Image TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage Tile
Image size: 7168x10240 Scale: 35% - PanoJS3
Page overview thumbnail

Article text

SICKFOBD CASK,
» . o
Life in Seaside Flats.
. Petitioner's Case Closed.
? ? / -
Stanley Leo Cosgrove' took Ks place
in. the witness box again on Friday morn
ing; when the hearing of the Bickford case
was continued before Mr. Justice Poole
and a jury. Farther cross-examined by
Mr: H. A. Shieriaw, counsel for ths co
respondent Antill, the witness said that
hia present wife was not .his first one. His
first wife might be living. So far aa he
could remember it was at Christmas time,
1919, that he, drove the general to the
Meadows. He 4id not think -that Col.
Baker or W.O. fiixon, about that, time,
had said he had been found out in telling
a lie. They had never said that for such
a, reason he was being taken off the gene
ral's car. After returning from the Mea
dows he might have had leave of absence.
but ne had not been suspended. He baa
been promised leave then, but the general,
the colonel, and the warrant officer had
broken many promises they had made to
him: However, he bore no malice; those
things were past and done with.. He had
often worked in the garage repairing cars,
end during those limes, some one else
'would probably have driven the general.
The petitioners house was slightly south
east of that of Mrs. Bickford, sen.
, Re-examined by Mr. Thomson the wit
ness said that he was in the service of
General Antill continuously until he left
the State. When the- general was in
Sydney he wrote to- witness expressing
deep appreciation of, and gratitude tor, tne
services rendered to him during the pre
vious three years. ; The general added that
he. greatly regretted witness was no longer
associated with him, thanked him, and
sent kind regards to both Ma wife and
him. In addition the general had sent
Jiim a letter of recommendation, in which
reference was made to the work he had
done, and witness waa described as a most
competent motor car driver and mechanic,
and a man who had at all times shown
the utmost willingness and cheerfulness
in carrying out his duties, and in whom
every reliance could be placed. ' He held
4 military discharge, which showed that
his services had been dispensed with owing
to a reduction in the staff.
- . — Mrs. Cosirrove's Evidence. — '?
; Eve]yn Veronica Cosgrove, wife of the
pjeyioua witness, said that the Christmas
Before iast they lived' 'at the Alexandra
Plats. Glenelg. They had. a bed-aitting
room on the J»p floor for two or three
?weeks, and then went into one of the base
ment flats. The general's flat was next
door. They stayed there until March. She
knew Mrs. Bickford by sight, having seen
her at Alexandra Flats. She remembered
ringing up -£he general's flat one Saturday
evening about a quarter to 6 o'clock, and.
a/lady answered. She asked -whether the
general was in, and the voice replied
'Kb.' The same answer was giveji to a
question as to whether Mr. Cosgrove was
in.r Witness then asked who -was speak
ing, and the reply was 'Mrs. Cosgrove.'
She then rang off. On returning home
about an lour later she entered the geue
tal'a flat by the back door, which led into
. the kitchenette. There was nothing to in
terrupt the yiew from the aatter into. the
corridor! She found her husband' cleaning
the dishes. Then ehe noticed Mrs. Bick
ford in the corridor. The lady was partly
dressed, having on a camisole and knick
ers; or a combination of the two garments.
It was not of ordinary white linen. There
?waa a light in the corridor, and while Mrs.
Bickford was there the general stood in
front of her and_ said, 'Coagrove and his
'wife are in the kitchen,' and switched the
light off- She was there on that occasion
for about 10 minutes. On one occasion the
general told her to prepare a dinner for
five people, and he mentioned that among
the- guestB would be Mrs. Bickford and Mr.
Napier Birks. Shortly after 6 o'clock on
the- specified evening the telephone rang,
and- tne general told her that 'the dinner
?was, postponed. At times she answered
the; .telephone, and had taken messages
for'' the general from among o there- Mrs.
Bickford. .'
-Cro»examined by Mr, Smith, the wit
ness, said she got the general's meals and
looked after the rooms of his flat.
People in the corridor and the kitchenette
of'^the flat were quite visible to one an
other. She hud been in the kitchenette
a minute or two when Mrs. Bickford en
tered the corridor, and. skipped- along it
towards the wardrobe. Witness waa^not
shocked, and might have been amused.
When the iijrnfc ?went out in the hall she
lost sight of Mrs. Brckford, and did not see
herS'again that night. She had heard
distinctly the' general say, 'Cosgrove and
hia ^wife-are in the kitchen.' . Mrs. Bick
ford-.did not walk into the dining room
before the light was switched off. She
was -first .approached with regard to the
incident Jast 'September. Mr. Thomson
had seen her on the day after ie had seen
her tusband.
%::.?— A'Broadminded' Witness.—
'« Mr. Smith— Have you discussed the case
?with' your husband?— That is only natural.
~!--di(Lnot aek you if it were 'natural. Did
you.' do so? — Of course I (did. ? r
- Often?— A good many times. — — -
cDid. he tell you what he had said to the
Boiicitors?— Yes. . '
'Have you told him what you know about
the.case?— Yes. . ? '.
XaT. reply—to Mr. Shierlaw. the witness
said that as far as the general was con
cerned, ehe could please herself whether
ahe-got Ids dinner or not. She was not
Ids servant; her husband was.
..Mr. Shieriaw— Were you not shocked at
what you eaw?— 5fo. I am broadmiivded.
; Were you not surprised? — You can see
these things ia any flats. There are quite
a 'number of th.ese dittle episodes at. sea
side-flats.
little ladies skipping about corridors in
their bloomers? — I did not say that.
In bathers?— Yes, life ia a bit more free
at the seaside.
ljoaeiiii«iii iue 01 me i»uj:— xes, J. 6up
poae oo.
Have von seen others costumed like [Mrs.
BickfoTd'?— Xo.
Such sights are familiar at the seaside?
— See; they might be.
Did you attach, much importance to it? —
Not at the time.
Bnt you did so after the interview with
Mr. Thomson?— Yes.
Continuing, the witness raid she knew a
(Miss Mendelssohn, but had not seen her
for about two years.
Was she convicted of having kept a cer
tain house?— Sh-M5ved with ler mother in
Hntt street, and I never knew there nvaa
anything of £he kind.
Do von remember ihe Bagley divorce
««?— Yea.
W*s anjtfcin? said in that case about
yen?. ?
Mr. TiSfX dbitct&*
Mr. Shierla-w desired to question the
witness vas to any association of her namo
with the case, but His Honor would not
permit ift
This closed the case for the petitioner. ;
—Motion to Dismiss Two Coitespon
dents. — ? .
On the resumption of the case ia the
afternoon His Honor was notified by Mr.
Smith, that an application would be made
by him for the dismissal of the corespon
dents Antdl and Fryberg from the case.
His Honor thereupon discharged the jury
until 10 a.m. next Tuesday, and heard
counsel on. the question.' Mr. Smith, in
moving, analyzed the evidence whioLhad
been tendered against Antill and
Fryberg, and submitted it was in
sufficient to render it necessary for them
to be called upon to reply. He contended
that, as far aa Antill was concerned, a'.
though. there might have been evidence of
levity of disposition, there was a. total
absence of proof of opportunity! ??,
Mr. Shiemaw supported the application
for Antill to be struck out of-.the petition.
. His Honor intimated that he would not
call upon Mr. Smith or Mr. Bright. to
support by argument the application in.
respect to Fryberg untii counsel for tha
petitioner liad been heard.
: Mr. Piper opposed the application, and
had not concluded his argument when the*
Court adjourned until next Tuesday at 10
ajn. ,- ,'.-??,
$