COURT OF SESSION, SCOTLAND

 

LORD HUNTER

 

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS

IN

SUMMARY TRIAL

in Petition

JOHN ALEXANDER CUMNOCK FORBES-SEMPILL,

First Petitioner

and

THE HONOURABLE EWAN FORBES-SEMPILL,

Second Petitioner

 

on

 

Wednesday, 17th May, 1967

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

COURT OF SESSION, SCOTLAND

 

LORD HUNTER

 

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS

in

SUMMARY TRIAL

 

in Petition

 

JOHN ALEXANDER CUMNOCK FORBES-SEMPILL,

First Petitioner

 

and

 

THE HONOURABLE EWAN FORBES-SEMPILL,

Second Petitioner

 

on

Thursday, 18th May, 1967

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

INDEX

Proof for the Second Petitioner Cont. Page

Dr. The Hon. E. Forbes-Sempill

Examined 188

Cross-Examined 207

Re-Examined 225

H. J. Haldane

Examined 227

Cross-Examined 229

Mrs. I. M. Forbes-Sempill

Examined 232

Cross-Examined 234

(No Re-Examination)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

original, p, 357, 358,

188

THURSDAY, 18TH MAY, 1967

FOURTH DAY

Proof for Second Petitioner

Continued

DR. THE HONOURABLE E. FORBES-SEMPILL (54)

EXAMINED:-

I live at Brux Lodge, Alford. I am the fourth child of the 18th Lord Sempill. He was also the 9th Baronet of Forbes of Craigievar. I was christened Elizabeth and re-registered as a male.

Q.- I think we know that you effected re-registration by an Interlocutor of the Sheriff Substitute at Aberdeen of the 21st August, 1962?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Were you brought up at Fintray in Aberdeenshire?

A.- I was.

Q.- Did you go to school or were you educated at home by governesses?

A.- I was educated at home by governesses.

Q.- When you were in your early years what were your principle interests?

A.- In the way of recreation, riding shooting, tobogganing, fishing.

Q.- In your early years were you interested in dolls, and that sort of thing, these sort toys or not?

A.- No, on the contrary I was not at all interested in dolls, in fact I disliked them intensely.

Q.- Did you have a pony?

A.- I did.

Q.- What sort of things did you do with the pony?

A.- I used to ride through the woods and sometimes chase cattle and lasso them and jump on their backs,

Q.- How much older than you was your sister Margaret?

A.- Seven years.

Q.- How much older than you was your brother?

A.- 19 years.

Q.- Did you have another sister?

A.- I had another sister, but she died in fact of peritonitis two years before I was born.

Q.- Did your sister Margaret stay at home for her education or was she sent away to school?

A.- She was sent away to school.

Q.- To boarding school?

A.- Yes, she went to school in Crowborough Queen Margaret's, I think, and it was subsequently shifted to Pitlochry during World War 1 because of bombing.

Q.- Can you remember when she left this school, what sort of age would she have been?

A.- I think that she would leave that one possibly when she was about 14 or 15 and thereafter went to school in Kent.

Q.- Did she go to a finishing school abroad?

A.- She went to finishing school in Brussels.

original, p. 358, 359, 360

189

Q.- How old was she when she left there?

A.- She would have been 18.

Q.- When she left the finishing school did she come home to live at Fintray?

A.- Part of the time she did, but she went to India for a long trip and was away for the best part of a year, and she visited a lot with her friends and contemporaries.

Q.- Before the war and after she attained 18 did she have any permanent base away from Fintray?

A.- I would not say so until she joined the Services.

Q.- And that was on the outbreak of the last war?

A.- The outbreak of the last war, but she was sent away for considerable periods. She had a motor accident at home and went to london immediately after that, and she suffered from delayed concussion, and to the best of my recollection she stayed in London for about nine months after that, and then came home rather as an invalid.

Q.- can you recollect the year of the motor accident?

A.- I think the year of the motor accident was 1930. There was a Court case in the Court of session the year after this motor accident, that could be checked.

Q.- What was your parent's attitude towards you while you were a child of about between 6 and 12 years of age?

A.- My tendencies as you know were to dress as a boy, lead a fairly rough sort of life, and they were really rather disapproving of this, they had nothing against riding and that sort of thing, but they was very strict protocol about dressing up and all this kind of thing.

Q.- And what was your attitude to being expected to put on smart clothes for social occasions and so forth?

A.- There was a fair amount of entertaining done and even if there was not one was expected to dress up in what I would describe as frilly things or dresses and things of that kind.

Q.- What did you feel about being expected to dress in these things?

A.- I felt most distressed, and felt rather like a bird that had its wings clipped.

Q.- When you were so to speak mucking about and were not expected to be dressed up what was your normal garb at this stage between 6 and 12?

A.- It would have been the kilt or riding breeches.

Q.- Did you start to shoot sometimes during this period?

A.- Yes, about 10 I acquired an air gun and did a lot of target practice, and went out and tried to shoot the odd rabbit.

Q.- Did your father give you this gun?

A.- No, he did not in fact give me this gun, I did a great deal of saving to get this gun.

Q.- At this time did you have a governess?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Do you know whether there was ever any question of your being sent to boarding school as your sister had been or not?

A.- My parents being of the Victorian kind did not discuss these things really with youngsters as parents do nowadays, but I gathered that they seemed to consider I was an unsuitable subject to go to school as I did not fit in.

original, p. 360, 361, 362 190 Q.- Did you ever have any occasion to hear what your parents view of you was at about this time?

A.- There was a particular occasion which I do recollect at Craigievar Castle where many visitors came to see around the old building, and as there is only one door if you are caught inside you could not escape unless you hid under a bed, and when these strangers came round I went and hid under a bed in a room next door to my own, and I heard my mother coming in with these visitors, and the air gun was in my room and a large old Bowie knife and she said, "Oh these belong to my youngest child, such a queer child, you know sort of tomboy and very masculine", she didn't know quite what to make of me.

Q.- What sort of age were you at this time?

A.- I think I would have been about 10.

Q.- How would you describe your relationship with your father?

A.- As rather a difficult and unpleasant one, he seemed to be very unsympathetic, rather more than that, he disliked my brother and he disliked me, my brother was very unhappy in childhood, and he ultimately made his escape and signed on as an apprentice at Rolls Royce to get away because his father was so unpleasant to him. I found life was very difficult with him. My mother I think also found life very difficult but she put up with it, as I suppose all good women of that day were expected to put up with these things. His tantrums and tempers were constant, and the unfairness of things that were perpetrated upon us had to be experienced to be believed.

Q.- Was there any particular reason that you know of why your father showed antipathy to your brother?

A.- My mother told me after I was grown up, of course, that when she had her first born child which was in fact my brother in 1893 that she was very proud of this boy and immediately said to my father, you know, "Isn't he wonderful, aren't you pleased about this", and he said, "You go to hell, I don't want a son, I wanted my brother Douglas to succeed".

Q.- Where did Douglas live at that time?

A.- Actually Douglas was probably abroad, he was in the Seaforth Highlanders, he was ultimately killed on the North West Frontier in 1908.

Q.- Were he and your father very close?

A.- I think very close indeed, their ages were close and they were indeed very close.

Q.- When did your father die?

A.- He died on the 28th February, 1934.

Q.- Perhaps I should also take when your mother died?

A.- She died on the 2nd March, 1944.

Q.- Were you taken as a child to see a Professor McKeren in Aberdeen?

A.- I was, I can't be really sure of the exact age, but I should think it may have been in the region of about six or seven, my recollection is that a paediatrician who my mother used to call for any children's ailments, I had seen him, and that he must have suggested that this visit to Professor McKeren was carried out.

Q.- Can you recollect any of the circumstances of this visit or the purpose of the visit?

A.- To the best of my recollection it was in fact because original, p. 363, 364, 365 191 there was some difficulty in passing urine, and the

paediatrician seemed to think I should go to this man to do something about it, and he did in fact carry out, I was led to understand, some opening up procedure to make this easier.

Q.- I understand you are not in a position to give any details?

A.- No, I cannot, I was really too young to remember anything very clearly about it. Of course, I was subsequently told a little about it by my mother in later years.

Q.- Did you have any technical terms?

A.- No, not technical terms, no.

Q.- As you grew older did your recreational pursuits change in character or not to those you have described?

A.- No, they did not, virtually I just enjoyed mainly shooting and fishing as recreations.

Q.- Did you take any part in any form of athletics?

A.- Yes, I did do that in the summer time in particular, I was very keen on getting the young boys from round the place, employees sons and so on, and the girls to some extent, and we used to organise high jump and long jump and wrestling, and things of that kind.

Q.- You wrestled yourself, did you?

A.- I did.

Q.- Perhaps I should have asked you, when you rode did you ride astride or side saddle?

A.- Astride.

Q.- You have heard reference made to a document here written on behalf of your sister last year?

A.- Yes.

Q.- In which it is said that your sister said "She had her periods regularly just the same as any other girl". I want your comments on that please?

A.- I feel that this is absolutely untrue, but I do feel that nobody can blame my sister for having said this, because I know that as I explained already my parents were very much of a Victorian outlook, and they did not wish to give the impression to the outer world that there was anything wrong, and therefore it was decided, apparently, not to tell my sister anything, because she was very much in the social swim, with a lot of bright young things, and it was believed she would not be able to keep this information to herself, and...well, I suppose my parents were shy, in fact, or ashamed of the fact, and so she was not in fact given the information so it could therefore not be passed on to anyone.

Q.- Did you in fact ever menstruate?

A.- No, I did not.

Q.- Did your mother speak to you about menstruation ever?

A.- Yes, she questioned me quite frequently, she had said something about, "You know what may occur", and she questioned me quite frequently about this.

Q.- When you were about 13 or 14 did you go to St Moritz?

A.- I did.

Q.- With whom?

A.- I went the first year with my governess and stayed with my uncle and his daughter.

Q.- How old was his daughter?

original, p. 365, 366, 367 192 A.- I think she would probably have been about 18 or 19, perhaps, at the time.

Q.- Did you her well at that time?

A.- Yes, I knew her very well.

Q.- Were you very fond of here?

A.- I was very fond of here, in fact, I was quite infatuated with her.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- Which uncle was that?

A.- My mother's brother, Charles Prodgers.

EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- As you approached and passed through the age of puberty did anything significant occur in your body?

A.- I used to have erections and emissions.

Q.- When did these start?

A.- I would say about the age of 16.

Q.- Presumably you knew all about these, what these meant?

A.- Reasonably well, yes.

Q.- Did you have a home farm at Craigievar?

A.- Yes, at Fintray.

Q.- You presumably were fairly well acquainted with the reproductive habits of animals at any rate?

A.- Yes, indeed.

Q.- When you had these erections and emissions did you wonder at all what your position was or not?

A.- I felt pretty clear about it, but I was so shy about the whole thing I just felt I could not mention it to anyone, least of all my parents.

Q.- Why could you not mention it to your mother, do you think?

A.- She was a very kind person, but I felt that she would not have....I feel then she would not have had any understanding of that kind of thing.

Q.- This was hardly the sort of matter which would be discussed freely amongst persons with a Victorian outlook?

A.- No, it just did not seem to be possible at all.

Q.- At the time you were having these erections and so forth what was your attitude to your contemporaries of the male and female sex?

A.- I felt an attitude of I might say friendship or camaraderie with males and a sense of attraction towards or by females if they were indeed attractive to me.

Q.- As you grew older did you ever develop or form any relations with an individual of either sex, any intimate relationships with members of either sex?

A.- Yes, I did.

Q.- When did you first form an intimate relationship with anybody else?

A.- The early 20's.

Q.- Of what sex....?

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- Your early 20's or the early 1920's?

A.- No, in my early 20's.

original, p. 366, 367, 368 193 EXAMINATION CONTINUED:- Q.- And of what sex was the individual concerned?

A.- A female.

Q.- At this stage can you tell me apart from penile erections and emissions whether there was any other physical manifestations of your body which perhaps are not normal for a woman?

A.- Almost about the same time I found it necessary to shave, because I had quite a lusty growth of hair on my chin and cheeks, and there also, of course, was hair growth on my body, on my chest in particular.

Q.- When did hair start to develop on your chest?

A.- I think it would have been about the same age, when I was 19 or 20.

Q.- You heard the various doctors mention the recession of your forehead hair, can you recollect when that recession started?

A.- I would have been more in the region of 30 before that would have occurred.

Q.- I think I asked you whether you ever went to school?

A.- No, I never went to school.

Q.- Were you educated entirely by governesses or governors?

A.- Entirely until I reached the next stage, the sort of pre-University change, at which time I was sent abroad to Dresden, where I stayed in a pension where there were both men and women, and we had an education of literature, languages, arts, music.

Q.- What age did you go to Dresden?

A.- I think I was on my late 15th or 16th year, possibly.

Q.- I think until that time you had governesses at home?

A.- yes.

Q.- Perhaps at this stage I should ask you to look at the photographs....

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- Did you continue any education after you came back from Dresden or did that complete your education?

A.- No, I did a bit more.

EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- Look at 8, 9 and 10 of Process, photographs. Can you tell me whether those photographs to the best of your knowledge are of you?

A.- Yes.

Q.- There is one I think of you on a pony in a cocked hat?

A.- Yes.

Q.- No. 9?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Have you any idea approximately at which age that was taken?

A.- I think it is actually in fact about 9 years, it could be 8 or 9 years probably would be nearer the mark.

Q.- And there is another similar photograph of you with a pony. is that correct?

A.- Yes.

Q.- No. 8, and at what age was that taken, do you know?

A.- That was taken at about 11 years.

original, p. 368, 369, 370

194

Q.- Finally, would you look at No. 10. Is that a photograph of you standing outside of Craigievar, is it?

A.- It is, yes.

Q.- With a shotgun?

A.- Yes.

Q.- At which age?

A.- Round about 20, perhaps 21.

Q.- At that time were you shooting with a 12 bore?

A.- No, actually it was a 16 bore.

Q.- Are you there wearing in No. 10 a tweed jacket and lederhosen?

A.- Yes, that is correct.

Q.- Coming back to Dresden, did you attend a series of lectures while you were there on literary subjects and so forth?

A.- I did.

Q.- Did anything occur while you were there at Dresden which resulted in a doctor being called in to see you?

A.- Yes, I was indeed seen by a doctor in Dresden, but I am afraid I cannot remember his name or very much about that.

Q.- Can you remember why the doctor was sent for or not?

A.- I think it was once again on the instructions of my mother to see if anything could be done about the fact that there was never any menstruation. She was constantly worried about this.

Q.- But you cannot, I take it, remember what the doctor did or said?

A.- I think all I can remember is that I got something to take.

Q.- Can you recollect about this time going to some laboratories in Paris?

A.- Yes, after I left the pension in Dresden - I was there about a year - I was back home for a period, and then I was sent to Paris to a similar kind of Institution, and attended lectures at the Sorbonne, and so on, and while I was in Paris this matter was pursued again, but I think before I saw a doctor about that a doctor was called in because I had a terrible plague of boils and pimples, a doctor was called in to see about this, and diagnosed hot blood.

Q.- Where was this doctor called in, when you were abroad or when you were at home?

A.- He was called in, in Paris, it was a Dr. Block who attended the Institution where I stayed.

Q.- Was there any connection between Dr. Block and your visit to the laboratories?

A.- Yes, Dr. Block sent me to the laboratory Le Tuille for investigation, and there were a lot of blood investigations done there and examinations, and a vaccine was produced, and I forget, there were various other forms of treatment, I cannot recollect exactly what did happen, I remember the vaccine in particular because it was a fairly vile one, and it was injected.

Q.- Was the only question under consideration at the laboratory the question of boils, or was there any other matter under consideration?

A.- No, they raised this other question of the periods, because they asked about this as an urgent matter, and this was indeed raised, and there is - it might be helpful to add original, p. 370, 371, 372 195 this - there is a tie-up between male development and boils and pimples and things, and nowadays these things in males are treated to some extent with oestrogen's.

Q.- Is that a condition which one sometimes sees in schoolboys?

A.- That is correct.

Q.- When you came back from paris had the treatment prescribed by the laboratory been successful or not?

A.- No, it was not successful, because boils still went on, and of course nothing ever happened about the other thing, because there was never any sign of any bleeding.

Q.- Did your mother take further advice about boils in Aberdeen?

A.- She did, I was taken to Dr. Tom Fraser and he produced some more vaccine, and I had a further course of injections which were finally successful. The other matter was pursued, but with no result.

Q.- Did you in 1931 have occasion to go to Baden-Baden?

A.- I did.

Q.- Was your mother at the time taking the waters?

A.- She was.

Q.- Did your mother arrange for you.....?

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- You would then be about what age?

A.- I think I must have been around 20.

EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- If it was in 1931 in fact you would be about 19?

A.- That would be correct, in fact I must have been about 18, because my birthday is not until later on in the year. I know I was in Baden-Baden in the spring of the year.

Q.- Was it 1931 or might it have been the following year?

A.- Actually I was in Baden-Baden two springs, it could have been either one of those, it is very difficult to recollect exactly, but I did see Dr. Schacht on both occasions when I was there.

Q.- I think he was a brother of the rather notorious Schacht connected with the nazi regime?

A.- That is so.

Q.- Why did you go and see Dr. Schacht?

A.- My mother was a patient of his, and she had a great belief in him, and she thought if I went to see Dr. Schacht that he might be able to help about this matter. Incidentally I should have mentioned, I think, I had also had some recrudescence of the boils, and Dr. Schacht's advice was also sought about that.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- "This matter" being the absence of menstruation?

A.- Yes.

EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- Was Dr. Schacht able to anything which helped you or your mother?

A.- He examined me, and he only said a limited amount to me, original, p. 372, 373, 374

196

he rather said, "You are all right, don't worry", but what he must have done he must have said something to my mother which gave her a far better understanding of the situation, because after the visit to Dr. Schacht, that was the first visit, there was far less restriction put upon me, and I was allowed more or less to dress as I liked, and I could smoke my pipe in the house, and that kind of thing, otherwise I always had to go outside and smoke it.

Q.- When did you start smoking a pipe?

A.- I started at a very early age, but I would say about 18, I suppose, in a serious fashion.

Q.- After returning from Baden-Baden did you ever speak to your parents about the possibility of a career yourself?

A.- Yes, I told my father that I wanted to study medicine, and he said, "Nonsense, I won't hear of it, you've had all the education I am giving you", and he refused, and I said, "Well, what about law", and that was also refused, and he would not put up any money at all.

Q.- I take it in those days he would have had to finance your education, University education?

A.- He would have had to finance it, yes.

Q.- So what did you do instead of taking up a career?

A.- I busied myself by doing any jobs I could do about the place, and tried to make a little money so that I could gather enough to put myself through medicine.

Q.- What about after your father died in 1934?

A.- When my father died my brother came to me, he was always a very sympathetic and understanding person, and I did not see him often unfortunately, because he had rather been driven out from home by the unhappiness of his earlier circumstances, and he never liked to come back, if he came it was just for a day or two days in his aeroplane, and then I think a few tantrums from the old man and he was away again, but when my father died he said to me that because of his business being very much abroad - he travelled widely in the aeronautical line - he said would I look after the Estates for him. He wished particularly to have various things developed apart from just the ordinary routine, he wanted a market garden run and a few things like that, and I did this for him.

Q.- And did he pay you a salary for doing this?

A.-he paid me a salary for doing this.

Q.- I think at that time your brother was based in London?

A.- He was based in london, he was frequently abroad, he went to Australia just after this time, he did a solo flight in a Puss Moth to Australia, and he was away there for about a year, and many other places, and he relied on me to look after things for him.

Q.- How long did you continue to run the Estate for your brother?

A.- I stayed at that job until I had made enough to start my medical career in 1939, he very kindly - we had always discussed the matter - released me from my duties, and I entered the University of Aberdeen to take a degree in medicine.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- In the autumn of 1939?

original, p. 374, 375, 376

197

A.- Yes, October, 1939.

EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- Were you presented at Court some time prior to 1939?

A.- Yes, it was 1930.

Q.- When you were 18?

A.- I would be 17.

Q.- During the time you were at Craigievar between 1931 and 1939 what sort of social activities did you have?

A.- Really very few, because I rather tended to withdraw from society and not embarrass myself or other people.

Q.- Why was that?

A.- Well, because the sex assigned to me was not what I felt I was, and I felt if I had to dress up and conform as they thought I should, dress in female clothing, I felt I was acting a false part, and I could not be happy in it.

Q.- During the time you were at Craigievar during those eight years did you have any close friendships with anyone of either sex?

A.- Yes, I did.

Q.- What sex?

A.- Female sex.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- Was that one or more than one?

A.- More than one.

EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- Did you ever at that time in those eight years have any form of sexual intercourse with any of those people?

A.- I did.

Q.- I don't know whether you can help me here, but have any of the woman with whom you had sexual relations at that time subsequently married or not?

A.- Yes, they all married.

Q.- I think that you qualified as M.B., Ch.B. in Aberdeen in 1944?

A.- That is correct.

Q.- Did you become Junior and subsequently Senior Casualty Surgeon at the Royal Infirmary?

A.- Yes, I did.

Q.- Did you thereafter take up general practice at Alford?

A.- I did.

Q.- Can you recollect the date when you took up general practice?

A.- In Alford?

Q.- Yes?

A.- Yes, it was the 1st November, 1945.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- Did you buy the practice, or just move in?

A.- No, I bought the practice.

EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q:- Did you then have an Assistant or were you on your own?

A.- No, I had an Assistant all the time, we had about 200 original, p. 376, 377,378

198

square miles and about 4,000 persons, so we could scarcely manage with one.

Q.- After you went to the University of Aberdeen in 1939 did you continue to form friendships with woman?

A.- I did.

Q.- Did you after 1939 have intimate relationships with any woman?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Have you ever in your life had any form of sexual relationship with a man?

A.- No.

Q.- Have you ever had any sexual feelings towards a man?

A.- No.

Q.- Did you in 1951 go and see Professor Cawadius in London?

A.- I did.

Q.- What was the purpose of your visit?

A.- The purpose of my visit was to ask him about my particular sex problem, and Professor Cawadius is an Endocrinologist of wide experience not only in Britain but in the European field, he is a very old man now, but at the time when I saw him he still took a very active part in his business, and he examined me and he said he thought that it was very likely that there were testes present. He said there were three things that could be done. The first was if one wanted to find out immediately was to do a laparotomy, an opening up of the abdomen to find out what was there. He said, "I don't advise this course, because of your age" - that was 39 at that time - "there is a certain risk attached, and I think this risk should be taken quite seriously". The second point he made was whether there had or not been menstruation. If there had been menstruation he suggested that the best line was to go on a course of chorionic gonadotropin, this is something which is contained in the human placenta or may be contained in other placentas as well, and brings about - has an action on the foetus in the intr-uterine state to bring down the testes, and it can be given in later life to bring this about, but in Professor Cawadius's view it should be used primarily for cases where there was menstruation or had been menstruation. He said if there had not been menstruation he thought that the androgens required boosting, and that the taking of some form of androgens would bring about or could bring about the descent of the testes.

Q.- Did he prescribe something?

A.- He did, he was keen at first, I think, that I should have injections, but I told him that I really could not do this unless somebody was going to know what it was all about, and I felt I would rather be discreet and not say too much about it, so he prescribed linguets of testosterone propionate, 25 milligrams, and I had, I think, a fortnights's course of this, and then I think I stopped for a fortnight and then had another fortnight's course, and thereafter he suggested that the right thing to do was to take a very small quantity once a week, and I was well warned of the dangers of cancerous development if you take androgens, and therefore the suggestion was I should take half a linguet once a week.

Q.- Do I understand from this that you were led to believe original, p. 378, 379, 380

199 that the initial dose of 25 milligrams was so to speak a sort of shock treatment?

A.- That would be the idea.

Q.- In an endeavour to react on the testes and make them descend?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Presumably a continuing much smaller dose would not have produced that effect?

A.- What Professor Cawadius gave me to understand was that there could be an immediate effect, but he said very often you took the shock treatment and you might have no effect for some considerable time, but that he recommended doing this. He did also say I could go back and see him any time if I wished to, and he gave me further advice about re-registration.

Q.- I was going to ask you about that, and I think following on his advice you went to see Sir Sidney Smith?

A.- I did not actually see Sir Sidney, but I had, had the privilege of meeting him on a previous occasion, and so I wrote to him and asked him if he would advise me about the procedure in Scotland, because Professor Cawadius said he knew there was a bit of difficulty about advising people in England when they had to be re-registered under Scots Law.

Q.- Largely as a result of certain advice given to you by Sir Sidney Smith did you go and see the Sheriff Clerk in Aberdeen?

A.- I did.

Q.- And did you subsequently petition for re-registration?

A.- I did.

Q.- And I think in the course of that you produced a certificate signed by three doctors?

A.- I did.

Q.- Three doctors in Aberdeen?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Have you seen Professor Cawadius since 1957?

A.- No, I have not, but he wrote to me, because he knew I had not re-registered at once, and he wrote to know if I was having any difficulty about the matter and offered me again if he could be of any assistance. I was in fact very tied in my practice, it was extremely difficult to get away, and the only time I could have got away he was abroad in Paris I think at some Endocrinological Conference.

Q.- Following upon your re-registration did you on the 10th October, marry your present wife?

A.- I did.

Q.- Have you had sexual relations with your wife during the course of your marriage since 1952?

A.- Yes.

Q.- We have heard the evidence of various doctors who have examined you to the effect that your phallic organ does not have a tube in it through which anything might be emitted. Do you follow that?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Can you tell me first of all, during the course of your sexual relations what happens to your phallic organ?

A.- Well, it becomes distended, and I perform the act, and the emission comes from the orifice, the urethral orifice just below, I feel it coming up under this part of the open tube.

original, p. 380, 381, 382

200

Q.- Is that so far as you are aware the urethral orifice which is close to the base of the phallic organ which we heard described by the various doctors who have examined you?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Lest there be any doubt about this, during the act of intercourse where is the phallic organ in relation to the other partner?

A.- It is just in the orifice of the vagina.

Q.- Since 1952 have you and your wife been happily married?

A.- We have indeed.

Q.- Until your cousin saw fit to serve a Summons on you in August of last year did you live you and your wife undisturbed and peaceably at Brux?

A.- We did indeed.

Q.- Am I right in thinking that you ceased practice as a general practitioner in 1955?

A.- Yes, that is correct.

Q.- Since that time have you devoted all your working hours to farming?

A.- I have.

Q.- Would you please give details of your farming activities? First of all what is the extent of your farm?

A.- Including arable and the rest it is about 1300 acres, but of that about 760 acres is arable. I have about 300 head of cattle, part of which is a pedigree Ayrshire herd, and we produce it and dispatch it bottled to Aberdeen every day. We grow roughly about 120 to 150 acres of cereals, and we have a hay harvest also of about 120 acres, and a silage harvest of variable quantity, perhaps 40 acres.

Q.- Do you run any sheep on the hill ground?

A.- I have sheep too, I have black-faced ewes and a small pedigree flock of Hampshire Downs.

Q.- What assistance have you got on the farm?

A.- I have one man, who is fully employed in the dairy, he does nothing else, and a woman who bottles in the dairy, she does part time work, just as much as there is to be done according to the milk yield of the day, and I have a grieve and one other man and myself, three to do the whole of the rest of the work.

Q.- How many tractors have you got?

A.- I have got four.

Q.- Does that mean that from time to time you are driving the tractors?

A.- I may do, I am not permanently a tractor man, my own particular job in the mechanised field is driving the combine harvester. I do all the wheat and barley myself.

Q.- You grow wheat at Brux?

A.- I grow a small quantity of winter wheat.

Q.- If you are delayed with your ploughing and have to get it done quickly do you plough as well?

A.- I might do. I would rather perhaps do extra work with the animals and let the other people go on, because my particular sphere is animal husbandry, I prefer that to machinery, and I think sometimes the other people prefer the machinery, and I push them on to that and deal with the animals.

Q.- Perhaps you are better qualified to deal with animals. Do original, p. 382, 383, 384

201 you in fact do vetinary work yourself?

A.- I do, yes.

Q.- I think we have heard you are an Elder of the Kildrummy Church?

A.- Yes, I am.

Q.- Do you still shoot?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Do you have a shoot at Brux?

A.- I have a shoot at Brux.

Q.- Do you fish in the river as well?

A.- Yes, when time permits.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- This is in the Don valley, is it?

A.- Yes.

EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- You are fairly high up in the Don?

A.- Fairly high up in the Don, we are between Alford and Strathdon in a general sense, we are really the upper part of the Vale of Alford.

Q.- I should perhaps have asked you about the Dancers of Don to which reference has been made in this case?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Can you tell me about that?

A.- I did have a team of dancers, I was very keen on Highland Dancing, Scottish Country Dancing, and i formed a team of dancers and used to go to festivals in the old days, and we rather retired from that scene and did a lot of work for charity.

Q.- When was this?

A.- I think we started about 1933, and we kept going until about 1950 with a break during the war years, of course.

Q.- Did you dance or were you an instructor?

A.- I did dance.

Q.- During the pre-war years in what capacity did you dance, as a man or a woman?

A.- As a man.

Q.- Were the Dancers of Don mixed or were they all male?

A.- We had a general sort of combined concert party of mixed origin, a mixture of males and females.

Q.- If you were dancing a sixteensome would you be all male or would you be normally male and female partners?

A.- Male and female.

Q.- Going back for a moment to 1952 can you explain why it was that it was not until 1952 that you took active steps to alter the position to which you had been assigned at birth?

A.- I thought when I was a medical student and later qualified as a doctor that I would be able to find out all sorts of things to help myself. When in fact it did not prove to be the case, because in the first instance, of course, I was very shy about approaching anyone about this particular problem, I tended to keep myself to myself, and in the second instance I had talked to one or two doctors who at that time but at that time it seemed to be something that had not touched Aberdeen in any way as far as knowledge of the situation was concerned, original, p. 384, 385, 386

202

and found I was really back at square one, and I made no progress, and then one day an old friend of the family came to see me, a Miss Aileen Scott Elliott, her father had been a brother officer of my father's, and she had been brought up not very far from us, and she came and told me, she said. "I always remember you as a small and miserable child that looked like a boy and was dressed like a girl", and she said, "I was sure you had a problem", and would I like to tell her about it, she thought she could help me.

Q.- Did she give you the name of Professor Cawadius?

A.- She did in fact, yes.

Q.- Supposing you had, had Professor Cawadius's name during your parents life time would you have gone at that time to see what could be done about altering your position?

A.- I think I would, but I think I would have reserved judgement about my action before I would have done anything, in case it caused any upset. I would not have minded about my father, but I would have minded very much about my mother.

Q.- After your brother's death I think we know that your cousin intimated a claim to be registered as Baronet of Forbes of Craigievar?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Did you also intimate a similar claim?

A.- Can I speak about that, my cousin - my brother was buried on the 3rd January, 1966, and my cousin sought a meeting with me, he would not say what it was about, but he asked our family solicitors in Aberdeen to arrange a meeting. We had a meeting on the 5th January in a place in Alford, and he said he wanted to see me about the Baronetcy, and I said, "What about it?", he said that he had put in a claim for it, what did I think about this. I said, "Oh well, it is supposed to be a free country, if you want to put in a claim that's all right", and he said perhaps that he oughtn't to have done it, and I said, "Well it is up to you". Then he told me, he said, "Oh well, my father arranged it before, and this should be done immediately, I am only doing what my father arranged". We had a chat which ended quite pleasantly, and he thought he would like to withdraw his claim. We went downstairs and saw Mr. Harry Forbes of Stronach & Son in Aberdeen, and he said, "How are you doing?", and I said, "My cousin says he would like to withdraw his claim", and Mr. Forbes asked him if this was so and he said yes, but later that afternoon I gathered from Mr. Forbes Mr. Matthews had phoned him to say "Did my client say this, because he doesn't mean it".

Q.- Whatever may have been the various discussions which took place I think we know your cousin still has a claim extant?

A.- Yes.

Q.- And did you at some stage intimate a claim?

A.- I put in a claim after we had, had quite a lot of comings and going's about the thing, and I tried to, you know, renounce the claim so that it could all be settled amicably, but as this would not be accepted I did in fact put in a claim on the 22nd June, 1966.

Q.- Do I understand that you investigated the possibility of renouncing the rights which you might have?

A.- I did indeed.

originals, p. 386, 387, 388

203 Q.- What was the purpose of this?

A.- The purpose was because my cousin wished to claim, and I thought if they would accept a renouncement from me that it could be handed over to him and all litigation about the matter would cease.

Q.- There would be no fuss and bother?

A.- In fact my cousin's counsel at the time did investigate the situation, I allowed him to investigate it rather than my side so that they could feel that they had complete freedom about the matter.

Q.- Did you subsequently withdraw your claim to be registered in the Registrar of Baronets?

A.- I did.

Q.- Just a final question on the matter, are you concerned to succeed to the Baronetcy or not?

A.- I am not concerned.

Q.- Am I right in thinking that your concern is to continue living peaceably as you have lived in the past?

A.- That is right, yes.

Q.- After you received a Summons in the Action at the instance of your cousin did you make enquiries to ascertain whether you could obtain further medical assistance from Professor Cawadius?

A.- No, I made enquiries as to whether he was still actively engaged in this sphere, and I was told he was so old that he really had retired from practice and was unable to undertake further work.

Q.- Were you put in touch with another doctor in London?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Who was that?

A.- I was referred to Professor Polani.

Q.- Who referred you to Professor Polani?

A.- My brother's physician in London, Dr. Stewart-Houseman.

Q.- Did you go to see Professor Polani?

A.- I did.

Q.- Was Professor Polani able to assist you or not?

A.- He did not conduct any physical examination or tests, we had a long talk, and he explained a lot of things to me, because I was entirely ignorant on the chromosome field, as it had been something new since I left my practice.

Q.- I don't want you to give details, but did he as a result of your seeing him refer you to some other doctor or not?

A.- He gave me the name of a doctor and I subsequently did contact this doctor, Dr. Peter Bishop, and he informed me that it would not be proper for him to act for me, because my cousin had already consulted him.

Q.- In the end of the day were you referred to Mr. Dewhurst?

A.- Yes, that is correct.

Q.- Mr. Dewhurst told us that when he first saw you on the 24th January, 1967, you had a plaster in your groin?

A.- Yes, that is correct.

Q.- Can you explain the presence of that plaster?

A.- On I think it was the 19th January I performed a biopsy and sent it to my brother's physician who was going to get it examined privately. Might I add at this point after my visit to the M.R.C. Unit in Edinburgh I was pestered by the Press.

original, p. 388, 389, 390

204

Q.- You referred to your brother's physician

A.- Dr. Stewart-Houseman.

Q.- Where does he live?

A.- I think it is Charles Street.

Q.- Where?

A.- Charles Street, Berkeley Square, is it?

Q.- In London?

A.- Yes, in London.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- You said after you had been somewhere you were pestered by the Press?

A.- Yes, it was agreed that if we had a summary trial I would present myself to Professor Strong and other persons at the M.R.C. Unit at the Western General Hospital, and I had asked if it could be done in the privacy of consulting rooms but a careful check was made on the security for leakage of information, but nonetheless I was pestered by the Press after that visit, and so I took great pains to try and do everything in the quietest possible way so as to prevent further pestilence by these gentlemen from the news.

EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- I think you are referring to the examination which Professor Strong told us about in evidence?

A.- Yes, that is correct.

Q.- And am I right in thinking that it was a condition of your cousin agreeing to this form of procedure that you should submit yourself to examination?

A.- To examination.

Q.- And this was the examination in question. Is that right?

A.- Yes, that is correct.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- That was when according to your recollection?

A.- It was the 26th November, 1966.

EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- You just had the one examination from Professor Strong and Dr, Jacobs?

A.- What I understood was I was only to see Professor Strong and Dr. Jacobs but when I went there in fact there was also Dr. Price who was not mentioned in the agreement, and there were also other people, there were in fact seven people in the room at the time when I was examined, and I was kept there about three hours.

Q.- This was the sole examination by Professor Strong?

A.- That is correct.

Q.- You said you performed a biopsy on yourself on the 19th January and sent it to Dr. Houseman?

A.- Yes.

Q.- For reasons you explained?

A.- Yes.

Q.- What happened to that biopsy?

A.- Dr. Houseman was going to a friend of his, a pathologist who I gather was retired or semi-retired and could examine original, p. 390, 391, 392

205 this specimen in privacy, and this was in fact done, I mean I sent the biopsy but when it arrived the friend of Dr. Houseman who was going to do it was taken ill apparently with a coronary thrombosis and so the specimen could not be successfully identified, so we simply had to call the whole thing off and start all over again.

Q.- Did you perform any further biopsy on yourself?

A.- I did.

Q.- When was that?

A.- On the 3rd March, 1967.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- Where was the biopsy performed that you performed on yourself on the 19th January?

A.- In exactly the same place.

Q.- Where was that?

A.- You mean in the groin?

Q.- Yes, which groin?

A.- The left groin.

Q.- Why the left?

A.- That was where the lump was.

Q.- When did you become aware there was a lump there?

A.- I had been aware there was a swelling for some considerable time, but it never protruded altogether, but during the month of January I had another severe attack of bronchitis, and during the coughing it protruded further and further and became quite evident.

Q.- When did you first become aware of any swelling in this area?

A.- This is a bit difficult to answer, because I have been vaguely aware of it for a considerable time, a year, two years, but I cannot be sure, because it was not protruding sufficiently from the external inguinal ring which is the bottom end of the canal which the testis comes through when it is on its way to descend to the scrotum.

EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- Did you have any other concern in relation to this lump apart from the possibility of its being a gonad?

A.- I did indeed for two reasons, one was that a nephew of mine, or rather of my wife's, who had an undescended testis, the operation was left until he was about 17 or 18, and when it was performed and taken down to the scrotum it proved to be pre-cancerous and had to be removed altogether, so when I was sure about the lump, whether this particular case had been on or not this is something that would have had to be investigated for my own peace of mind, moreover I had a scare about malignancy in 1959 when I had a ruptured tendon which they thought was malignant at the time and proved not to be so, but nevertheless it leaves this question very much in one's mind.

Q.- On the 3rd March did you perform a further biopsy?

A.- I did.

Q.- Was this done in the same place as you had performed the earlier one?

A.- Exactly.

Q.- Dr. Manson told us that you had spoken to him on the

original, p. 392, 393, 394

206

telephone?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Would you look please at No. 54 of Process. Is that in your handwriting?

A.- That is in my handwriting.

Q.- What did you do having got Dr. Manson's permission to send in the specimen under his name, what did you do with this specimen?

A.- I did not do the biopsy until I had obtained Dr. Manson's permission, because if he did not agree about this I would have had to have asked somebody else, so I did the biopsy early in the afternoon immediately after lunch in fact and I put it in a plastic box, the kind of thing one gets medical samples sent in, and I took it, sealed it up and addressed it to the Pathology Lecturer at Forresterhill in Aberdeen, and I posted it myself.

Q.- Did you also at some time give certain samples of urine to somebody?

A.- I approached Mr. Philip who is Senior Lecturer in Surgery in Aberdeen who granted one of my original medical certificates, and I talked to him about this business which was postulated by the M.R.C. Unit of the adrenal hyperplasia and here again I was ignorant and behind the times in modern procedures, but he advised me that there was a test which could be done and said he would get the special specimen bottles for 24 hours, and I gave him a 24 hour specimen, I believe, which he took to Dr Klopper, and this was examined and you have Dr Klopper's Report on that. I subsequently gave him two 24 hour specimens which went to Dr. Brown at the Department of Chemical Pathology, and they were tested.

Q.- Was there an occasion when you produced a morning sample for the minister?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Can you recollect when that was?

A.- It was suggested Dr. Klopper should get a fully authenticated sample, and as the minister was willing to act as courier and also as he lived relatively closer to me than the doctor I went up to the minister's house and passed a sample in his presence, and he took it to Dr. Klopper.

Q.- Can you remember the approximate date of that?

A.- I can look at my diary, I don't say I can give the exact date, I could try, it would have been in early April, I suggest, but I cannot really say, I think it might have been the 11th April.

Q.- I perhaps should have asked you when you referred to Mr. Forbes who granted one of your original certificates, did you mean one of the certificates relative to the Petition for re-registration to the Sheriff in Aberdeen?

A.- I did in fact mean that, yes.

Q.- On the 28th March was a biopsy performed upon you by Dr. Manson?

A.- It was.

Q.- In the presence of Mr. Reid?

A.- It was.

Q.- Finally on the question of tests, did Dr. Manson take some blood from you at some time?

original, p. 394, 395, 396

207

A.- He did, this was done in April. He was in fact to have done it when the biopsy was taken which was the 28th March, but he had been into the City Laboratory and requested heparinized tubes and these were sent, but unfortunately they were sent to Dr. Manson Peterhead instead of Alford, and so there was a delay of a week, and I rather think it was the 14th April when the blood samples were taken, he took two separate ones, 10 cc's went into one tube and 10 cc's into another.

Q.- I think those were taken for the benefit of Mr. Dewhurst?

A.- Yes.

Q.- I think we know you have been examined by Dr. Armstrong?

A.- Yes.

Q.- And also by professor Roth?

A.- Yes.

Q.- And by Mrs. Cordiner?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Are you still taking the linguet prescribed for you in 1952 by Dr. Cawadius?

A.- I usually do take it, I must admit I forget sometimes.

Q.-In what quantities?

A.- I take a half linguet which is 12 milligrams once a week.

Q.- This is I take it, very much less than the crash programme?

A.- Yes, I had a talk to Dr. Armstrong about it, because as you know I have rather a worry about malignancy, and I asked if it was dangerous and he said no, it was an infinitesimal dose.

CROSS-EXAMINED:-

Q.- You were examined by Professor Strong on the 26th November, 1966?

A.- Yes.

Q.- That was following upon agreement which had been reached between your solicitors and the solicitors acting for the First Petitioner?

A.- Yes, that is correct.

Q.- At the time were you aware of a swelling in your groin?

A.- I thought that there was something, in fact there were two places there were swellings, and I indicated those to Professor Strong and Dr. Price.

Q.- You did bring those to their attention?

A.- I did, yes, but they did not seem to think very much about it.

Q.- But Professor Strong I think told us, he did not, that he had conducted a pretty extensive search in that region to see if he could find any indication of any swelling?

A.- What actually happened I think in this particular region is that Professor Strong did conduct a very thorough examination in many ways, but he did not seem to bother very much with this, he put Dr. Price on to it, and Dr. Price examined it, and I showed him two swellings, one inguinal and one femoral which is slightly lower, and I don't know what he said, he went across the room and mumbled something to Professor Strong, but I gathered that they could not be certain of interpreting the findings.

original, p. 396, 397, 398

208

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- Were both those swellings in the same groin?

A.- Both in the same groin. I think you will find that Professor Strong says that varicose veins were present, and they may have interpreted them as being due to varicose swelling.

CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- But he also says in No. 48 of Process which you can see for yourself and which is his first Report at the bottom of the second page, "No evidence of testes was found in the labia or in the region of the inguinal canal"?

A.- Yes, I know he says that.

Q.- "Rectal examination added nothing to the findings on external examination". and he refers to varicose veins, an examination was carried out?

A.- Yes, it was carried out, but it was not pressed to any degree, that particular one.

Q.- You were very interested in this examination because at this point of time this was the only examination to which you I think were going to submit. Is that not so?

A.- The examination was granted by me in return for having a summary trial instead of a trial in open Court, so I had no choice in the matter, I had to submit myself to this examination or else we would have had the case in open Court which would have been very unpleasant for not only my wife and myself but all my relations whom I considered very much as well.

Q.- This was the agreement which was reached ?

A.- Yes.

Q.- On your behalf and on behalf of your cousin that this particular form of procedure would be adopted?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Provided you were prepared to submit to medical examination by doctors agreed on both by you and on behalf of your cousin?

A.- Yes, the agreement was not quite....

Q.- Is that not right?

A.- The agreement was not quite carried out, because we were led to understand there would be only two doctors who I would be seen by, Professor Strong and Dr. Jacobs.

Q.- Was Dr.Price's name not mentioned?

A.- Dr. Price's name was not mentioned.

Q.- If you look at the Petition which was jointly adjusted do you see in Paragraph 6 "Thereafter by agreement between the Petitioners....the Second Petitioner underwent medical examination on 20th November, 1966, by Professor Strong accompanied by Dr Price"?

A.- Yes, it says this after it happened, but before it happened I was not told Dr. Price would be there, and I did at the time mention it to Mr. Haldane because I felt we had not quite had a square deal for a joint agreement.

Q.- You presumably saw this Petition before it was adjusted finally by the parties?

A.- This is obviously written afterwards.

Q.- Do you say that it does not set forth accurately what in fact the agreement was?

original, p. 398, 399, 400

209 A.- The agreement was I would see Professor Strong and Dr, Jacobs.

Q.- Did you take any objection to Dr. Price's presence?

A.- yes, I did.

Q.- To whom did you object?

A.- I did not object there, I told Mr. Haldane afterwards that I did not think I was quite fairly dealt with.

Q.- Look at the letter of 24th October, 1966, from Tods, Murray & Jamieson to Messrs. Haldanes & McLaren, No. 62 of Process. Do you see there is mentioned in the third paragraph there that the examiners would consist of one or more of Dr. Court Brown, Professor Roth, and Dr. Strong but will not necessarily be confined to these three gentlemen". Did you understand that to be the position?

A.- I understood that at the time, but subsequently before I presented myself for examination I was informed that it had been agreed between I think Mr. Haldane and Mr. Macfie that there would in fact only be two doctors present, and I was quite willing to see Professor Roth, I agreed to see these gentlemen, but by the time I came to present myself at examination I was told in fact I would have to see two and the names were given to me,and the others would not be present because of the security arrangements for the Press.

Q.- Are you taking objections to having been examined by Dr. Price in any way?

A.- Yes, I do.

Q.- Why?

A.- I don't think his examination was a good one, and he also did damage to my arm, I had a loss of sensation for three months in my thumb and first finger.

Q.- Did you tell those people who are acting for you about this?

A.- I did, I also showed my hand to Mr. Philip the surgeon in Aberdeen, but we decided as there were so many difficulties that rather than make more I would not make a fuss about it, but since this arose I feel I am quite justified in saying something. Moreover it says in our agreement that no anaesthesia will be allowed except by express wish of Dr. Forbes-Sempill. What occurred in the M.R.C. Unit when I was lying on the couch bed, Professor Strong was at my right side taking buccal smears, that is scrapings inside the mouth, Dr. price was on my left side, and while I was having my mouth held open and this was going on he jabbed me in here and injected a local anaesthetic which caused the subsequent trouble.

Q.- Did you tell those who are instructing you about this at the time?

A.- I informed Mr. Haldane about it when there was no return of sensation in my hand after two or three days, and he informed Professor Strong, and I could have taken action about it, but I am not the kind of person who likes to take action against my colleagues.

Q.- Do I understand you to say now that you considered there was a breach of agreement which had been reached?

A.- I do.

Q.- And I take it you also say that you are prepared to waive any objection you might have been able to make to that breach original, p. 400, 401, 402

210

as you describe it?

A.- I decided that I would do that because I did not want to make the situation any more difficult than it already was, and I had no desire to make an attack upon a colleague, but I still register my objection about it.

Q.- This is the first time you have made this point?

A.- I am not quite sure in which context you mean.

Q.- The first time you have made this point to anybody who was representing your cousin as far as I understand it?

A.- Yes. I don't know if Mr. Haldane can refer to Professor Strong, he certainly did make Professor Strong aware of this.

Q.- Your objection is to Dr. Price being there?

A.- Yes.

Q.- And to some form of anaesthesia being administered?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Did you instruct any formal objection in this process on these matters?

A.- No, I said I was quite willing to leave it alone.

Q.- Tell me, had you read Dr. Strong's Report when you performed the biopsy on yourself?

A.- Yes, I read Dr. Strong's Report I think on the 5th January.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- Of this year?

A.- Of this year?

CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- When did you hear about the nephew of your wife having to have an undescended testicle removed?

A.- I think it was about last September.

Q.- That was some time before?

A.- Some time before, yes.

Q.- What was the purpose of your carrying out this biopsy on yourself?

A.- The purpose was to, the present purpose at the moment was to find out whether there was testicular tissue present and whether it was in fact all testicular tissue, and incidentally to find out if it was healthy tissue.

Q.- Was that incidental or primary, whether it was healthy tissue?

A.- I think to be completely straightforward I was seasonally busy at the time, I had my own feelings, but I would have sat upon my own worries, but I had to do something about the Court case, which was pressing, because I understood counsel required facts by the beginning of February or early February.

Q.- What I am wondering is whether this was carried out by you because you were dissatisfied with the Report which had been produced by the doctors?

A.- Well, I thought the Report, I was dissatisfied with the Report, and I certainly was extremely worried at the thought of having adrenal hyperplasia, because that is a condition from which one may become gravely ill and die, in addition to which it could have been due to a tumour which could have been again a malignant thing, and that was why I went to see Mr. Philip because he is in fact the head of the Cancer Treatment original, p. 402, 403, 404

211 Group in Aberdeen, he is Senior Lecturer in Surgery and of the Radio-Therapy Department.

Q.- Was it anxiety as to what sort of condition you might be in that caused you to perform this operation on yourself and send away a sample in Dr. Manson's name to the hospital for examination?

A.- As I said before I had to move because of this case, but I mean case or no case I would have done it some time, but I don't say I would have done it at that time.

Q.- If Dr. Strong's Report had not mentioned adrenal hyperplasia would you have carried out a biopsy on yourself?

A.- I think after the testis came down as it did if I had not done it myself I would have had it done.

Q.- That is, you say, it came down in January?

A.- It came down in January.

Q.- The position in January was different, but what had happened so far as your testis was concerned in November?

A.- It was more obvious, it was not permanently down, but it had come down and it had protruded from the external inguinal ring, which it had not really done before. This is what I always thought, you could feel it on the rim, but as you know testes do retract because they have this special muscularity and also if you happen to be cold it goes up, you see.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- The biopsy you took was from a swelling you have described, you remember earlier in your evidence, in two parts of your groin?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Was it the upper or the lower part?

A.- The upper one, if it helps your Lordship, very near here (indicating), near the inguinal ligament which comes from the pelvis, and the inguinal canal is above this, it is a finger's breadth above the inguinal ligament and in that line, and that is where the swelling appeared.

Q.- The lower swelling was where?

A.- Here (indicating), I think probably it would be right to say that would be a varicose one.

Q.- Can you describe in medical terminology where the lower one was?

A.- It is in the femoral region.

Q.- If you would just look back at No, 48 of process, Page 3, at the top, you see it says, "Varicose veins were noted on the left leg, including the upper part of the left thigh over the femoral canal"?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Would that be consistent or not with the position of the lower swelling?

A.- That would be consistent with the lower swelling.

CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- Did you make a particular point of bringing to the notice of Price and Professor Strong the fact that you had this swelling in your inguinal region?

A.- What I said to them was "I think there is the possibility of something here but it is for you to examine and find out". original, p. 404, 405, 406

212

I could not be dogmatic about it, because until it had been examined histologically nobody could put forward an exact suggestion about it.

Q.- No, but you were a doctor?

A.- I did suggest to them that they would find something there.

Q.- You were very interested naturally enough in the result of the examination?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Did you suggest to them that it might be an undescended testis?

A.- We did discuss this possibility, yes, we did.

Q.- Did you tell Professor Strong that or Mr. Price or both of them that Professor Cawadius had said in 1951 that he thought it likely you had a testis?

A.- Yes, I told Professor Strong when he took the case history that Professor Cawadius thought that the testes, they could be on the posterior abdominal wall or they could be on the way down already, and this was the purpose of the administration of the testosterone.

Q.- So all the information you had about this from Professor Cawadius and what you felt yourself was in fact put before Professor Strong and Dr. Price?

A.- Anything he asked me I told him, because I agreed to co-operate in all respects.

Q.- I quite accept that, but what I am thinking of is this particular matter, you see, because the examination was, I think, to determine if possible your sex. You knew that?

A.- Yes.

Q.- And this was obviously a matter which you perfectly well knew might have a bearing on your sex, I just want to be sure you did put all the facts regarding the swelling and the knowledge that there might be a testis before Strong and Price?

A.- I gave Professor Strong the gist of what Professor Cawadius had said, and he was not certain, of course, of the stage of descent there could be, and I did draw their attention to two little swellings, and I said "I don't know, you examine them and see what you think".

Q.- On another matter, after you had effected re-registration did you take any steps to get yourself registered as the heir presumptive to the Baronetcy of Craigievar?

A.- None whatsoever, I did not even know such a thing was necessary, the first person who indicated to me that it was, was the First Petitioner.

Q.- Did you know or not if you your name was entered in Debrett at any time as heir presumptive to the Baronetcy of Craigievar?

A.- I think that various of the Peerages and things may have put that in, but I had no part in entering that at all. I have never been concerned with that.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- Have you ever filled in the form they send you?

A.- I filled them in once for the change of name and the marriage, and beyond that I am afraid I never do anything original, p. 406, 407, 408

213

about it.

CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- Was that the form you got from Debrett you filled in, or Who's Who?

A.- I think I may have filled in two, but I do certainly remember giving them the date of my marriage, anyway.

Q.- You filled that in when you got the draft entry?

A.- Various things come to me every year, and I am afraid I very often don't read them, but I did definitely fill in the one about my marriage, that I can tell you, because I remember doing that.

Q.- For what publication was that?

A.- I think I filled it in for two, but I can't honestly tell you which two, because I really don't remember. It could have been Debrett, on the other hand it could have been Whittakers or Burkes. I could not be sure, I was not just all that concerned.

Q.- Did you take any step at any time to lay claim, I think you did, to the Baronetcy of Craigievar?

A.- I put in a claim signed 22nd June, 1966, which I think was not posted in fact until about the 27th June, it would have been received just before the date of expiry for claim which is six months from the date of death of the previous holder, but I did not discover anything about this until quite a long time after my brother was dead, in fact I knew nothing about making any claim for Baronetcies until the First Petitioner mentioned it to me on the occasion he sought a meeting with me.

Q.- Anyway, you subsequently withdrew that claim?

A.- I subsequently withdrew it.

Q.- You were born, I think, on the 6th September, 1912, and your birth was registered on the 22nd September, 1912, so we understand?

A.- Yes, I believe that is correct.

Q.- And your Petition for re-registration, the Interlocutor in that Petition is dated the 21st August, 1952, that appears from No. 50 of Process, which is the Summons, as well as from the Interlocutor itself, and I think you married on the 10th October, 1952, some two months or so after re-registration had been effected?

A.- That is correct.

Q.- For how long had you known your wife prior to getting married to her?

A.- I had known her since about February, 1945, so that would have been about seven years or so.

Q.- Was she one of the people you told us you had an intimate relationship with?

A.- I did subsequently, but just about the time of my marriage.

Q.- For how long had you been particularly fond of her prior to getting married to her?

A.- Well, actually I had been attracted to her very strongly the first time I ever saw her, but there was no sort of relationship at that time at all. She subsequently came to work for me, and under these circumstances everything was conducted original, p. 408, 409, 410

214

in a proper manner,but I was very fond of her.

Q.- In what capacity did she work for you?

A.- She worked for me as surgery receptionist.

Q.- In your practice?

A.- And my housekeeper.

Q.- When did she start to do that?

A.- I think it was early in January, 1947, about the 3rd January or something like that. I947 I think is correct.

Q.- So you lived in the same house for some three years before you got married?

A.- That is so, yes.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- Do I understand you carried on your practice from that house in which you lived?

A.- Yes.

CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- And your wife as she now is at that time acted as your surgery receptionist and also as your housekeeper?

A.- Yes.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- Living in?

A.- Yes, but there were other people in the house too, you see.

CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- Who else were there in the house?

A.- My assistant and a maid.

Q.- Was that Dr. Manson at one time?

A.- No, Dr. Manson never actually stayed in the house, because Dr. Manson came to me just after he was married and so I had another house for him.

Q.- Who was your assistant?

A.- In 1947 a Dr. Thompson and later on a Dr. Marina.

Q.- Was that a man or a woman?

A.- Dr. Thompson was a woman, Dr. Marina was a man, and then the next one was a married assistant who stayed in another house.

Q.- When was it you first decided that you wanted to marry your wife as she now is?

A.- I would say approximately June, 1950, but this is not an exact date, just approximately.

Q.- Did you discuss this with her and make your wishes known to her, that you would like to be married to her?

A.- Yes, I did tell her, and she in fact tried to discourage me, because she had thought I had always had such a battened down kind of life that I ought to be free, she is that sort of person, she thinks more about other people than herself.

Q.- What I am wondering is whether as must have been obvious to you the only way you could get married was for you to be registered some way as a male as opposed to a female?

A.- Oh yes.

Q.- Whether the wish to get married was really the driving force and the main reason for your applying for

original, p. 410, 411, 412

215 re-registration?

A.- I would like to be very truthful and fair minded about this, I think as you know my wish always was to be a male, and this I did desire very much indeed, because the other way of life seemed to be impossible, but I did also very much want to get married, and I felt the right to have my own wife and my own house and take my place as other ordinary individuals.

Q.- Was this the first time you ever wanted to get married?

A.- No.

Q.- Had you ever suggested marriage to anybody else before?

A.- I could not very well because I had not found my way out of the maze. I may have said I would like to, but as I had not found my way out of the maze.

Q.- This was the first time at any rate that the wish to get married was so strong that you felt you must take the essential steps to try and get yourself registered as a male in order to get married?

A.- Yes, I think that may indeed have been an incentive, but I mean it was not the only one. I had seen Professor Cawadius and saw the way clear, no matter what this is something I would have done, this I would have done.

Q.- Did you see Professor Cawadius after you had made up your mind that you wanted to get married to your wife and mentioned the matter to her?

A.- Yes, that is possible, but I don't think it is quite correct, I have probably suggested very much of marriage to her, maybe, until later on, because once again I am a fairly canny individual, coming from the north-east, I would not have wished to have led her into thinking anything was possible that would not have been possible.

Q.- I think I did ask you this specific question before, I think it rather arose from one of your answers, did you have any sexual relationship with your wife before you married her?

A.- Yes, just shortly before.

Q.- That is what I thought you said, and what do you mean by shortly before - before Professor Cawadius or after Professor Cawadius?

A.- No, I should say more a month or so before the marriage.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- When did the engagement take place, or was there any form of engagement?

A.- No, we were very quiet about that, because naturally we did not want to arouse any comment from the Press, we had been very, very pestered by the Press, and one's idea was to keep very quiet about it.

Q.- But had an undertaking been reached between you?

A.- Yes, after I got my re-registration an understanding was reached, and we had no special date in my mind, and I went and called at the minister and made arrangements to get married.

CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- Had you discussed the question of re-registration with your wife before?

A.- Oh yes.

Q.- Did you discuss it in the context of possible marriage original, p. 412, 413, 414

216

with her?

A.- Actually it was discussed first quite apart from that when this friend Miss Aileen Scott Elliot called at the house and brought a man with her who had seen Professor Cawadius and been helped by him, and there was a discussion with me, and then Miss Scott Elliot I think had some discussion with my wife at the time, not with any view to us being well acquainted or getting married, but rather she thought that she could help me and make me happier by explaining a bit to my then housekeeper, that she could help me in certain ways.

Q.- By that time was your wife obviously on fairly intimate - I don't mean sexually intimate, but on intimate terms with you, more than you would expect a housekeeper to be with her master?

A.- Well, we were very well acquainted by that time, but what I should mention perhaps in all fairness is that I did have a liaison with another woman which I terminated in the region of about 1949 or something like that, so that you know, there was nothing very intimate, if you see what I mean, during that period, but after I had terminated this particular liaison I tended to talk more and make a confident of my wife, house-keeper as she then was.

Q.- By that time you had to some extent at any rate found a way of life which suited you?

A.- I was totally absorbed in my medical practice, and I dressed as you know in male attire, and my patients all regarded me as a male practitioner, and that was just my life, I lived to serve the community.

Q.- If it had not been for the question of marriage arising would there have been sufficient incentive to you.....?

A.- Yes, there would.

Q.- To try to effect re-registration?

A.- Quite definitely there would, because I had lots of patience, I could thole things, but they sometimes were intolerable, and I can tell you quite straight whenever the opportunity presented itself I would have done this in any case.

Q.- You would at any rate have taken some such steps as were open to you, as you might have been advised were open to you to effect re-registration. Is that the position?

A.- I would have done just what I did do once I knew about Professor Cawadius, I would have gone on with my re-registration.

Q.- Did you have legal advice about your re-registration?

A.- I did not seek legal advice before because what I thought was that Sir Sidney Smith would tell me what was the right thing to do, I looked upon him as a meeting of the waters, so to speak, he would know the medical and the legal aspect, and I have correspondence, because I did keep copies, I never thought at the time it was important, but I did keep the correspondence from him, and Sir Sidney said he would talk to the Registrar General himself, which he did, and the Registrar General wrote to me, and he also wrote to the Sheriff Clerk in Aberdeen, the late Mr Muirhead who died recently. I never thought it necessary to go to a lawyer, because they simply told me to present myself at the Sheriff's Chambers at such and such a day, and I had to go, I think I had sent

original, p. 414, 415, 416

217 two medical certificates in advance, and when he saw me he said to me that it would be a good thing if I had a third medical certificate, and I got that and sent it to him and he granted my Petition,

Q.- Was Dr. Manson your assistant at that time?

A.- Yes, that is correct.

Q.- And the other doctors, Philip and Wright who also gave certificates according to you, are they still alive?

A.- Yes, they are both alive, actually it was not Dr. Philip, but in fact Mr. Philip, F.R.C.S. Edinburgh, in charge of the Radio-Therapy Department at the Aberdeen Infirmary and Senior Lecturer in Surgery at the University.

Q.- I want you to have before you No. 47 of Process which is a letter dictated by Miss Wright to your sister?

A. Yes..

Q.- Were you in your youth known as Betty or what name?

A.- Sometimes, yes.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- What other names were you known by?

A.- Various nicknames, my mother used to call me Benjie.

CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- When did your sister first go away from home to school at Crowborough?

A.- I am led to understand that she went when she was about 6.

Q.- You would not be born then if she was 7 years older than you?

A.- That is correct.

Q.- She would be home for the holidays?

A.- Home for the holidays.

Q.- Did you share a bedroom, or did you have separate bedrooms?

A.- We did not share a bedroom.

Q.- And then she went you say, to a school in Kent?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Again she would be home for the holidays?

A.- Yes.

Q.- And then to finishing school in Brussels, for how long?

A.- I think about a year.

Q.- And then back home to Fintray?

A.- Then back home to Fintray. It was not very long after that she went to India.

Q.- Did you see a fair amount of her in the school holidays when she was at home and you were at home?

A.- Not an awful lot, because we rather went our different ways, she naturally being seven years older, and my companions were mostly two boy cousins who lived nearby.

Q.- Were you on reasonably affectionate terms with your sister?

A.- No, we did not get on very well.

Q.- You had sufficient contact with her to form some sort of antipathy towards each other?

A.- She was a difficult child, and given rather to tantrums and things, and my mother said "You must give in to her", the same as she said with my father. We were brought up on a original, p. 416, 417, 418

218

policy of appeasement - "You must never cross them", because it made difficulties.

Q.- Did your sister Peggie treat you in any other way than as her sister?

A.- I don't know, I was just the youngest member of the family and there to be booted around.

Q.- If you look at the letter you see in the first page at the bottom "I always regarded Dr. Ewan as my sister". Do you accept that as probably being true of her?

A.- I said this could be quite true at an early age, she was not supposed to realise anything else.

Q.- But you note she says "I always regarded Dr. Ewan as my sister"?

A.- She certainly was not given the intimate information, that I do know, so perhaps she was kept in the dark about that.

Q.- The letter goes on, on Page 2 "As a small child, she was very delicate". Do you remember whether that is so or not?

A.- Yes,I think this is true, because at birth I was about a 4 pound baby and delicate and difficult to rear, and I had colitis and various troubles, and I think caused a great deal of anxiety to my mother.

Q.- And then she goes on, "But after her middle teens she became quite strong and healthy"?

A.- I would have been strong and healthy quite a bit before that.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- How do you know you were a 4 pound baby?

A.- Two reasons, one is my mother told me, and the other it was written down in the Family Bible.

Q.- Were you told whether you were premature or not?

A.- That I don't know, I think it probably quite likely I was.

Q.- But were you told, this is a question of fact?

A.- My mother never actually said so.

CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- The letter goes on "she went through the phase (as I did myself and so many girls do) of wanting to be a boy". You have told us what your attitude was, do you remember if your sister ever went through such a phase?

A.- Yes, I think this is true, she was quite a tomboy, and I know when she was at school that she did not get on very well with her lessons, she rather tended to putting her energies into climbing on the roofs and giving everybody frights in case she would fall over.

Q.- Was she quite like you in that respect, as you have described yourself to us. She tended to be a bit of a tomboy?

A.- I don't think she ever just sort of was keen on the sort of tough kind of things that I liked.

Q.- Did she not drive at Brooklands before the war?

A.- She used to go to watch it, but to my certain knowledge she never took part.

Q.- You are not sure about that?

A.- I am pretty sure that she was not actually one of the drivers although I know she was keen on going to watch.

Q.- Did she shoot as well?

original, p. 418, 419, 420

219

A.- She has shot, yes.

Q.- And I think she reached quite a high rank in the Women's Auxiliary Air Force during the war?

A.- Yes, she did.

Q.- The letter goes on "She went to parties, dances, etc., and was presented at Court in 1929 or 1930" - that I think is true?

A.- I was presented at Court, and I was dragged I think to one dance and a couple of parties in London under protest and duress and after that I made my escape home and I never went back.

Q.- We will miss the next paragraph just for the moment. Down at the bottom of the page do you see a paragraph which starts "From 1939 till the end of 1944 I saw very little of her, as she was studying medicine in Aberdeen and I was stationed in the south of England"?

A.- That is correct.

Q.- "I was invalided out of the Service in 1945 and my sister used to spend almost every week-end with me at Little Fintray which was my home. She stayed with (Tibby Cramb) i.e. Mrs. Maurice Cramb". Is that true, did you used to see her most week-ends?

A.- A part of this is true and a part of this is not. It is quite true to say that she saw very little of me until she was invalided out of the Service, but after she came home to stay at Little Fintray I had been staying when I had a week-end off from my casualty department, which was one in three weeks, at Little Fintray. On the first day I went to see her she presented me with a huge bill for my stay there, and I went to the cook housekeeper and said, "Your boarding house is ower dear, I'll never be back", and I did not go back either, so I did not see her and I did not spend the week-ends with her, it is quite untrue. I was out on one occasion seeing her, and she came back to see me in Alford on one occasion, otherwise the rest is quite untrue.

Q.- Why should your sister say something like that which is quite untrue?

A.- It is just a mis-statement of fact, because it certainly is not true. I went to Alford on the 1st November, and I could not have gone away if I wanted, I had a very full schedule of work even if I had an assistant, and as I have said my practice was 200 square miles, 4,000 persons, there was not the slightest chance of going away to stay even if I had wanted to.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- That is the 1st November 1945?

A.- That is right.

CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- So in 1945 you did spend some week-ends at Little Fintray?

A.- No, I did not.

Q.- 1946?

A.- No, before that, because I graduated in 1944, and I had left Little Fintray for good before that, because I had a house and shooting at Frendret near Huntly, which was a

original, p. 420, 421, 422

220

sub-let, and I took it for a year from the 1st August, 1944, to the 31st July, 1945, and I stayed there at that time, and I was not at Little Fintray during that time.

Q.- About how many week-ends would you have spent with your sister at Little Fintray?

A.- I did not spend any week-ends, because the week-ends I was there she was still in the Forces.

Q.- When was this week-end when you were presented with a bill?

A.- I went to lunch there, she asked me to go down to lunch to divide out some remaining possessions of my mother's, and she had at that time a Mrs. Ballantyne staying with her, and I went down for lunch on my half day, and we had lunch, and I said, "Well, I suppose we better get these things done, because I will have to go home before evening surgery", we were a bit rushed at that time of year, and she said, "Oh well, there is nothing really to do, we are going to the theatre", and they departed to the theatre at Aberdeen, I got the bill and that was it.

Q.- Why did you use the phrase which you said you used about the boarding house being more expensive if you had not been asked to stay there?

A.- I said to the housekeeper, just you know as a way of speaking in our own way up there "Your boarding house is ower dear, I am not coming back". Those are the words I said to the housekeeper.

Q.- You said you never stayed any week-end with your sister at Little Fintray?

A.- No, there was one week-end when I did stay with her, and there was a special reason for that, because I was involved in a motor accident, I was the passenger and somebody crashed the car in a ditch, she was resident at the time, she was on holiday, she took me back into my own department in the hospital to get stitched up and back, and I did not stay with her a week-end, and she was very good to me indeed. She could be extremely good and extremely kind.

Q.- Did she come and see you?

A.- No, she visited me once in Alford.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- When was this week-end after the motor accident?

A.- I think it would be June.

Q.- Of what year?

A.- It must have been June, 1945.

CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- If you look at Page 4 of the letter, just turn over a few pages, at the bottom of the page does she say, "So, up to 1946-47 (I am not quite sure of the year) I saw her most week-ends and we were as usual good friends". We have dealt with the week-ends, I imagine you say that is inaccurate?

A.- This is inaccurate, because I was in practice in Alford, and she visited me once, and I went down once to Little Fin-tray, and never stayed there after that time at all.

Q.- Is it true to say you were good friends as usual?

A.- Well, we were, how shall I put it, we tried to be amiable.

original, p. 422, 423, 424, 425

221

Q.- To come back to the other passage which you have been asked about already, which is on Page 2 in the fourth paragraph, where it is said, "She had her periods regularly just the same as any other girl". I think you say this is untrue?

A.- This is quite untrue.

Q.- What I am puzzled about is why on earth should your sister say that if it is untrue and she had no knowledge of it, say so specifically?

A.- I think I know why she said it, but I think the reason is unpleasant. I don't know whether you want to hear it.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- We may as well know?

A.- May I feel in a way it is irrelevant, and I would rather not say it, but if it must come out then I will say it. My sister died in a motor accident in October this last year, and she was in fact in financial straits, and she left 9,000 and apparently her total debt was 12,000. I cannot vouch for these figures, but I have seen them on paper. In October, 1966, there was to take place a meeting between my sister-in-law and my sister and myself for the purpose of dividing the family silver which was to come to us after the death of my brother, and we met at Craigievar and had a most amicable session, and the silver was largely divided into the various portions. After I went away from this meeting, it was harvest time, I rushed back to my combine, my sister stayed on with my sister-in-law Lady Sempill, and she had a very full discussion with her and she said she was regretting very much what she had done.

Q.- This must be hearsay presumably, this evidence, but it is being elicited in an answer to a question by me which would be somewhat difficult for counsel to take objection to, but I think it is undesirable that hearsay should come out unless counsel are agreed that the whole matter should be taken - perhaps I better say this to the witness, if you could just confine yourself to things that are within your own knowledge, because I understand you are dealing with something that happened after you had left the meeting?

A.- I am coming back to my own knowledge, but as a result of what my sister said to my sister-in-law, that she had given certain written testimony and that she now regretted, and she would really have liked to have been friends with me, and I felt sorry that she might be drawn into any litigation, and I called her on the telephone and said "Would you like to come over to dinner and discuss this", and she did in fact come to dinner with me and my wife in October - I don't know if the exact date is important, but I think it was in fact the 17th October. She came over and she said to me that she wanted to understand about things, and she was beginning to understand about things, and she was very sorry that she had written something, but it was written and she could not take back what she had written because she had already done it, but that my cousin had inferred that if she would help him he would take care of her financially, and she also told this to my sister-in-law.

original, p. 425, 426, 427

222 CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- Have you told your solicitors this story before now?

A.- Yes.

Q.- They were fully aware of all the facts you have just said?

A.- Yes.

Q.- What I think you are suggesting is that for an oblique motive your sister put this paragraph in her letter to Mr. Matthews which she knew was totally untrue?

A.- I say this again because she is dead and she is not here, and cannot defend herself, but I think that it would only be fair to say that she was ignorant of the facts, because as I have told you there were facts kept from her because my parents did not consider that she would be able as a bright young thing to keep things to herself, and I think that one should take that into consideration.

Q.- But why on earth should she say this if it was not true, that is what I don't understand?

A.- She was hurt because she was the one that was the outsider, because my brother and I got on very well, and she had in fact done something to him that was not quite fair, and he had forbidden her in his house. My sister-in-law asked her occasionally to tea, but he said, "If you have her here I am going now", and he would go to Inverness or wherever it was, he felt so strongly about it, and naturally she was hurt because she felt I was welcome in his house and he was welcome to my house but she was not welcome in either, and it was a very sad situation and a situation which we were about to ameliorate.

Q.- What possible bearing has that got on saying that you in fact had menstruated when she must have known it was not true?

A.- She maybe thought it was true. I know latterly she understood about it, but that does not mean that she understood formerly, and I think she was angry about this business, she told me herself in her own words when I re-registered that she was very annoyed and she thought it was all a lot of nonsense, and she was aggrieved because she had heard it the information from my sister-in-law and not from me direct.

Q.- All of which she says in her letter?

A.- Yes, she says that, but she was feeling hurt about it, and she just reacted in that way, and she did regret it, she gave me a very sincere apology the day before she was killed.

Q.- I want to be clear about this. Do you say your sister wrote the paragraph about your having your periods regularly because she hoped to get some money out of your cousin John or because she honestly believed that might have been true or for some other reason, or for none of those reasons?

A.- She just said to me in my own house, and I think my wife was present at the time, that "I am very disillusioned now, but I did believe in John and he said he would provide for me".

After an adjournment for lunch -

Q.- You told us this morning that in your early 20's you had an intimate relationship with a female?

A.- Yes.

original, p. 427, 428, 429

223

Q.- What did the female call you?

A.- She regarded me as a male.

Q.- Did she address you by some masculine name or what?

A.- Yes, that is true

Q.- Did she?

A.- Yes.

Q.- What did she call you?

A.- She called me the same as my mother called me, Benjie.

Q.- What about these other females that you had relationships later on in your life with, did they accept you as a woman or what?

A.- No, they accepted me as the male partner.

Q.- Did any of them call you Betty?

A.- No.

Q.- What did they call you?

A.- Different people called me different things, different nicknames.

Q.- Anyway, we don't need to go into that, they did not use your Christian name which was Elizabeth?

A.- I was never called that.

Q.- What did you call yourself when you said what your name was?

A.- It rather depended, in official capacities if I had to fill up a form and was required to write my own name well I had to do it, on the other hand I tended to call myself whatever the company knew me by.

Q.- If one of your friends when you were at the University of Aberdeen introduced you to somebody who had not met you before by what name were you introduced?

A.- I was known as Wink, because I was always winking.

Q.- That would be an informal introduction?

A.- That is what everybody knew me as, yes.

Q.- If you were being formally introduced say to a Professor or something of that sort what name were you introduced by?

A.- Usually in these circumstances we were addressed just by our surname, unless there were two people of the same surname there was no Christian name, so it was Forbes-Sempill, but you had to say Albert Thompson or James Thompson.

Q.- Was there no occasion at the University when your Christian name had to be used in introducing you to somebody?

A.- Not that I recall.

Q.- How were your letters addressed to you?

A.- Before I qualified they were addressed to the Hon. E. Forbes-Sempill. After I qualified I stated to my friends and everybody else I wished to drop The Hon. and I just became Dr. Forbes-Sempill. You will see this if you look in the Telephone Directory, I was just Dr. E. Forbes-Sempill.

Q.- Before you qualified did you not get any letters addressed to The Hon. Miss?

A.- No, The Hon. E., they would never have been addressed to The Hon. Miss in any case, that would have been entirely incorrect.

Q.- Were they never addressed to Miss Forbes-Sempill at any time?

A.- Never on any occasion.

Q.- What did you man friends at the University call you?

original, p. 429, 430, 431

224

A.- They either called me Wink or by my surname.

Q.- I think you have told us you regarded yourself as a man at that time?

A.- Yes.

Q.- But you were registered at the University as a woman student, were you not?

A.- Yes.

Q.- And in that particular sense accepted by your fellow students as a woman student?

A.- I think they perhaps thought I was a pretty odd kind of being, but I was friends with everybody, both the men and the women, and I kept myself to myself.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- You would be a bit older than the general run?

A.- I was, I was 27 when I went to University.

CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- Where did you live when you were at University?

A.- I lived at 27 Lewishill Avenue.

Q.- Was that digs?

A.- I was in digs before that and then I went to stay there with a friend.

Q.- There is another thing I ought to have asked you which arose out of your sister's letter?

A.- Yes.

Q.- It is on Page 5 where reference is made to a Dr. Innes who had looked after the family and who died about three years ago. Do you remember Dr. Innes?

A.- I do indeed, Dr. Innes was appointed family doctor during my father's terminal illness, and my mother was not very happy about the old G.P. who had been looking after him, and Dr. Innes was called and he came up, he was I think on some hospital work and one of the mental wards as well, and I knew Dr. Innes very well, but I don't recall at any time Dr. Innes ever attended me, because I was never ill.

Q.- What I am thinking of is he was the family doctor and I think you agreed a family friend?

A.- Yes, I would say that.

Q.- I wondered if you had ever thought of going to him if you were considering changing your sex by way of registration?

A.- Well, Dr. Innes as I have said was the family doctor from about 1934, well, 1933-34, and after that time there was in fact nothing done about any of my problems, and I was gathering my money to go in for medicine and I decided that I would in any case do nothing further until I got some more information myself.

Q.- Would he not have been the obvious person to have gone to when you were seeking a medical certificate for the purposes of your Petition to re-register?

A.- Actually I liked Dr. Innes very much and he was very jolly and hearty, but he was not a person who I would have approached about this, the person who I have discussed the problem with to some extent was Mr. Gordon Bruce the surgeon who was also the Queen's Surgeon and has recently retired from practice, and I was in consultation with him recently.

original, p. 431, 432, 434

225 Q.- But Dr. Innes was a person who knew much more about your background than either Dr. Philip, Dr. Wright or Dr. Manson?

A.- No, I would not say that, because Dr. Innes never really attended me for anything serious. I had been to Mr. Bruce as a patient for varicose veins and I had known Mr. Bruce an awful lot longer than Dr. Innes.

Q.- But Dr. Innes did know your family background?

A.- In as much he came and stayed and saw my father when he was ill, and he did subsequently attend my mother.

Q.- And he was, as I think you agree, a family friend?

A.- Yes, I would certainly agree to that, and a very nice man indeed, I have nothing at all against him, but nevertheless the person who I chose rather to discuss my problem was with the man that I had known longer, Mr, Gordon Bruce.

Q.- You had known him longer than Dr. Innes?

A.- Yes, a lot longer than Dr. Innes.

Q.- Your father died in 1934?

A.- Yes.

Q.- When did you first meet Dr. Gordon Bruce?

A.- Oh, I should think about 1923.

BY THE COURT:-

Q.- Was that in connection with varicose veins when you first came in contact with him?

A.- I met him before, I met him shooting, he was a very keen shot and a very excellent fisherman, and I used to meet him quite a lot at these things, and when I had varicose veins it was quite a natural thing to say to him could he do something about this.

Q.- When you say you first met him in 1928 that was really socially?

A.- Socially, yes.

CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED:-

Q.- When did you first consult him medically?

A.- I should think it probably would have been about 1935, but I would not just like to say that was the exact date, it could have been 1936.

Q.- There is just one other matter, the Dancers of Don, did that body sometimes consist of only females?

A.- Sometimes it did, yes.

Q.- And when it did, did you occasionally take the female part in dancing?

A.- No, I never did.

Counsel for the First Petitioner intimated that prior to getting information as a result of a telephone call to Dr. Price neither he nor those instructing him had any knowledge that at the examination of the Second-Named Petitioner on the 25th November, 1966, Dr. Price had injected an anaesthetic into the arm of the Second-Named Petitioner. It is now accepted that Dr. Price in fact did so.

RE-EXAMINED:-

Q.- When did your father's terminal illness commence?

A.- It was either late November or early December, 1933, I original, p. 433, 434

226

think actually 1st december, but I can't give you a very exact date.

Q.- When was it can you recollect in relation to that time that Dr. Innes was first called in to advise your father and mother?

A.- I think right at the beginning of the illness.

Q.- Until that time had he been in any respect a medical adviser?

A.- No, he was not.

Q.- But do I understand between that time and 1939 when you went to the University of Aberdeen you did not have occasion to consult Dr. innes on medical matters?

A.- No, I did not.

Q.- And of course I take it he had no first hand knowledge of you during your adolescence and pre-adolescence?

A.- No, because I never met him until this time of my father's terminal illness, and I did not require him myself subsequently.

Q.- Again I refer to the letter No. 47 of Process, do I understand that from the 1st, November, 1945, you were in charge of the practice at Alford?

A.- Yes, I really relinquished my duties as Senior Casualty Officer on the last day of October, and I moved out to Alford that night and took I took up my duties at Alford on the morning of the 1st November.

Q.- And did that practice prevent you having every week-end off?

A.- During the winter time one could never have had such a thing, and even in the summer I would say it was virtually impossible to be away. Dr. Manson can manage something now because he has a partner, but I only had an assistant who normally was not a person one could have left for very long without supervision.

Q.- You did say that you conducted your practice from your house at Brux. Did you also have a surgery in Alford?

A.- I was resident in Alford at the house and surgery until May, 1950, and at that time I moved out to Brux and the married assistant got the house at Alford where the surgery was.

Q.- You conducted your surgery from 1950 onwards in Alford in the surgery?

A.- Yes.

Q.- Brux I think is some miles away?

A.- About seven miles up river from Alford.