were called in by the people of the house or by another medical man I might go.
What did Mr. Hayne say then? — He went over the names of several medical men, some of whom he would like to go for and others he did not care to approach. I said 1 could not advise him. He then went away, and I returned to bed.
What happened next? — About 7 a:m. I got a ring from Dr. Fleming asking me to go to 49 Hope-street, and I went. I had a strong suspicion it was the same case.
Witness then related that he had consultation with Dr. Fleming. They were not long in the house, leaving at 7.40. Again Mr. Hayne turned up. Witness saw him for the second time as he (witness) turned out his dogs into Hope-lane to have a run. (This was at the rear of witness's house.) "Hayne approached me." said the witness, "while I was standing at my back gate. He apparently came from the direction of Hope-street. He may have come down Hope-street, or across Hope street, but he did not come up Hope-street, as I would have seen him previously. No. 49 Hope-street is nearly opposite Hope-lane, but a little higher up. The lane is a cul-de-sac. Mr. Hayne came over and spoke to me, saying, "You've seen that case with Dr. Fleming?" I replied I had. He said, "What do you think of the patient?" I said,
SHE WAS MANIFESTLY DYING — that nothing could be done for her. "Do you think there will be an inquest?" he then asked. I told him that rested with the Coroner and Dr. Fleming. On going away, he said a friend, or her friend would see Dr. Fleming.
Senior-Sergeant: Did you see Mr. Hayne again that day? — No; but I may mention that about 11 a.m. that day Mr. Hayne rang me up on the telephone, and said the patient was dead, and that Dr. Fleming had said she died of an acute form of liver disease, but that there was to be an inquest, as it would be the best thing under the circumstances.
Senior-Sergeant: Now, Dr. Macpherson, can you tell me why you did not tell us that in the first instance?
"Well," replied the Doctor, with evident uneasiness; "the whole matter is a most painful one to me, and I had not quite made up my mind what my position really was then. I know I would have another opportunity of giving evidence, and, in the meantime, I obtained the advice of several leading men in the medical profession. I also took legal advice; the legal advice decided me, as I was informed by a lawyer of standing that to withhold the information would be practically committing perjury. I did not give this evidence before because I was doubtful of my real position, and I practically confined myself to the questions put to me then. The information came to me in my medical capacity, but I was legally advised that under no possibility could I escape giving it without violating my oath.
The next witness was Auctioneer Ephraim Harbour McKay, of Invercargill, in whose employment the deceased young woman had been as book-keeper. Witness was visibly agitated, and evidently felt his position keenly. His sighs of deep emotion audibly reached the press table from time to time, and his repeated refusals, delivered in tremulous tones, to answer any of the Senior-Sergeant's necessary questions, created a very painful impression in court, and unfortunately assisted the grave gossip current among all classes about town.
Senior-Sergeant: How long had deceased been in your employ, Mr. McKay? — For eight years as bookkeeper and typiste. Her position was a responsible one.
You had promoted her to be head book-keeper? — Yes, about the time she left for Dunedin, and I informed her that her salary would be raised if she returned.
Had she an office to herself? — Ordinarily she had one entirely to herself.
How many offices have you? — Three. My brother is a member of the firm, and we have separate offices.
Were you in Dunedin prior to Miss Donnelly's death? Auctioneer McKay showed evident signs of much agitation at this question, and, in solemn tones, appealed to the Coroner: "Your Worship," he said, "it seems to me most unfortunate that I am to be unfairly dragged into this case. I think it would be better at the start for me to say that
I DECLINE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION WHATEVER."
Senior-Sergeant: Were you in Dunedin the Monday before Miss Donnelly died? — I decline to answer.
Did you find Miss Donnelly in her office on your return from Dunedin? — I saw Miss Donnelly that night (Monday) in the presence of my wife. They were both working — Miss Donnelly and another clerk.
Did Miss Donnelly come down to work on Tuesday? Mr. McKay became agitated once more and appealed strongly to the Coroner: "Your Worship, I claim privilege and your protection. I decline to answer any more questions."
On the ground that they may incriminate you?
Witness: I'll answer no more questions.
Coroner: But you must, or I will commit you for contempt of court. Might your answers incriminate you?
Witness: Yes.
Senior-Sergeant: Did you tell Detective Carroll that you were in Dunedin on the Monday? — I decline to answer.
Lawyer Hay: I appear in the interests of this witness. The matter is one now in which the police seem to have some suspicion, and unfortunately Mr. McKay has been innocently involved. The facts in the case may be ambiguous, and my client has been advised that the proper course for him was not to answer, on the ground that his answers might unfairly incriminate him.
Senior-Sergeant: If he alleges they will unfairly incriminate him it is tantamount to saying he's innocent.
Lawyer Hay: Yes, he is innocent.
Coroner: If he has nothing to conceal there can be no harm in telling the whole of the truth. If he declines to answer it will leave the presumption that he has something to conceal.
Senior-Sergeant: Did Miss Donnelly come back to your house on Tuesday morning?
Witness: Mr, Coroner, I decline to answer, and I claim your special protection in this particularly sad case.
Coroner (with a sigh): I can't see the good of going on with this witness.
Lawyer Hay: The reason why witness has taken up this attitude is owing to the recent developments in the case. Only this morning we had developments.
Coroner: If his conscience were clean he would withhold nothing: the public will draw their own conclusions from his refusal. His present course of action leaves him to be
UNFAIRLY JUDGED BY THE PUBLIC.
Lawyer Kay: Mr. McKay's character is well known and will protect him in that respect. He is a resident of over 10 years, and nothing can be said against him. He is sorry now he ever took any part in it at all subsequent to the lady's death.
A suppressed buzz of voices passed through the court as the name of Mr. James Hayne was called, and the florid, well-known "Jimmy" — matured, double-chinned and paunchy — ambled into the box. One could hear the proverbial pin drop, as "Jimmy" ogled the Coroner, and surreptitiously studied the court as he wiped his rolled gold pince nez. As the senior-sergeant glanced at his file of papers, "Jimmy" clapped his stumpy right index-digit and fat thumb to his cheek and chin after the studied fashion of Hall Caine — and obliquely surveyed his examiner.
Senior-Sergeant: What's your full name, Mr. Hayne? — James Reynolds Hayne.
Your address and occupation? — I carry on business as a chemist in Princes-street, and I reside at 305 High-street.
Sergeant Dart here suggested reading the evidence given by Dr. Macpherson, which Coroner Graham accordingly did.
Witness: I must refuse to answer any questions after hearing that.
Coroner: You cannot say that. I will commit you for contempt of court if you don't answer. What are your reasons?
Witness: Dr. Macpherson's evidence is sufficient reason.
Coroner: Do you consider that your answers may tend to incriminate you? — I do.
Senior- Sergeant: Did you see Dr. Macpherson after 11 a.m.? — I decline to answer any more.
Are you a frequent visitor at No. 49 Hope-street? — I decline to answer.
Do you know or have you ever seen a girl called Margaret Mary Donnelly — the subject of this inquest? — I decline to give any answer.
DID MR EPHRAIM BARBOUR McKAY CALL ON YOU, Monday, September 29? — I decline to answer on the grounds...
Coroner (annoyed): But why?
Witness: My answer might incriminate me.
Senior-Sergeant: Do you know if a woman called Mrs. Ritchie recently lived at No. 49 Hope-street — up to three months ago? — I decline to answer.
Coroner: It is no use going on, sergeant; the witness has made up his mind not to answer.
Senior-Sergeant: Yes, sir; he declines to give any evidence that may throw light upon this poor lady's death.
Owing to the collapsible state which Miss Inglis got into on the occasion she first tendered her evidence, she did not enter the witness box last Friday, but was accommodated with a chair convenient to the press table, and her sharp features still bore a high coloring, but she evidently was in a more satisfied frame of mind than on the previous occasion.
Senior-Sergeant: Did you treat deceased in any way after the miscarriage? — I did not.
To whom did the douche can in the room belong to? — It belonged to Mrs. Ritchie. I did not see it used by anyone.
Was Mr. Hayne, the chemist, at No. 49 Hope-street that morning, or there at any time at all? — I decline to answer.
Coroner: Why?
Miss Inglis (softly): It might incriminate me.
Senior-Sergeant: Was there really a woman named Mrs. Ritchie up til three months ago — not yourself — as the occupier of No. 49 Hope-street? — I decline to answer.
Where is Mrs. Ritchie now: no doubt she has heard all about this case — It has received wide publicity? — I decline to say.
Have you not invented Mrs. Ritchie? — I decline to answer.
IS THERE A MRS. RITCHIE OR NOT? — No answer.
On the morning that Miss Donnelly died did you try to send a message to Mr. McKay? — No. I did not. I tried to get him on the telephone, but could not.
Which Mr. McKay did you endeavor to get? — Mr. E B. McKay.
How did you secure his name? — I only got it from the girl. No one instructed me to address Mr. McKay.
When did deceased furnish you with his name? — It was when the girl was getting unconscious that I tried to find out her address. She mentioned McKay and "uncle" when she was getting bad, and I concluded McKay was her uncle.
Did Mr. Hayne send you for Dr. Fleming? — I decline to answer on the ground that I might incriminate myself.
Coroner: You decline to answer because Mr. Hanlon shook his head. A burst of laughter from the body of the court greeted the coroner's remark, and the callous witness laughed and swayed merrily herself. On this occasion she needed no glass of water.
Senior-Sergeant: Do you know Mr. Hayne, the chemist? — Yes, I met him in his shop.
Does he visit 49 Hope-street? — I decline to answer.
You said previously you have received £10 from Mrs. Ritchie, beginning of October; now, Miss Inglis, did you not get that £10 from Mr. Hayne? — I decline to answer.
Is not Mr. Hayne "Mrs. Ritchie"? — I decline to answer.
Lawyer Callan: You said that Miss Donnelly mentioned "McKay"? — Yes, and she said "auctioneer."
Whom did you try to ring up? — I tried to ring up "McKay, Invercargill."
Miss Donnelly mention Invercargill? — She did.
This concluded the evidence.
THE CORONER'S CONCLUSIONS. Coroner Graham: This is one of those painful cases which occasionally crop up, and which are shrouded with a certain amount of mystery, as the witnesses are all more or less interested in stifling the truth. The young woman had unfortunately become pregnant, and shortly afterwards a miscarriage occurred. There was a suspicious circumstance in her leaving Invercargill for Dunedin. She was on the eve of promotion in her employment, and was going to visit friends, but she came to Dunedin and stayed inn an obscure lodging-house in Hope-street, which had never been advertised, and which had no notice up to indicate it to be a lodginghouse. How did she come to know of the place? She was to have left on Thursday, but she suddenly decided to leave on Tuesday. She started off early that morning. She went to the place mentioned, where the miscarriage took place and she died. I can only come to the conclusion, which is, that the cause of death was acute septicaemia, the result of a miscarriage, but how the latter was brought about, whether naturally or by artificial means (owing to the refusal to give evidence by the only witnesses who could throw light on the subject, on the ground that such evidence might tend to incriminate them) there is not sufficient evidence to show. -NZ Truth, 25/10/1913.
The contribution of Ephraim Barbour McKay, Margaret's employer, to her demise remains uncertain. I have found a "Mrs E B McKay" but not found a divorce petition against him. Such a petition would indicate a betrayed wife and suspicions of infidelity on Mrs McKay's part. It is entirely possible that Mr McKay was doing his best to help a valuable employee out of "trouble." That in itself would be enough to explain his refusal to answer questions in court.
No comments:
Post a Comment