SUPREME COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume XXV, Issue 69, 21 March 1894, Page 5

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS.

(Before His Honor Mr Jusbice Conolly.) Larceny as a Bailee.—ln the charge prelerred against -Charles George Humphreys of larceny as a bailee of lGcwb 2qrs 131b of gum, the property of Reuben Leonard, of Aratapu, the jury returned a verdict of guilty.—Mr Cotter asked that the prisoner should be dealt with under the Firsb Offenders' Probation Act. The Probation Officer's report was of an unfavourable charactor. —His Honor sentenced the prisoner to nine months' imprisonmenb. , Receiving Stolen Goods. — Alfred Goodhuo, who had previously pleaded nob guilty to a charge of having on the 26th February received a gold watch and chain and £15 in money, the property of David Morrison ; a watch and chain, the properby of Peter Miller; a watch and chain, the property of John Sloane; and £14 17s, the property of Louis Miller, knowing them to be stolen, was found, guilty. Another prisoner, named Harry Thompson, had pleaded guilty to breaking and entering a cottage in Richmond belonging to Hellaby Bros.' and occupied by men employed in the slaughter-house and stealing the three watches and two sums of money. Thompson had been in the employ of Hellaby Bros., and resided with the other men in the cottago. Goodhue, was found guilty by the jury of receiving the goods. Both prisoners "were sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment with hard labour. TODAY'S PROCEEDINGS. Alleged Larceny.--Frederick Ellis (on bail) was charged thab on January 22nd be feloniously stole one gold watch and chain, the property of Colin Henderson. There was a second count againsb accused of receiving the same, knowing it to be stolen. —The accused, who was defended by Mr O'Meagher, pleaded nob guilty. — Witnesses were orderd out of Courfc.-Mr Tole prosecuted on behalf of the Crown, and stated the case. The prosecutor stated that during a portion of the month of January he resided aba friend s house in Chapel-street. On the night of the 2.lsb January he vent to bed aud in the morning missed his gold watch and chain. The watch and chain were seen in bhe possession of bhe accused before bhe 31sb January. From the 15th to the 31st January the accused had been boarding at the house of Mr McNamara, and owed him money for board and lodging. The accused produced a gold watch and chain and told Mr McNamara ha could pawn ib for £4 and take the amount ho owed him. McNamara pawned the watch for £4 and gave accused £2. Ib would be sworn that accused was seen in possession of tbe watch and 6hain. The defence of the accused waß thab he gob the watch and chain from McNamara aboub the 17th January.—The prosecutor gave evidence, and stated he could nob swear that the watch and chain were in his pocket when he went to bed ab 11 o'clock on tbe night of tbe 22nd January.—The witness was cross-examined at length aa to his movements on the night it was alleged the watch ahd chain were stolen,.and whether he was Bober or otherwise.—The case has been proceeding all day. Six witnesses were to be examined for the prosecution, and two for the defence,