SUPREME COURT.

SuLivji'day.

(Before Sir Robert Stout.) Paying The Penalty.

Stephen Walsh, convicted of theft irom tllo person, came up for sentence. His Honor said nccused had a bad record, but ho w;is s-oing to rieiil leniently with him, as he believed prisoner would not have got into ilns double but *or Ins cravin? for cHnk. ~L>-* won.'i deal with him ai a m;t^ mer not usual in such casos. in tin-hope that prisoner _ would overcome the craving (or drink. Prisoner ■would be sentenced to six months' imprisonment, with hard labour, in Wellington Gaol.

In the case of Frederick Anderson, convicted of causing actual bodily harm, His Honor said the use of the knife must be suppressed, or there would be no safety for the community. Prisoner had also gone into the box and committed perjury, but would not be prosecutedtfor that. He-would bo sentenced to twelve months imprisonment. Alleged Burglary.

George Gardiner, John Muore, and Hum Kee were indicted on three counts, namely (1) breaking and entertering the premises of L. Giorgi and stealing therefrom tobacco and cigarettes to the value of .£6O or thereabouts ; (2) stealing the goods; (3) receiving the goods and chattels, knowing the same to have been dishonestly obtained.

Mr Fitzherbert'prosecuted, Mr Cooper appeared' for Gardiner and Moore, and Mr Loughnan for Hum Kee.

The following jury was empanelled :— J. Archibald (foreman), H. V. Penman, W. J. Cornford, W. Mclvenzie, J. Cox, W. Davison, C. Parker, D. Evans, I. Goble, J. Gilmour, I. Grelhor, and W. Kirk.

Mr Cooper applied for the cases against the Europeans and the Chinaman to. be separated. There was a certain amount of evidence against Hum Kee that could not be used against the other prisoners, but would prejudice their trial if the cases were taken jointly.

His Honour had not observed such evidence.

Mr Cooper instanced the statement of Hum Ivce as to dealings with a cheque, which it was alleged, he gave to Gardiner and Moore, and they cashed. That was the only possible connection that could be established between Hum Kee and the other prisoners, and might prejudice them were the cases tried jointly. Counsel quoted the English cases of Eegina r. Jackson and another, as authority in support of his contention. Mr Fitzherbert objected to the application.

His Honor said he dW not see how he could grant the application, in face of the ruling in the Queen v. Blackburn. Mr Cooper: I ask your Honor to make a note of it. His Honor: I'll make a note of it, but I don't know tnat there is anything in it.

The case then proceeded, all prisoners pleading not guilty. ... L. Giorgi was the first witness called for the prosecution. He proceeded to give evidence as already reported in the Manawatu Daily Times when the case

was before the Lower Court. Wituessk'ept

a special size of " Welcome Nugget," which, he said, could not be obtained elsewhere in Palmerston. He had tried

all the other local establishments where tobacco was sold, but could not obtain any. Mr Cooper objected to witness making statements as to the stock kept by other *> tobacconists. It was only hearsay.

His Honor: Nothing of the kind. If a person goes round-to all the establishments where tobacco is sold and endeavours to buy some and fails, it is not a.case of hearsay. He can't say that that brand is not stocked, but he can Bay that it is not for sale. Witness deposed that the tobacco produced was similar in appearance and quantity to that stolen from his shop. He knew there were sixteen sticks (number produced) t■ of " Welcome Nugget " stolen because he had counted them in the box shortly before the robbery. Constable. DeNorville gave evidence as to searching Hum Kee's shop and finding the tobacco produced. Hum Kee said he bought the tobacco. Asked as to a cheque for £16 he had drawn, Hum Kee paid he had paid it to a man for work done some time ago. Subsequently he said he gave £28 for the •whole of the tobacco found. He bought it in two lots, giving a cheque for ±'16 in part payment. Hum Kee then made further admissions, and witness and Detective Benjamin accompanied him to the Chinamen's gardens in Fergusonstreet, where part of the tobacco produced was found. At the police station Hum Kee made a statement —taken in writing—as to b; uying two lots of tobacco " from a young man with dark hair," who took the tobacco in a sack at night on two occasions. The " dark man" said the tobacco was not stolen; "it was as good as gold." The statement was taken down without difficulty. Another Chinaman was present and " explained things," but did not act as interpreter. The statement was volunteered by accused; witness did not suggest anything. . Detective Benjamin gave corroborative evidence. When searching Gardiner he found a £5 Union Bank note and a £1 note, together with silver. Cross-examined by Mr Cooper: There

was & considerable quantity of tobacco at Hum Kee's shop when searched, in addition to that taken away by witness. Oswald Vaughan, teller at the Union -Bank, stated that he cashed a cheque drawn by Hum Kee on March 31st. He gave three £5 notes and a £1 note. The cheque was presented by a man who " resembled the middle man " (Moore).

; "Is it possible for two bank notes ; bearing the same number to be in circu- ! Ration ? " asked Mr Cooper. " I've never heard of it." '' . Witness could not swear that the ' " infddle man" of the accused was the

man who presented the cheque. ■:'■ ' James Wood, cabman gave evidence , • as to driving Gardner and Moore, on ■ r the evening of March 23rd or 24th, from •; ; a boardinghouse in Broad street to past j; Hum Kee's shop. :: , frank Bell, Mary Dempsey, Fang s' WdngJ Ada Johnston, and Chas. New- •!. 'berry repeated the evidence given in I! <iire Lower Court.

1 : Constable De Loree detailed a statei ssrrent made to- him by Gardiner while the 1 Hatter was washing outside the cell.

Qardiner said: " How's the case getting

.' on?" and added, "I've had some close 1 shaves and have always managed to get j off.-We gave you no chance; every- ' thing was done bo well. I was the

;; Jboßß.-" j ."You'r pretty smart," said witness. '<■ . MYes; I get most of the-money and : tfire other blokes do the dirty work. !. Maore might get into trouble, but you've ; ! mo chance against me." I Moore came out afterwards and said,

•"If ifebe others have split I'll put their ■; pot tight on." His Honour: " What does that

mean ? ""

" I don't know."

His Honour: " It's a slang expression, I suppose?" "Yes."

" Well, what does it mean ? " " Oh, it means ho would ' put them up,' I suppose." Continuing, witness said Moore

added: " There are several in this town

':■ -who ought to be in gaol; they've got > (others doing sentences that they ought , Jiole.doing themselves." ' Witness was sure as to the entries in ■*h t* aoteisoolk and his statements. He ga %& be made a rough draft of what occ urrai The entries were made about thre^ * ioMra later. * Air Coop«r : " What I suggest is that the coi wers*tion never took place in the yard at i*R> *"?* in the train itQIAI Wanganui You sa"* "-The game's up; we've cot' tho Cht> w» and nß>a been crying at the station** * couplf of days The China-man &ft» blown the gaff.' Is that so?' 1 ■ t ■■ . „ "It's an abb\-»lm9 concoction. >' Bid You eve V say anything about the Chiimman having bjjwn the gaff ? " "Eio; I awear l.didat. Uiob concluded the caße for the said he M «* ***** Cal£ D&glTaeLcefo r HumKccec MrLoughnan said the tfnly evidence ar /ainst his client was the peculiar staten/ent made to Constable I>t lSorville. He was going to call witnesses to prove tjhat Hum KSe had, only a very broken "knowledge of English, and that hfi bore »n excellent character. * Bicbard Essex was the first witness called. He had known Hum Kee ior about nine years ; had had many buai•ness transactions with him, and always .found him very honest and straightiforward. He bore an excellent- reputa- ' . >tibn among English people. "Heis as "\ good as »ny white man I've met. '"■' Hi« Honor: "No doubt some China- '' ■ are very fine men." Continuing: Witness said Hum Kee »Wfc* iO Tery broken English, and there

iiiid ,m<!' i'l-.-i) misunderstandings betu\ cii t1" ■■■ Jg:.h ,!.)i'i-s had kuown the prisoner eight or niio years, and always found him straightforward. His English was not very good ; sometimes he could not be understood.

Fred Mowlem' had found Hum Kee honest. His knowledge of English was that of the average Chinaman. Wm. Brophy and F. S. Goldingham testified to i risoner's good character. The latter said his English was not particularly jrood. In the course, of business there I-iml orien \t,-c<\ mistakes betwve-n \V!llll->s" jj- ill Mliw 11.11111 KtV 011 '•.'•■.•.'l.'i of the ia^i-r's ivi-lish.

This concluded tho evidence, and the Court adjourned till this morning. His Honour warned the jury against holding communication with anybody in regard to the case.