SUPREME COURT

Lyttelton Times, Volume XX, Issue 1129, 5 September 1863, Page 4

SUPREME COURT

WEDNESDAY, September 2,

(Before Mr. Justice Gresson and a Common Jury, of whom Mr. D. Kinnebrook was foreman.) REGINA V. HELEN MARKS, FOR LARCENY. The prisoner pleaded that she brought away the shawl, but hacl no intention of stealing it. His Honor said this was equivalent to a plea of "Not Guilty." , „ . lt . _ ■■ Mr. Duncan appeared on behalf of the Crown. The prisoner was undefended. Thomas Sugrue, sergeant of police, stationed at Lyttelton, sworn: On the 13th July last he apprehended prisoner on board the s.s. Airedale on a charge of stealing a shawl from Mr. White. He told her he should search her boxes, and she said " Oh, yes, I Have got it," and went to her bunk and brought the shawl and gave it to him. She said she took the shawl in mistake. He the shawl he received from the prisoner. Mr. White accompanied him to the Airedale, and before they got on board he saw prisoner on the deck, but on their approaching she went below to the ladies' cabin. Sarah White said she was the wife of the prosecutor. The prisoner was servant in her house. She Save notice and left on the morning of the 9th July before daylight. After she had left, the shawl was missing. The one produced in Court was the same. It had a mark in the corner which she knew, but there was only a thread of it left. She wore the shawl on Tuesday before the prisoner left. The shawl was placed in a drawer in the kitchen, and a few minutes before the prisoner left she distinctly heard the noi'se of the opening of a drawer in the kitchen. . - , Alfred St. John White, a contractor, living on the Papanui Road, said: The prisoner lived at his house as servant. The Sunday after prisoner left, his wife's shawl was missing. The one in Court was his property. He saw the prisoner on board the Airedale. . , The prisoner said the shawl was on one of the cots in the loft where she slept, and she took it in mistake for a skirt of her own. It was quite dark when she left, and she did not find it out till she was some distance on the road to Lyttelton, when she had no opportunity of sending it back. The Judge, addressing the jury, said that it was a very simple case. They had heard from Mrs. White that the mark which was upon the shawl had been taken off. They must draw their own inference from that fact; and if they came to the conclusion that the prisoner took the shawl believing it to be her own, she was not guilty; but if she took it with the intention of fraudulently converting it to her ; own use, then they must find her guilty. The jury, after a few minutes'deliberation, gave ii a. .verdict of Guilty. • . His Honor in'passing sentence said the prisoner i had been found guilty of the crime of larceny on the clearest evidence. He was sorry that a female Capable of earning an honest living should have so disgraced herself, and he hoped she would come out of gaol at the expiration of her sentence a wiser woman. His Honor then sentenced the prisoner to four months imprisonment. The Grand Jury threw out the bill against W. B. "Worley, for embezzlement, and the prisoner was discharged. The next case called was REGINA V. JOHN JONES, For obtaining goods upon false pretences from Mr. Bethel Ware. The prisoner pleaded Guilty, and said he was under the influence of drink at the time of committing the offence. The prisoner called Herman Cook, who said he had known the prisoner two years and considered him an industrious and honest man. Ser-geant-Major Pender also stated he had heard the prisoner was an honest man and bore a good character. Thomas Grantham had known prisoner for three years, and believed him to be a steady industrious man. The Judge said it appeared the prisoner not only bore a good character in gaol but for some time before, and it was to be lamented that he should have been betrayed by the baneful vice of drinking, into the commission of so serious an offence, but he was willing to give the prisoner the benefit of the good character he had received. He should therefore sentence him to three calendar months imprisonment with hard labour.

REGINA V. TAYLOR, FOR AGGRAVATED ASSAULT.

The prisoner pleaded Not Guilty. Mr. Duncan having stated the case for the prosecution, called William Burke, who, on being sworn, said he was a seaman. He first saw the prisoner about 5 o'clock on the night of the 15th August, at. the White Hart. Prisoner asked him to take a nobbier with him, which he did. The prisoner remained in the bar till ,gi x o'clock. Prisoner asked him to go to the Fleece with him and he would pay him for his trouble. He went with prisoner to Ruddenklau's, and they each had a nobbier there. From there they went to the Fleece and had another nobbier of port wine. They then went up Armagh street towards the police barracks, and as far as the second turning, and prisoner inquired if there were any houses in that street. He said there were. After some further conversation prisoner said he had lost his money. Witness said "Search me, I have only 14s 6din silver." The prisoner replied " Mine is not silver, it is notes." Witness said, "See, here is something sticking inside of your trousers," and prisoner put his hand in his pocket and pulled out a large watch. When prisoner had found his watch he did not search further : he then stepped half a yard back and struck him a violent blow on the face which knocked him down; lie then slit his face from chin to forehead by a kick. Prisoner then dragged him about the rosftl by the legs and he theh became insensible, and did not recover his consciousness until he was conveyed to.the watch-house. He suffered from Internal injuries and was quite unable to work, _ By the Prisoner: Saw the barman at the White Hart count out prisoner's money, and heard the barman a«k him to let him take care of it, Imt the prisoner refused. The barman said the money was £42 and a bill for something more. ' By'the Court: He should think it was five or six minutes walk from the Fleece to where he was knocked down. . Albert T. W. Bradwell being sworn, said: On the. evenintr of the 15th August last he was in Gloucester •S' He was going to Mr. Furby'i. near the Music Hall, he heard a loud voice importuning some one for money which had been taken from the person asklng. He heard the noise of a struggle and some one saying u Let me go homes" the reply was " You shall never go home alive unless you give me my He believed he saw a man against the fence. He then went into Mr. Furby't house, and upon -coming out shortly after, he heard the same voioes and the sound of blows being struck, and a feeble voice saying " Don't kill me." After this he iieard heavy moans and sounds as if a man was being strangled. Upon this he obtained a light, and he and geyerM persons went to the snot from whence the noise proceeded, It wae ver* dark, and about

midway between Manchester street and the Music Hall he discovered the prosecutor Burke lying with his feet in the gutter, his clothes nearly stripped from his body, and his features scarcely discernible. The man was insensible, and appeared to be dying. The prisoner was kneeling upon Burke s body. He said " Get off that man, he is dying." 'I he prisoner made some incoherent reply to the effect that he did not care, for the man had robbed him of his money. As he spoke he changed his position and sat upon Burke's stomach. He was then removed by witness with the aid of other persons frotn off the man's body. Sergeant-Major Pender arrived shortly after this, and witness then left. Irom a track of blood upon the road, it appeared the man had been dragged a distance of ten yards from Manchester street towards Colombo street, lhe prisoner said he had his money in a pocket, which he shewed to witness, and it appeared the pocket was unsewn, so that it could fall through. _ Sergeant-major Pender said: On the evening of the 15th August last he went to Gloucester-street, he saw the prisoner, Burke, Mr. Bradwell, and several other persons there. Burke was lying against a fence, with his face covered with blood, and clothes partially torn from his body. He was insensible. Prisoner said he had lost £45; he made a search for it, but the only money found, was 7s 6d in Burke s pocket, He apprehended the prisoner. By the Court: He had known the prisoner for some months, and beyond drinking sometimes, he knew nothing against his character. . _ . William Henry James, sergeant of police : On the evening of the 15th August last the prisoner was brought to the station ; he searched him, and found a watch, pipe, and a knife upon him. The next morning when prisoner was in the act of putting on his boots, a roll of notes fell from the right leg of his trousers. He took possession of the money, which consisted of £42 in notes, and a cheque for £2 9s 6d. Edward Batt, said he was a medical practitioner : On the evening of the 15th August, about eight o'clock, he went with a policeman to see Burke. He found him in Gloucester-street. He appeared to have received a severe beating. He was sensible. The inside of the mouth was bruised, and two of the upper teeth were broken. He recommended him to be taken to the hospital. The bruises he saw might have been produced by blows from a fist. _

This closed the case for the Crown. Prisoner said he was in liquor at the time. After leaving the White Hart he had no more recollection till he found himself in Gloucester-street, with his money gone, and his pockets torn out. His Honor summing up, said the evidence was so clear that an assault had been committed, that the jury could have no doubt upon that point, even if the prisoner had been robbed, it would not justify the assault, as he had his remedy by applying to the police. It was true a man may commit an assault to prevent his property being taken from him, but in that case the prisoner supposed he had been robbed, and thought it justified him in committing the brutal and savage assault with which he was charged. After a few minutes deliberation, the jury returned a verdict of " Guilty." The Judge ordered the prisoner to be removed, and brought up for sentence the next morning. REGINA V. GORDON. The prisoner was indicted for shooting certain pigs, the property of Harry Kenrick, at Oxford. Mr. Duncan prosecuted, and Mr. Harston appeared for the prisoner. Harry Kenrick said: The prisoner complained to him of damage done to land by his pigs. He told him to put poison on the land, and destroy them as Woodfield had done. Prisoner wanted him to shut up the pigs. He said he could not do so. One day he heard the report of a gun in the direction of prisoner's house; he went towards the house and found one of his pigs lying on the ground apparently dead, and another wounded. He saw the prisoner, and said to him "so you have shot my pigs." He replied, " yes, and if you will send the others I will shoot them also."

Cross-examined by Mr. Harston: He did not authorise him to kill the pigs. He warned him not to shoot them, as it was illegal. He believed that it was legal to lay poison on the land for the purpose of destroying animals trespassing. The words he used to the prisoner might hare been construed by him into a permission to kill the pigs. He knew that his pigs had trespassed upon prisoner's land, and he had obtained damages for the loss of the pigs in the Resident Magistrate's Court at Kaiapoi. - At this juncture the Crown Prosecutor declined to proceed with the case. The Judge observed that it was useless to go on with the case, and directed the jury to return a verdict of not guilty, which they did. The Judge then addressed a few words of caution to the prisoner, not to take such rash proceedings in future, which had the result of placing him in a very unpleasant position. It was apparent from the evidence that the prisoner was a man who would not willingly offend against the law, and he hoped that the lesson he had received would operate as a warning to him in future. The prisoner was then discharged. REGINA V. JOHN ALLINSON. —EMBEZZLEMENT There were several counts laid in the indictment, but, as the prisoner was undefended, the Judge thought he must object to more counts than one, and the Crown Prosecutor elected to proceed under the count for embezzlement. John Ward Shackleton said he was partner in the firm of Win. Stringer and Co. The prisoner was.in their employ as a warehouseman and traveller. On the 26th June last he told prisoner to see Messrs. Cameron, of Saltwater Creek, and look after some boots supposed to have been lost, and to return the next evening. Prisoner did not return. He had samples with him to enable him to take any orders on the road. Some three or four days afterwards he found the prisoner in bed about one o'clock in the day, and when witness inquired why he had not returned to business he said he was afraid to do so, but he did not know why. He appeared to be suffering from the effects of drink. Prisoner said, in reply to his questions, that he had been unable to trace Camerons' boots, but he had obtained some orders; He gave up his order-book, and said he would come to business the next day. Prisoner did not do so, and he saw him again, when he said he had lost £20, but could not tell how. Prisoner subsequently said the £20 he had lost were received from Mr. Bean, of Rangiora. Prisoner said he had been robbed, and they went to Sergeant-Mnjor Fender about it. Prisoner told the Sergeant in his (witness') presence that the money consisted of notes, silver, and a cheque for £5. Prisoner said lie had been at a house of ill fame on the Papanui road, and the owner of the house had picked up the cheque from the floor and given it to him, and they went to Mrs. Adley'a boarding house, inhere the cheque was changed for liquor. Prisoner alio said he had given a portion of tlie money to a girl. Prisonerhas not settled with him for the money received from Mr. Bean. Prisoner was empowered to receive money on behalf of the firm, but ought not to have gone to Rangiora.

By the prisoner: He Instructed the prisoner to endeavor to find the boots, and to return, if possible, on Saturday night. Prisoner had ft right to go to Rangiorii if It wm thought there was a possibility of the missing goods being there, but nototherwise. By the Court: The prisoner had an implied authority to spend part of the money for expenses, but he was expected to account for it. Frederick Bean, being sworn, laid .he was a carrier and ttprefceeper at Bangiom. About the end of June the prisoner was at hit- He believed the prisoner was a ommeft^4feveller. lor Messra, Stringer and Co. of Christchtifth, iu his wife had previously dealt with him bygiving an order for £100 worth of goods, which had l«sn executed. He paid the prisoner jE2O on Messrs. Stringer and Co.'s account; the money was in notes and a cheque for £&. The prisoner gave a receipt lor it. Thomas Oafces was barman at the Golden Fleece, Christchurch. The prisoner came in and called for two glasses of ale> lor which he paid by a cheque for £5. Witness gave him change. Cross-examined by Prisoner; He remembered the prisoner and Constable O'Orady coming into the Fleece in July last. He gave the cheque to a messenger to get cashed out of doors. This ckued the case for the Crown. The prisoner said he had accounted for the money to the nrm. He was prevented from going to busi-

ness by illness, and he had a doctor's certifies that effect. > t0 His Honor, addressing the jury, said the char.,,, against the prisoner was the embezzling cx-rt;U' monies the property of Messrs. Stringer and (j 0 j!' order to establish a charge of embezzlement it v.-J necessary to prove the prisoner was a clerk i n til' employ of Messrs. Stringer and Co., and by v i r J of that he received the property of bis emploviV and that he had failed to account for the mom.y in some manner which involved secrecy. Tin'.had heard the evidence of a member of tinfirm that prisoner was employed as traveller aJ sent to see about some missing goods at .Salt«at ( r Creek and to receive money for the firm if it Caiir , in his way, and it might have been his duty to % Rangiora; but they had the evidence upon that'am' it was for them to say if that part of the ease iv ; « made out. But the most important part of them'J. remained. A man might receive money, and j„ )ni V diately upon coming back might say "True it H did receive thie money, but I have spent it." in stK .| a case there might be great difficulty in making out a case of embezzlement, but it might be a breach 0 f trust. The important question was, whether tlif conversation prisoner had with Shackleton amounted to a concealment as to the receipt of the nionev irso, it was embezzlement, but if the jury concluded there was no desire of concealment on the part of t! t( . prisoner, that he was ready to make a clear br< a>t of the whole transaction, and that there was nothin" calculated to mislead his employers, then tliey bound to acquit the prisoner.

The jury, after retiring for a short time, returned into Court with a verdict of " Not Guilty."

The learned Judge observed, that lie could not allow the prisoner to leave the (lock, without a tv-»-words of kindly caution. The jury had evidomhtaken a merciful view of the case from the points suggested by the Court. He (the would remind the prisoner, that he had had a very narrow escape, and he trusted that the lesson which he had received would be a caution to him as to his future conduct in life.

The prisoner was discharged, and the Court adjourned until Thursday, at 10 a.m.

THURSDAY, September 3. (Before his Honor Mr. Justice Gresson, and a Common Jury). REGIXA V. TAYLOR. Thomas Taylor, previously convicted of an aggravated assault, was brought up for sentence. His Honor commented on the aggravated am] brutal nature of the assault, telling the prisoner lie might be very thankful he was not charged with murder. The prisoner's conduct had k-eu savage and brutal, and such the judge was determined to put a stop to. He would, therefore, sentence the prisoner to imprisonment in Lyttelton gaol for twelve calendar months, with hard labor. REGINA V. PROCTOR. —HORSE STEALING. Barwise Metcalf deposed: He was on Captain Harding's station on the 14th July. He saw the prisoner there. He came on foot about 2 p.m. He left on foot. Captain Harding had a bay gelding in a paddock near the house. He saw it about an hour before prisoner's arrival. Missed it next morning The paddock 1 is fenced. Three days after observed four rails knocked down and posts split; posts decayed. Saw the tracks of a horse. He had seen the same horse to-day; he is at the door of the Court. The brand is a wavy brand. The horses are sometimes away and missing for a day or two, but never go off the laud. George Wildborne deposed: He is ostler at Turton's Ashburton hotel. He saw the prisoner there on the 15th July. Never before. He was riding a bay horse. Believes it to be the same horse that is : standing outside. Prisoner was riding on a pair of blankets withouta saddle arid a rope bridle. Gave his horse a feed of corn and hay at his request. He said he was going to get a saddle soon. He showed him the food. Prisoner sail he would return the same night, but he never saw the prisoner till 12 or 14 days after that. He was then in cliarge of Sergeant O'Grady. Thomas Harding was called and stated: He lived at Ashburton. He was absent on the 14th July. He returned home on the 16th. Missed his horse ui bay gelding) on the 17th. Searched the run, and saw the horse a week after at Eangitata, fifty miles off. Prisoner had no authority to take the horse. Saw the prisoner on the horse in custody of the police. . Thomas O'Grady, sergeant of police, deposed that on July 14th he went after prisoner. He went tirst to the back country across the Ashburton, then m the Rangitata, which he crossed on the 19th. and found a bay gelding on the other side. It was at large on the plains, and had a tether rope round its neck. He left it at the accommodation house at the Rangitata. He knew the prisoner. He arrested him at Hunter's Hill on the 22nd, twenty miles south of Timaru and fifty from Rangitata. He gave the prisoner the usual cautions, and among other crimecharged him with horse stealing. He replied." i have quite enough of crimes without that.'" On t- ie 24th prisoner said, " I had no horse; I took a mare. I could have taken her to Timaru." On the -ioth lit said, "I may as well admit it; I have stolen t ie clothes on my back, and I took the horse on t.ie tether from Mr. Harding's land or paddock (not sure which.) No one saw the horse with me. whether it was a horse or a mare I took. brought prisoner and horse to Christchurch. Unhorse is now outside. The prisoner was »0 to w 1 miles distant from the horse when he was appiehended. He arrested prisoner three days atu-i finding the horse. The Jury retired, and after quarter of an hour > absence, returned a verdict of not guilty. The Judge agreed with this verdict, and attei • short and feeling address to prisoner, encouragnii. him to future amendment, passed sentence o. him for the two former charges, escape and laroi Sentence, three months for each offence. Anthony Knight, a juryman, was fined Xio non-attendance when called upon.

REGINA V. PATRICK KEANE. Patrick Keane was charged with stabbing ' intent to maim and do grievous bodily harm. soner pleaded Not Guilty. . , f Patrick Howard, of the police force, _ on the 24th August lie was on duty at the White ' Inn at 10 (to i past) p.m. Saw prosecutor ho t Harris. He was sitting down. Observed a wi> j 'and some blood on his left side. He took posses-- j of a stick and broken sword from a man m long room in the White Hart. Heard of » ro "' atKr [ had seen Jiobt. Harris. Examined the wol ' looked round the room, took the stick ami pai blade (now in court), from a man named urennii • Searched for Patrick Keane. Four days « 1 arrested prisoner at Willis' house, near the ra. <■ course, and cautioned him in the usual ma" • Prisoner said, "I have no recollection or " occurred." (1 . Bobert Harris, prosecutor, being sworn, stat • He was at the White Hart about io p.m. 0,1 , 24th August. Had a few glasses of ale "> tllC ' f room. Had a bit of a disturbance with some i • The man had a kind of walking stick Had . r words, was excited at the time; cannot reim the words. They had a scuffle, a number or 1 1 i got round them, felt something run iuto his ie • and exclaimed " I've been stabbed." Whent lic * . was over sat down, pulled off his shirt, and ex; his side, it was bleeding slightly. Some blood wa» flannel. The blood proceeded from a little no t ' v side. From the pain, it must have been sometl . Sharp that stabbed him. Had on a coat, waistcoat. ' shirt! and flannel. Had a pocket-book pocket, too low down tofwardoffastab. Tlie hole m outer coat (on being submitted to the iuiy lor mspt 1 no hole could be seen.) Could see no hole in <»'. v P l . • his clothes.' Could see none in either coat, vest, oi - . The man he scuffled did not seem as bi£ j soner. He had a black shooting coat on. (Pn^ 111 '''' o( - a rough white vacuna coat.) He had no reeolk'ctu blows. Recollects closing and grappling, but no struck. Cried out* " I've been stabbed," a 1 "1 srt Felt sickly after the stab. T) ton William John Speedy was sworn, and deposed: j the night of the 24th of August saw prisoner and tut j. secutor in the long dining-room of the White Hart, 9 p.m. They hada scuffle. Prisoner backed toward* '' table, drew a sword from the c»no in his hand, and: i m ' te thrust at prosecutor. Some one then snatched at the sword in two, and threw part of it into the n I' The prisoner was then on his hands and knees, w

face towards the ground, near the chcffiomer. Prosecutor came and sat down near him, and shewed the wound, it was half an inch below the region of the heart. He seemed sober. Did not see the prosecutor strike at the prisoner. Identified the sword-case and blade. It would make a wound like the one shown him by prosecutor. Was sitting to the right hand of the door. Saw no one strike prisoner. Saw no marks on his face. The coat worn at present, by prisoner was similar to the one he had on the night ot the scuffle. Did not hear the prosecutor say he was stabbed till he sat down. George Winscale, deposed: Was with the prosecutor at the White Hart on the evening of 24th August. Was in the lone room. Harris was three-parts drunk. Was talking to some men behind the door. Looked round, saw the prisoner lying on the table and Harris on top of him with a sword blade projecting over his shoulder He (witness) ran forward, seized and broke off part of the sword and threw it towards the fireplace. Hams sat down, and said he was hurt. Saw a mark on Hams side about an inch long, like a scratch from apm or nail. It seemed only on the surface. Prisoner was dressed same as he now is. From the way in which the stick was held when the men were on the table, it could not then have done any harm. This closed the evidence. The Jury retired, and returned with a verdict of guilty on both counts. His Honor, in passing sentence, said it may have happened in the scuffle that prosecutor was wounded, but one witness distinctly swears to having seen the prisoner make thrust, and that might have been fatal. The whole f was the result of a drunken brawl, and therefore to mark >' his firm determination to put down all such, he sentenced the prisoner to six months imprisonment with hard labor, from the Ist instant. BEGINA V. MICHAEL BURKE. Michael Burke was then placed at the bar, charged with obtaining goods on false pretences. He was defended by Mr. Moorhouse, and pleaded Not Guilty. The Council for the Crown having opened the case, called William Walker who, being sworn, deposed.—He was a shoemaker in Lyttelton, on the 11th May 1861, prisoner came into his shop and said that Mr. Price had ordered him to get a pair of the best boots in his shop. A pair was shewn, and he went for a pair of socks and returned and fitted them on. He said "I've got no wages, but old Joseph Price will call and pay you for them." Before leaving, he said place them to Mr. Price's account: it was his saying that he was authorized by Mr. Price to order a pair of boots that induced me to let him have them. Cross examined by Mr. Moorhouse, the witness said, "I did give prisoner his tea, knowing he was from the country. He talked to me about Bradford and a gentleman I knew whom prisoner stated to be his brother; but this had no influence in inducing ,me to let him have the boots. If I had not found out that prisoner was a servant of Mr. Price's I would not have let him have the boots." Joseph Price deposed prisoner was once in my service, and I remember his going to Lyttelton in May, 1861. I gave him £5. He wanted boots, but I don't know if he wanted other things. I authorised him to call at Mr. Walker's for two pairs of children's boots, which I had previously orderrd. I did not authorise him to get a pair for himself. When he returned he had on a pair of Wellingtons. I told him I thought he might have got a more serviceable pair. I never asked prisoner about paying for the boots, neither did he say to me that he had ordered them to be put down to my account. Walker afterwards asked me for payment, and I refused to pay for them. Prisoner left my employ. In answer to Mr. Moorhouse, witness said: Prisoner left me. He was owing me about lis. I had no settlement with him. I said I forgave liim the balance. This closed the case for the prosecution. Mr. Moorhouse briefly and ably addressed the jury, particularly calling their attention to the fact that, according to Mr. Walker's evidence, the false pretence was not the only inducement for his giving the prisoner the boots, but that it was according to Mr. Walker's own statement the prisoner obtained the boots; Mr. Walker having distinctly Btated, that it was his subsequent inquiry and ascertaining that the prisoner was actually in .Mr. Price's employ, that induced him to supply the boots; and, further, that had he not been in Mr. Price's employ, he should not have had them. Consequently, the false pretence, charged against the prisoner, was not Mr. Walker's only inducement, and . he (Mr. Moorhouse) hoped the Jury would take this into consideration; as, also, that the prisoner never having any settlement with Mr. Price, had a right to conclude, that Mr. Price had charged the boots against him in his books. "His Honor summed up and the Jury retired: after 20 minutes absence, they returned a verdict of Not Guilty. The prisoner was then cautioned, and reminded by the Judge, that he was not free from moral guilt in this case, and was then discharged. '« FRIDAY, September 4. Before his Honor Mr. Justice Gresson and a common jury. BEGINA V. GILLIS. —EMBEZZLEMENT. Mr. Duncan prosecuted, and Mr. Slater defended the prisoner. William Lacy Cameron said: He was one of the firm of Cameron Bros. In April last he paid a sum of £3 9s to the prisoner, on the account of Hargreaves and Co. Prisoner gave him a receipt as clerk to that firm. Richard Bradfield said, he resided at Lyttelton.: On the 26th June he purchased some goods from Hargreaves and Co. He received an account from the prisoner, and the next day he paid the amount £13 12s 6d to the prisoner, and obtained a receipt from him. Some time after hefreceived a summons from Messrs. Hargreaves and Co. for the amount he had paid the prisoner.. On seeing the prisoner he said he had not paid over the £13 12s 6d to Messrs. Hargreaves, as he had been summoned for £15, and had applied the money to pay it. The prisoner said he expected that he (witness) would receive a summons from Messrs. Hargreaves shortly, but he hoped that he would not tell his employers of it for a day or two. This, witness refused to do, and in prisoner's presence produced the receipt to Messrs. Hargreaves. The prisoner was asked by Mr. Hargreaves whether he had received the money, and he acknowledged that he had. „ . „ Cross-examined: He could not account for the ® £119s having been obliterated from the receipt. It had not been in his possession the whole time. Mr. Hargreaves had had it. David Palmer said: In July last he paid to the prisoner the sum of £3 ss, on Messrs. Hargreaves' accountE. A. Hargreaves was in partnership with his brother at Lyttelton as auctioneers; the prisoner was in their employ as clerk from Feb. to the middle of August last. One ot the prisoner's duties was to attend the auction sales, and receive and account to the Firm for all monies paid to him, and to give receipts in the name of the Firm. At their sales the prisoner received several sums of money from Cameron Brothers, from R. Sradfield, and also from David Palmer, which had never been accounted for by him to the Jnrm. The accounts in the books were still open against the above parties, and he sent prisoner to solicit all outstanding auction accounts, mentioning those three particularly. Oa his return, he said he thought he had paid m Cameron s account, but witness denied having received it. He sent the prisoner repeatedly, to collect Bradfield s account, and on md he corfd »ot Bad BmMM. Afer diij< after a summonß -»». Mtred, whenßradMi calk and produced a receipt signed by the prisoner Upon this, the prisoner said, he W received the amount but wouW pay it off on the receipt of his salary. At this time£l2los. ' was due to him,but there was a contra account, whichleft prisoner in debt to the firm. ■pay Cameron's or Palmer's accounts out qf his wages. Prisoner never voluntarily declared that he had received examined by Mr. Slater: although they had suspicion of prisoner, they could no* bnng anythinghometo L, and Lt him out to collect He™* omitted to enter a sum of money , . cag jj prisoner: he discovered the balanmg to casn. Never found accounts marked off m the auction were not entered in his cash book. This closed the case for the Crown. urisoner, Mr. Slater having addressed the jury p . th the Judge went tbfough the evidence, pointing out the main points for and against the pnsoner. jnt-rval, rethen retired, and after a short interval, turned into Court with a verdict of £a d Guilty. To a second indictment, the P ns o° .P. distressing The Judge, on passing j u^f^ e S "Sble situations in to see a young man who hadheld respectable situa _ England in such a position. Hc hia conduct, nity, during his sentence, of:reflce ting upon ms bet . and he hoped he would come ° uto S, ~ j e( j terman. It was to be feared that had been lea extravagant habits, and it wm probable, ducement, which had caused him . n our t on the which he was charged. The first indictment was, that the priso P geco nd kept to hard labor for six months; and upon «lese indictment, to which he had pleaded the senre of the Court was four months impmonm.BnttoM puted from the expiration of the P*® felony. BEGIN A V. GEORGE The Crown Prosecutor appeared for the U0 Mr. Moorhouse conducted the dete . w ho It appeared, from the evidence, that, thepnso was employed as cook to the gang o gd flne of h j g vcrnment works near Arrowhcnua, na T : n notes, mates, named John Neilson, of a sum , . gold, and silver, amounting in all to ab • defence by soner pleaded " Not Guilty, but aftCT .. „ an j gen . Mr. Moorhouse, was ultimately found ' _iT ft W)r The tcnced to six months' imprisonmentwith hard iaoo . case was one wholly without interest. . tjo The Court adjourned until Saturday (this day), a.m.