SUPREME COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume XX, Issue 59, 11 March 1889, Page 5

SUPREME COURT.

THIS ©AY.

CRIMINAL SESSIONS.

(Before Mr Justice Gillies.) THEMarchCrirninal Sessions of the Supreme Court opened at 11 o'clock this morning.

GRAND JURY.

The Grand Jury were sworn in as follows ':—Alexander Thompson, James Wiseman, William Green, William Charles Walker, Gerald L. Peacocke, Malcolm Niccol, Thomas J. Nash, Thomas Morrin, Paniel fl. Lusk, Samuel Luke, George Edward Ireland, Robert Home, Herbert C, Hanchard, Seymour T. George, George Fraser, William Culpan, .Archibald Clark, Egbert C. Carr, Joseph Buddie, Henry Atkinson. Mr Thomas Morrin was chosen foreman. JUDGES CHARGE. His Honor Mr Justice Gillies delivered his charge to the Grand Jury as follows :—■ Air Foreman and gentlemen of the Grand Jury,—l am happy to say that the calendar on the present occasion is a very light one indeed, in point of the number of prisoners and also the number of charges, there being 14 persons charged with 15 offences. The charges, however, are of an unusually serious character—several of them—there being one case of murder, one wounding and one indecent assault, two cases of arson, three of horse and cattle stealing, rive of forgery and uttering valueless cheques, and tyro cases of breaking and entering. Curious to say, there is not a single case of simple larceny this sitting. There are a few of these charges to which I think it my duty to direct your attention. The most serious case is a charge of murder, in which a man shoots a woman with a revolver, and then attempts to shoot himself, but fails to do so. Murder, you will be so kind as to remember, Sis the killing of a human being with, malice aforethought, that is to say, premeditaledly or intentionally. If there is not this premeditation, or this Intention of killing, previously conceived!, it only amounts to manslaughter. In fchepresent case it appeara that a woman of drunken character had beon for some time pursuing the person charged, and extorting money from him. On the occasion on which she was shot she had forced herself into his house agasinst his will. He drew a revolver from beneath his pillow and shot her, killing her, and then tried to shoot himself, uttsuccess-. fully. Ib i 3 for you to say whether there is anything to show premeditation, and whether it was simply a sudden burst of anger, a sudden impulse, not premeditated. The only fact that appears in .the depositions to show premeditation is the fact of his having a revolver loaded at the time. It will be for you to say whether there is sufficient evidence of premeditation to enable you to* bring in a true ball of murder. If not you can ignore the bill for murder, and find a true biil for the lesser offence of manslaughter. There isone charge of wounding by a boy, with a penknife. The evidence shows that this boy was being and hai been systematically annoyed by a number of other .lads, that they, on the occasion in question, caaae and annojTed him, that one of them struck him on the face, that ho had in his hand an open penknife and stabbed the boy who struck him in the shoulder. It is not a very serious case, and no doubt the boy'had very strong provocation. It is for you to satisfy yourselves on this point. If you find that he used the knife, however, although it may have been to protect himself, yon will be justified in bringing in a true bill for maliciously wounding. It is nob a very serious case in any event. There is a charge of indecent assault upon a girl under ten years of age. I do not intend to direct your attention to the particulars, but I'll ask you to compare carefully the statement made by the girl herself and the medical evidence. The medical evidence shows that there' was no trace of violence upon the child, therefore I ask you to compare carefully her evidence with the medical evidence. There is a case of arson by a Maori woman, in which she apparently set fire to a couple of Maori whares. It does appear from the depositions that she is generally looked upon amongst the natives as a mad woman. That may be a defence when she comes before the petty jury; it is not for you to inquire into her sanity or insanity. If you are satisfied that she committed the offence, you can find a true bill, leaving the question of sanity to be determined by the petty jury. There is another case of arson, that is setting fire to property, in which a person is charged with petting fire to a haystack. The circumstances are peculiar, but there is nothing special that I may direct you upon. The setting fire to a haystack is a criminal offence, just as much as setting fire to a house. ■ There is one case of. horse - stealing which I would direct your attention to, a case in which a Maori is charged with stealing a horse. The evidence is very conflicting, and the horse that was produced at Court proved not to be the horse alleged to have been stolen. It is somewhat difficult to say how a bill for horse-stealing can be found when they have not found the horse stolen; the horse alleged to have been stolen was not the stolen horse at all. It will be "for you to see whether the evidence will be supplemented J beyond that shown in the deposition.l;. I do not think there are any other cases to which I need draw your attention, except one case of breaking and entering a gumdigger's v/hare, in which it appears that a sack occupied a pgpuliar position. Ido not find whether this sack was in any way fixed or fastened so that it required unfastening in any way. In order to constitute the crime of breaking and entering there must be an actual removing of an obstacle to the entrance to a house. I am bound to say that in the mere hanging of a sack or curtain before the door, the removal of that on one side would not in law, in my opinion,

constitute breaking and entering. Al- ! though you may not bring in a "bill for f! breaking and entering, if : you are j satisfied that a theft took place from the ] whare you will then be justified in bring- ■il ing in a true bill, nob for breaking and d entering, but for stealing from a dwelling. jj These are all the cases I deem it neces- I sary to draw your attention to. You will ij now retire to your room and the bills will ',> J] be presented to you. I Indhcent Assault. —The Grand Jury H found a true bill in fche case Kegina v. | RovWand Hill Bryan fc. The prisoner ;| was formally charged with having, on | the 30th November last indecently [i and unlawfully • assaulted one Flor- i ence Featherstone. He pleaded nob ■ ;,| guilty, and the common jury was then | sworn in, all women and young persons ( having been ordered out of Court. — Mr | Hudson Williamson appeared for tho f Crown, and requested that all wit- i nesses should leave the Court. He ' then addressed the jury, and briefly j stated the circumstances of the case. , f '■{ The prisoner had been in the employ of Mr Featherstone, at Lucas 'Creek, ' \, for several years. On the day in I question Mr Featherstone had left: - home, leaving the prisoner following his .! usual avocation. His little daughter j Florence was at home also, and "Harry," j as the prisoner was familiarly known, asked ;, I her to come down to the stockyard with • him. Here the assault was committed. . I llt was witnessed by a young brother who i> attacked the prisoner. The little girl was | examined by Dr. Bakewell afterwards, but I his examination did not give anything I serious. It remained for the jury to ' | determine whether the assault was an in- , , decent one or not.—Florence Featherstone, - J a girl of under ten years, was the first wit- ■ I ness called, and gave evidence as to the as- .. )| saulb.—Rsssie Featherstone (nine years) 11 brother of the lasb witness, was callei. He { did not know the nature of an oath, though \i he knew the difference between a lie and ;|i the truth.—His Honor decided after question-; ing the child that he did not show sufficient J knowledge of his responsibility to allow him j to give evidence.—Amy Featherstone de- I posed to knowing the dayoftheassault. She -j : was afrhomeonthat day and she remembered J her little sister coming to her on that day .] by herself when she was crying and excited. ) She would not tell her anything for a long' . j time and then she did tell her something. J She (the witness) then went and saw "Harry," and spoke to him about tho as- j sault and told him that when her father'] came home she would get him a^ j good thrashing. " Harry" replied that) 4 he did not mean any harm. -She accused v :j him of having assaulted her sister. In. reply to a juryman witness stated that tho prisoner had been in her - j father's employ for 9 or 10 years.— > J Elizabeth Hester Featherstone, mother of the child Flor &nee, deposed that on the -. morning of the alleged assault she was in town with her husband. They returned . !; about half-past two. Immediately oh her re-" . ;. tu.vn-'shesawherchildFlossie.whowascrying, ;.; and' very excited. She could see thatf ~i there* was something the matter. On hear: _. -. ing what had been done they (the parents) ; : took t^e child up to town in their yacht ~ ft where Dr. Bakewell examined her. , The, prisoner frad been in her husband's employ. j for teii yea-js. He had always been well be- ■ hayed. He' ran away when Mr Featherstone threatened him if he had hurt his little ' gir), and she had only seen him in Court /j since. Duringher examination Mrs Feathe- [ ■ stone asked if theprisoner had been examined / ' to see if he -was in his right mind, and then .' in reply to His Honor, said she had always f: i been certain that he was not quite right in, . i his mind, though not sufficiently bad to put . in a lunatic asylum. He had always been / ' modest and respectful in his behaviour. — Robert Hall Bakewell, medical practi-; :;. tioner, deposed to receiving the little:girl| .; Florence Featherstone. on. board her father's; , ; yacht. She had suffered" no injury.; p This concludeci., the case for the prosecu-: [>t tion. The prisciier intimated that he had , no witnesses to call, and that he had no-! thing to say for himself.—His Honor having j summed up in favour of the prisoner^ j; The jury retired to consider their verdictf and after four minutes' returned with a ver-j diet of '•« not guilty." The prisoner was ab: once discharged from custody. \ 7KUE BILLS. i ; """The Grand Jury found true bills in the i, , following cases :—Samuel Vv rells, cutting! and wounding ; Richard Bingham Mason, t« and George Henry Mason, false pretences, '■; 2 charges ; ; George Clune, uttering (2 ! charges); saroe, false pretences; Karena Pene Hone, alias George Cash, forgery. , .5 NO BILL. The Grand J-ary failed to find a true bill against Wata Apri, charged with horsestealing. /