Anglican Division F, Row 13, Plot 83

The sudden death on Thursday night of a married woman named Rebecca Greigg aged 34, who resided at King-street, Arch hill, has been reported to the coroner (Mr. T. Gresham). As Dr Keith, who was called in, declined to give a certificate of the cause of death, an inquest will be held at the Star Hotel, Karangahape Road, to-day.

paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19050715.2.18

 

THE ARCHHILL FATALITY.

INQUEST UPON THE BODY.

SENSATIONAL EVIDENCE.

CHARGES OP NEGLECT.

A VERDICT OF MANSLAUGHTER.

The circumstances of the death of Mrs. Rebecca Grigg, at her residence, King-street, Archhill, on Thursday last, as revealed at the inquest upon the body at the Star Hotel, Karangahape Road, on Saturday, were of a sensational character. The evidence showed that the deceased, when she was visited that day by Mrs. Prudence Weaver and Dr. Keith, was very much emaciated. Dr. Keith said that had medical aid been rendered a fortnight prior to the woman's death there would have been every possibility of her life being prolonged; in fact, her life might have been saved. Death, he said, was due to an abscess. In coming to this verdict, the jury, in accordance with the summing up of the coroner (Mr. T. Gresham), also found that such death was accelerated by the wilful neglect of the husband, Francis George Grigg, who was then arrested upon a charge of manslaughter.

Sergeant Hendry represented the police at the inquest.

Dr. Keith said that shortly before half-past three on the afternoon of the 13th inst., he was called to attend the deceased at her residence, King-street, Archhill. On arriving he found the woman lying upon a bed in a dying condition. He was not then in a position to certify as to the cause of death, as there was nothing in the external condition of the deceased on which to arrive at any opinion. By direction of the coroner he had conducted a postmortem examination that day. He had found that the body, which was extremely emaciated, was in a fearful state of filth and neglect. Lice were crawling all over the head, face, neck, and hands, while the lower limbs were perfectly filthy. This state of things must have existed for three weeks, and could certainly have been prevented by any person in attendance upon her. On opening the chest he found the left lung consolidated at the base. The apex and upper half of it were broken down from an abscess formation. The stomach was empty. The right lung was also consolidated at the base. This condition of things had certainly only developed within a fortnight or three weeks, and he was sure that had medical aid been rendered a fortnight ago there was every probability that the life of the deceased would have been prolonged; in fact, it might possibly have been saved. "In all my experience,'' added the doctor, "this is as bad a case of neglect as I have ever witnessed."

Asked to state the Cause of death, the doctor said that it was abscess on the lung.

In conclusion, Dr. Keith said that he considered that the house in which the deceased died should be destroyed, the surroundings being in a very insanitary condition, and the building itself dilapidated.

Francis George Grigg, bottle gatherer, husband of the deceased, said that she was 34 years of age when, she died. He had been residing with, her in King-street for about 12 months past, and until Wednesday last he had never heard her complain about feeling unwell. While he was asleep upon that occasion his wife woke him tip and complained about her heart and chest. At her request he gave her some brandy, which he always kept in the house. With regard to the condition in which the body was found by Dr. Keith, all he had to say was that he left such matters to his wife. His wife prepared the dinner as usual on Wednesday. Prior to that she had not been off the premises for nine days. Up till Thursday last he was not aware of any persons who had seen his wife for a month previous.

Questioned by the foreman of the jury, Grigg said that his earnings amounted to between 30s to 35s per month. Out of this he had to pay a rent of 5s per week.

In reply to another juryman witness said that during the past 14 days he,had gone for the meat and bread. The latter he got from Skinner's, the store close by.

Prudence Weaver, a widow, said that she resided in Cobden-street, Newton. She had known the deceased for two or three years past. The deceased and her husband had been residing in King-street for the past 12 months. Prior to Thursday morning she had not seen the unfortunate woman for several months. She knew Grigg, to whom she spoke on Monday, the 10th inst On inquiring after his wife he replied that she was not very well. He did not convey to her the impression that she was any worse than usual. He asked her to come round and see her. At about nine o'clock on Thursday morning Grigg came to her house and requested that she should go round an see the deceased, as she was so bad. She understood that he had called for a similar purpose on Wednesday evening. On that occasion, however, she was out.

Continuing, Mrs. Weaver said that she accompanied Grigg to the house, where she found the deceased lying upon a bed in the kitchen. Her hands, and feet were stone cold, and the woman, who was dazed, could not speak. On observing this she inquired from Grigg whether she (the deceased) had had any medical advice? He replied, “No.” At that she said: “Then go away and get it at once or she may die under your hands.” From the condition in which she found the deceased she could scarcely think it possible that she had prepared the dinner at mid-day on Wednesday. She was positive that she could not have done so. She remained with her until death took place, which would be at about ten p.m. on Thursday. Directly she told Grigg to get a doctor he went for Dr. Bakewell. As the latter did not arrive by half-past two p.m. Grigg went away for another doctor, returning with Dr. Keith.

To Sergeant Hendry: She saw nothing in the shape of food upon the premises, excepting some bread and some uncooked sago.

To Grigg: She did not see any jelly. She understood that the deceased asked for some stout, which Grigg went and got. When they put it to her lips the woman could not drink.

To Sergeant Hendry: There was nothing to have prevented Grigg, knowing that his wife was sick, from cleaning the house, he did nothing to keep his wife clean she considered that someone should have been called in to do so.

Constable McGilp said that he had known the deceased for five mouths past. He last saw her about three or four weeks ago. She was then walking along Great North Road. Although she was then in a very tottering condition she was not in a worse state than usual. After a diligent search he could find nothing on the premises in the shape of food. When he assisted Dr. Keith that morning to remove the body from one stretcher to another, he found the woman hair was almost alive with lice. This filthy condition of things, in his opinion, had existed for months past.

This was all the evidence.

The Coroner (Mr. Gresham) in summing up pointed out that under the Criminal Code Act, 1893, anyone who had charge of another person, who was unable to provide himself or herself with the necessaries of life, through sickness or any other cause was bound to do so, and was criminally liable for omitting (without lawful excuse) to perform that duty if the death of such a person was brought about or life endangered in consequence.

After half-an-hour's retirement the jury returned with a verdict, “That the cause of death was abscess of the lung, and that such death was accelerated by the wilful neglect of Francis George Grigg, the husband of deceased.” The jury also attached the following rider: "That the jury are of opinion that the attention of the public health officer should be drawn to the filthy and insanitary condition of the house.”

Grigg was then arrested upon a charge of manslaughter. He will be brought before the Court this morning.

paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19050717.2.37

 

POLICE COURT NEWS.

SEQUEL TO THE ARCHHILL INQUEST.

GRIGG REMANDED IN CUSTODY.

In accordance with the verdict brought in by the jury at the inquest held on the body of Mrs. Rebecca Grigg, of Archhill, on Saturday, the deceased's husband, Francis George Grigg, a bottle collector, was charged at the Police Court yesterday, before Mr. C. C. Kettle, S.M., with having committed manslaughter by wilful neglect.

Sub-Inspector Black asked for a remand until Monday next.

The accused, when asked if he had any objections, said he would like to have the case gone on with as soon as possible.

The remand was granted.

The Magistrate (to the accused): Do you wish for bail?

Accused: I have no means for bail.

The accused was not represented by counsel.

paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19050718.2.105

 

A WIFE'S CHEERLESS DEATH.

HUSBAND CHARGED WITH MANSLAUGHTER.

A sequel to the death of Mrs. Rebecca Grigg, who died in cheerless surroundings in her house in King-street. Archhill, a few weeks ago, occurred in the Auckland Magistrate's Court this morning, when her husband, a rag and bottle collector, a middle-aged, short, thickset man, was charged with manslaughter.

The husband was arrested on July 15 in consequence of the verdict of the coroner's jury, who found that the deceased Rebecca Grigg came to her death from abscess of the lungs, and that the death was accelerated by wilful neglect on the part of the husband, Francis George Grigg."

The charge against the husband was that on or about July 13 he did commit manslaughter by killing Rebecca Grigg." Mr. S. Mays (for the Crown Prosecutor) conducted the case for the Crown, and Mr. Skelton (of Devore and Martin) defended the accused.

Prudence Weaver, a widow, of Cobden-street, Newton, said she had known Grigg and his wife for the last two years. Mrs. Grigg was always in delicate health. On the morning of her death the deceased's husband asked her to go and assist his wife in her work, and act as companion to her, as she was very poorly, and was lonely during his absence. She went back with him and found the deceased lying down, wearing ,an old jacket, and covered otherwise with a rug and some small coats. Her hands and feet were stone cold. Witness told her husband to fetch a doctor at once, and he went to do so. An hour and a-quarter later he returned and said he had got Dr. Bakewell, who would arrive soon. Deceased could not speak, but uttered a sound which seemed like "stout," and at witness' request the husband fetched some stout. They put it to the woman's lips, but she could not drink it. Dr. Bakewell never came. After waiting some hours she sent the husband for another doctor, and Dr. Keith arrived at about half-past two o'clock. He prescribed for the deceased, who took one dose of the medicine. She died the same night at about ten o'clock.

Mr. Mays: From your experience of sickness and death, do you think it possible that the deceased could have been up and cooked the dinner the day before?

No, she couldn't have done so. She looked to me to be half dead.

Did you see any blankets there?— No, There were no blankets or sheets, only the one rug, which was on the bed, and the coats.

Just before her death, did the accused make any request to you about her hair?— Yes. He asked me to cut it, but I refused.

Was there any food in the house? — Yes, just one piece of bread and a little rice or barley. Did the accused make any reference as to the inquest that was to follow? — Yes. He asked me what I thought would be done, and I said, "You have got yourself into this muddle, and you must get yourself out of it."

What was his demeanour at the inquest?—He seemed troubled and very anxious. I think you saw the prisoner on the Monday before his wife's death, July 10?— Yes.

What did he say about her? —He asked where a Mrs. Johnston lived, and said his wife was very poorly, and he wanted Mrs. Johnston's little girl to come and be company for her while he was out.

What was the state of the deceased's body?—lt was in a very dirty state.

To Mr. Skelton: You say she was always delicate?— Yes.

What was her trouble? —I could not say. She seemed in a decline. Her husband did not ill-treat her. She always spoke too well of him for that. In fact, I think he was too lenient, and gave her too much her own way.

In what way?— She was too self-willed, and would not take his advice. I put it down to her ailment. I think he would give her anything she asked for.

Do you know anything of their circumstances? —They were very poor.

Was the husband industrious? —He always seemed to be working. He told me on the Monday that he had bought the horse and cart, thinking that when she got better he would be able to take her out for a drive.

Did Dr. Keith say anything about warmth?—No, but when her husband asked the doctor his fee, he remarked, "You are not very well circumstanced. Never mind about the fee."

Did he order a fire?— There was already a fire burning, which her husband had made.

Did her husband go for an ambulance?

—Yes, at Dr. Keith's request. But Mr. Strathern refused to let him have it unless he brought a written order from the doctor. But at that time Dr. Keith had gone.

Sergt. Hendry said he arrested the accused on July 15 on a warrant of the coroner (Mr. Gresham). On the way to the lock-up he said: "I am sorry the jury brought in that verdict. I did not neglect her. I did what I could for the poor girl. I did not know she was that bad." He saw the deceased's body, which was in an absolutely filthy condition. Lice were running about the face and neck. He did not see the rest of the body, but he saw quite enough.

To Mr. Skelton: Deceased had been twice or three times arrested for drunkenness at Newton, and he believed on one or more occasions in the city. Otherwise he knew of nothing against her. When he had seen her previously, she appeared clean.

Dr. Keith said he was called in to the deceased at about 3.30 on July 13, and found her dying.

What was done? —I tried to get her to say something in answer to my questions, but failed to get any answer. I noticed that her right hand was hanging over the side of the bed, and very much swollen and cold. She was powerless to raise it. She did say a few words in a weak, pining voice.

Were they incoherent? —I heard them distinctly enough. They were: "Oh, you — —" and then the voice died away. She repeated the words a second time in the same way. He arranged for the husband to have her taken to the hospital, as he could see that she would not survive. Witness held the postmortem examination by direction of the coroner, and found that the upper part of a lung had been completely broken down by an abscess. The body was emaciated and dirty, the hair unkempt and full of lice. In his opinion she could not have been up and cooking on the day before her death. The stomach contained about a tablespoonful of milky food.

Mr. Mays: If she had been properly treated and medically attended, her life would certainly have been prolonged, and might possibly have been saved. You have practised in the slums of London, haven't you?—Yes.

Have you ever seen a worse case than this?—I have seen as bad cases but never worse. Mr. Skelton: I think I shall object to that your Worship. I think It is scarcely relevant to the case.

His Worship scarcely agreed with the objection, but had it recorded on the depositions. How long beforehand do you think a doctor should have been called? At I least a week.

To Mr. Skelton: Deceased might possibly have suffered from asthma for many years past, and the symptoms might have been mistaken for those of abscess. If brandy and milk had been given by the husband, it was reasonable to suppose this treatment had at some time been recommended by a doctor.

To His Worship: If deceased had been washed with or without her consent, and properly fed and clothed, that would have prolonged her life even without medical treatment. The asthma and abscess would, however, cause a certain amount of emaciation in spite of nourishing food.

Thomas Gresham (City Coroner) testified to the accuracy of a record (produced) of evidence given by the accused at the inquest.

In this evidence, read to the Court, the accused said his earnings amounted to about 35/ a month.

Mr Gresham also testified to the verdict returned by the jury.

Elizabeth Skinner, wife of Robert Skinner, storekeeper, said she lived close to the Grigg's house in King-street. Her husband was the lessee of the house the Grigg's occupied. The prisoner told her of his wife's ill health, and mentioned that some time previously she had gone under an operation. Witness offered to come and do anything for her, but prisoner said he thought he could do all that was required. He said a doctor had attended her. On the day after the death prisoner told her what had happened, and said that the doctor's visit flurried her, and, he believed, hastened her death. He also said that he wanted to get a doctor sooner, but she objected, and when his wife heard that the doctor ordered her to be taken to the hospital she said, "Frank, if you take me there I'll never get over it; I'll never live. Witness had not seen the deceased for three months past.

Mr Mays: Where did you think she was all that time? —There was a report in the neighbourhood that she had gone away, and I thought the same as the rest.

To Mr Skelton: Mrs Grigg was a very reserved person. Witness had never called at her house. Mr Grigg appeared a respectable man, and always spoke kindly and sympathetically of his wife.

Constable McGilp, of Surrey Hills, said when the deceased was lying dead, her hair, which was naturally dark, was rendered grey with vermin. He found in the house small quantities of tea, sugar, milk, butter, and cornflour.

Mr Mays: How long do you conclude that the woman had been bedridden? — At least a week, judging from the state of her lungs and the dirtiness of her body.

Did you have any conversation with the accused?—l asked him on the day he reported the death why he did not send for a doctor sooner, and he replied that he did not think his wife was so bad.

To Mr Skelton: He formed the impression that these people had been in better circumstances, but had come down in life.

This concluded the evidence.

Accused said he wished to give evidence on oath, and call witnesses.

Mr Skelton intimated that he proposed to submit evidence to explain the facts stated by the doctor and other matters; so that the Court should be able, if it thought fit, to save the country from the expense of trial in the Supreme Court if there were no likelihood of a conviction. Mr Skelton added that he would not deny the woman's unkempt condition, but the accused would say he had endeavoured to cut her hair, but she had refused to allow him. His Worship doubted if the evidence indicated by Mr Skelton would be other than evidence which ought to be weighed by a jury. (Proceeding.)

paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19050731.2.7

 

The grand jury in the Supreme Court yesterday threw out the bill against Francis George Grigg, the Archhill bone and bottle collector, charged with the manslaughter of his wife by neglect. He was, therefore, brought before Mr. Justice Edwards and formally discharged.

paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19050808.2.40

 

 

Plot 83: Rebecca Grigg (34) 13/7/1905 – Abscessed lungs (Ang.)

 

Rows 11-16 in Anglican Division F are what can also be known as ‘Potters Fields’, they were used to bury some of the people whose families were unable to afford funeral costs, institutionalised unidentified at the time of burial or had no-one to bury them. These plots were common graves with some having up to three individuals interred in each, as they were not purchased, permanent grave markers were not permitted to be erected.

 

Rows 12-16 are now protected by native bush and it is now no longer known where either rows or individual plots are located in this area.

 

Done