SUPREME COURT.

Otago Witness, Issue 2362, 1 June 1899, Page 22

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SESSIONS.

Monday, May 29. His Honor Mr Justice Williams took his seat on the bench at 10.30 a.m.

The criminal sessions of the Supreme Gourt commenced before his Honor Mjr Justice Williams yesterday morning, and a large number of cases had been dealt with when the court adjourned at half -past 5. True bills were returned in all the indictments. Charles Richard Manlove pleaded guilty to a- charge of false pretences, and was sentenced to s>ix months' imprisonment. Two young men, Howard and Moffet, pleaded guilty to separate indictments for bicycle stealing, and were both sentenced to nine months' imprisonment. A man who pleaded guilty to a charge of larceny from a dwelling was admitted to probation, and another who had attempted to commit suicide was cautioned and ordered to come up for sentence when called upon. Joseph Jackson was convicted on two charges of forgery, and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment, and a similar sentence was passed upon Charles Smith, who pleaded guilty to a charge of larceny from a dwelling. Anoth«r prisoner, Samuel Southa.ni, who pleaded guilty to house-breaking, was admitted to probation ; James P. Casey, an old offender, who was convicted of house-breaking and larceny under circumstances which his Honor said rendered it a particularly mean crime, was sentenced to two years' imprisonment ; and William Keath, who was charged with stealing from a dwelling, was acquitted by the jury

"" THEFT OF BICYCLES,

Andrew Howard was charged with stealing from the premises of the Otago Club, in High street, in March last, a bicycle, the property of M. J . Scobie "Mackenzie.

The accused who was already undergoing a sentence, pleaded "guilty," and gave his age as 20.

His Honor sentenced the prisoner to nine months' imprisonment with hard labour, the sentence to commence at the expiration of his previous sentence. John Moffett was charged with the theft, on March 3, from the Otago Club, of a bicycle, the property of Frank Pattullo. Prisoner pleaded guilty, and stated that he was 19 years old. The case was exactly similar to the foregoing one, and prisoner had the same record. Mr R. Hudson gave evidence as to prisoner's character. He said lie had worked for K. Hudson and Co. for some time, and had behaved himself very well. The Crown Prosecutor said that prisoner was born in New Zealand, and was 20 yeard of agp. There were two previous convictions against him, both being subsequent to the theft of the bicycle. They occurred at Invercargill. One was for the theft of a brooch and earrings, and the second was for being concerned in die theft of come liquor. He was at present undergoing sentence for tlieso offences. Prisoner was hentencod to nine months' imprisonment, with hard labour, the sentence to commence on the expiration of the previous sentence.

ATTEMPTED SUICIDE,

Charles Leys was charged with having, on March 30, at K\eburn, attempted to commit Mjioide.

Prisoner pleaded guilty, and said he was in the horrors from drink at the time.

Hid Honor said that the Probation Officer's report seemed favourable, but the officer preferred that priboner bhould be released on home recognisances, as his work was such as to require his frequent removal from place to place. The Crown Proseuctor said that the police knew nothing against prisoner, save that he was" very much addicted to drink.

Prisoner was discharged on entering into a recognisance for £25 to come up for sentence when called upon. If he did not drink he would not be called upon, but if- he did give way to drink the police would be instructed to inform the couit, when he would be brought up for sentence. His means of escaping punishment was to avoid drink, and his Honor strongly advised him to take the pledge immediately he was released from custody.

FOKttEKY

Joseph Jackson was charged with having, on or about March 8, at Gamaru, forged a cheque for £10 Zk 6d, purporting to be drawn by James. Robertson Elder, _ of Maheno, on the Union Bank of Australasia at Oamaru, by altering tl.e figures and wording of the cheque fiom £1 3h 6d to £10 3s 6d.

Prisoner pleaded not guilt/y. The Crown Picseculoi, in opening the case, said the charge on the first count was forgery, and that on the '■econd uttering. The offence of forgery' included altering a genuine document iv any material part by addition, erasure, obliteration, or otherwise. That being so, if a man altered a genuine cheque, with the intention of increasing the amount, that was as much forgery as if he forged the whole cheque. The facts of the present case were nhort and Birnnle. Accused worked iv the

month of March for three or four days, for a( sheep farmer at Maheno, Mr J. R. Elder, and, as wages, received on the Bth of March a chequa for £1 3s 6d. The next seen of the cheque was that it was cashed by the wife of an hotelkeeper at the Juction .Hotel, Oamaru, and was then a cheque for £10 3s '6d. On presentation at the bank it turned out to be a for-* gery, and the prisoner was arrested on the present charge. When the charge was explained to him he admitted having had a cheque from Mr Elder for £1 3s 6d, which he said he had cashed at Newland's store at Maheno, and that someone there must hay« altered it. as he had not done. so. The police sergeant very properly told accused that if he had cashed the cheque at Newland's, he would, if he desired it, be given an opportunity of having Newland in court. The accused then said he did not want anyone, that he had himself altered the cheque, and had cashed it in Oamaru, but he added, " What do they mean by charging me with forgery? I am not guilty of that; altering is not forgery." That wafl a complete admission of the offence. The accused was ignorant of the law, and imagined that to alter a cheque was not to commit forgery.

Evidence for the prosecution was given supporting the case as opened for the Crown.

The Prisoner, in addressing the jury, contended that there was insufficient evidence to show that he had altered the cheque. His JRonor, in summing up, directed that it wa* the oase that to alter a cheque with intent to defraud was forgery. That was laid down in so many words by the Criminal Code. . '

The Jury, without retiring, returned a verdict of " Guilty." Prisoner was then charged, on a second information, with having, on March 10, at Dunedin, committed forgery by issuing a cheque for £15 2s 9d, purporting to be drawn on the Bank of New Zealand, Oamaru, and drawn by Archibald M'Culloch, by altering the cheque from £3 2s 9d to £13 2s 9d. Prisoner pleaded guilty, and gave his age as

The Crown Prosecutor said the police gave prisoner a. fairly good character, and he had not been convicted previously. Hip Honor, said he would take the fact of there being no previous convictions into consideration, but two distinct cases of forgery could not be passed over lightly. Prisoner would bo sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment, with hard labour, on each charge, the sentences to be concurrent.

A MEAN CRIME,

James Patrick Casey was charged with having, on the 15th of April last, broken and entered the dwelling house of Henry Bray, at Diggers' Gully, Kurow, and having stolen therefrom £2 in money, a pipe, and a case. The second and third counts charged the accused with theft of the money and articles mentioned, and a fourth count charged the accused with receiving the pipe and pipe case, knowing them to be stolen.

The Accused pleaded Not guilty, and was not defended by counsel.

Mr Fraser, the Crown prosecutor, opened the ease for the Crown, which was that the accused called on the prosecutor and represented that he had no money; that out -of charity he was provided with bed and breakfast, and had an opportunity of seeing' where the prosecutor kept his money. On tho next day the prosecutor's tent was broken into, and the accused on that day had two JBl-notes in his possession, and ako a pipe and. pipe case belonging to the prosecutdip which had been left in the lent.

Evidence for the prosecution was given by Henry Bray, James Barclay, F. Chase, and Constable Bradshaw.

The accused called Samuel Poeklington, who deposed that accused was in his (witness's) shop on Saturday night, 15th of April. Accused did not tell him that he had any money, but did promise to pay for having his boots repaired when he had finished at Hayes's mill.

The Prisoner addressed the jury, and his Honor having summed up, the jury retired at 4.10 p.m., and'an hour subsequently returned a verdict of " Guilty." The accused when called upon gave his ago as 42. The Crown Prosecutor paid tho accused commenced his c.ireer at Invereargill in 1883, when ho ■was sentenced to 1?. months' imprisonment for theft. In 1885 ho was sentenced to ihree years' imprisonment for forgery. Since then he had been convicted for drunkenness only until tho 29th of April last, when he was convicted for stealing a razor at Kurow.

His Honor, in passing sentence, said : Ido not want to lay stress on your previous convictions, prisoner, because the latest of them was committed nine years ago, and so far as U known you have not got into any trouble worth speaking of from that dale to the present. The offence, however, of which you have been convicted was a particularly mean one — going and stealing money from a man who had given yon shelter. The (sentence of the court is that you be imprisoned for the term of two years and kept to hard labour.