NEW PLYMOUTH SESSIONS

The quarterly sessions of the Supreme Court at New Plymouth opened yesterday morning, before His Honor Mr Justice Hosking. A commencement was made on the criminal cases, of which there were three on the list. Thomas Knutsen was arraigned on* a charge of false pretences at Patea, and inormations for fraudulency were concerned in the case against George Hindi. ■ Wilful damage in breaking plate glass windows at Opunake was also set down against H. A. James. In his charge to the Grand Jury, His Honor there were only three cases on the list of indictable charges. The first was an old and weli-knewn offence, that of obtaining unoney by false pretences, by the issue jpf a valueless cheque. The Grand Jury, he thought, yould have no difficulty in coming to a conclusion that a prima facie case had been established by the Crown. There was also a charge "against an employee of laying failed to account for moneys received on behalf of his employer, the case, being one of alleged embezzlement. There were five different sums of money involved. ; The jury found, true bills in the above two caseß.

The third case, His Honor said, was a charge of damaging property, the occurrence concerned being the breaking of plate glass windows', a matter which very often involved the proprietor in very considerable expense. In order xo ;bnng it forward as an indictable offence it must be committed at night, and in this case it obviously happened at night. The incidents that night, So far as the accusedwwats t concerned, were that he was among a. party of other men, and that a gathering took place opposite the shop in -which the window was broken. About midnight half a dozen merry .persons were singing and drinking beer out of bottles. They were there for a considerable time, a nd apparently went away and came back again. All the witnesses for the Crown, and accused and his brother, ■were included in the party. The witnesses stated that while all were drinking .and singing none of them broke the window while they . were' there. They all separated between 12.30 and 2 o'clock, accused and his brother, who had bicycles, riding off. Accused himself made a statement in which he denied having had anything to do with the breaking of the windows. In this case, His Honor said, there was some interesting finger print evidence which' the Crown presented. A bottl e was found at the back of the window that was broken, and there were some prints on it. These were taken, and one fingen print was found to correspond with the finger (prints of accused. They were asked to draw the conclusion from this that the bottle was thrown by accused. Another finger print, however, on the bottle had not been identified. The finger .prints of all his, companions had been taken, but it was not similar t"o any of theirs.. Finger print evidence was admitted in the courts as one of the best methods of identification. In this case, however, a party were drink-; irig outside the shop out of beer bottles without using tumblers. The finger prints of various persons who handled the bottle may have got on it without their being parties to throwing the bottle. The jury had to decide whether the gap in the evidence had been sufficiently made up to establish a. prima iacie case.

In the above instance the grand jury reported no bill, and the accused (James) was t discharged.

FALSE PRETENCES,

A charge of obtaining £2 10s m money from Louis Lee, a Chinese market gardener at Patea, by issuing a valueless cheque in October last, was preferred • against Thomas Knutsen. Mr C. H. Weston (Crown Prosecutor) conducted proceedings for the prosecution. Knutsen, who was not represented by counsel, pleaded not guilty. He conducted his own defence.

Mr Weston said that some four or five days before the alleged offence was perpetrated the accused called on Mr Stevenson, manager of the Bank of New Zealand at Patea, and had an interview with.him. At that, time Knutsen seemed to be either intoxicated or not quite in' his right mind, and altogether the manager said he could not make much out of the interview. Accused apparently wanted the manager to recognise his signature. A few days after ivnutsen called at the bank and. obtained a blank cheque from the lady clerk, telling her he was transferring his account to-the Patea branch. Nexl clay Knutsen called on Louis (Lee, from whom he had already bought vegetables on credit, and purchased some more vegetables, tendering a, cheque for £5 as payment, and the Chinaman squared the account and gave £2 10s change. Lee himself did not cash the cheque, but gave ft to another Chinaman named. Wong, who took it to the bank and discovered it was valueless.

6. H. Stevenson, bank manager, Patea, said that when Knutsen first came to see him his remarks were a general; mix-up, as he talked about buying motor launches and farms, and also said something about the war. He gave a Specimen signature, which witness later threw in the waste paper basket. Later a cheque - signed by Knutsen came before him through. Adams ana vSons, with an equiry if it was all right^ and he returned it* stating there was no account. The cheque was afterI wards presented by a Cninaman named ! Wong.

Evidence regarding the cheque was aißo given by Margaret A. Homer, telfer at the bank at Patea.

Louis Lee, market gardener, recounted various dealings with, the accused, and was subjected to lengthy crossexamination by Knutsen, who affirmed that Lee was not telling the truth. His contention appeared to be that Lee was to get 10s for holding-the cheque and presenting it the following Saturday. After the evidence for the prosecution concluded, Knutsen was asked *i he desired to give evidence. He then briefly addressed the jury,' stating that ho had always told the truth m the matter. If Lee had kept the cheque, he said, there would have been no trouble. He had over £22 in wages , due to him at the time, which he could hnve got by going six miles, and als* had a private, income of £1 per. week.

He pointed out that he had been in goal .since December 10. After a short retirement* the jury brought in a verdict of guilty. Hi* Honor announced that he would defer sentence till to-day and, addressing fmsaner, pointed out that there was a ong list of convictions against htm. His Honor said he-thought he would have to declare. Kmit sen an habitual criminal, as there had been fifteen con- ' victions against him ' since 1912. In 1918 there were a number of cases of false .pretences against prisoner and also one of using obscene language: It appeared to be wasting time .to'commit him for three months. He would give Knutsen a chance of considering the position, and he could make a statement, if he desired, before sentence was passed. CHARGE OF EMBEZZLEMENT. . Sums of money totalling £92 10s were involved in a case of alleged embezztement, when a young man, George Hinch, was charged with failing to account for moneys received on behalf of J. A. Sargent, trading at Hawera as the . Sargent Electrical Supplies Company, by. whom accused was employed as a traveller. Mr C. H. Weston (Crown Prosecutor):conducted the case, and accused was represented by Mr P. O'Dea. [ The details were published when the case came before the Magistrate in Hawera. Evidence was given by J. ASaW'ent, who, cross-examined by M** O'Bia, denied that he had given authority for Hinch to '■ deduct his commission from the amounts received as deposits on contracts. The Court subsequently adjourned till lv a.m. to-day, Hinch being released under existing Bail.- News."