CRIMINAL SITTINGS.

Press, Volume XXV, Issue 3228, 5 January 1876, Page 3

CRIMINAL SITTINGS.

Tuesday, Januaby 4. ; /Before his Honour Mr Justice Johnston,; Hie Court re-opened at 10 a.m. ATTEMPTED SUICIDE. David Bowen was indicted for having on the 10th December last unlawfully attempted, >$o comniteuicide. The prisoner, who was undefended, pleaded that he was suffering under the influence of drink, and that he knew nothing about it. His Honour said that from the depositions, it appeared that the man was suffering under delirium tremens at the time. Now, id had been held by the authorities that a man suffering under this disease could not be held to be responsible for hie actions. He would like to ask Mr Dnncan whether he thought the case one which should have teen prosecuted by the Crown. Mr Duncan said he understood it to be his duty, when a prisoner was committed for trial, to present a bill against him. Hie Honour was clearly of opinion that there was no such duty imposed on the gentleman representing the Attorney-General. His experience, extending over some years, led him to believe that it was in the discre--fcion of the gentleman prosecuting for the Crown to examine the case, and if he felt it vrae not one in which he ought to proceed, he could in the exercise of his discretion decline to present a bill although there had been a committal. Mr Duncan was exceedingly glad to hear his Honour express such an opinion. He (Mr Duncan) had always taken that view of the duty of the position he held, but it had been objected to. Hie Honour thought that they must look upon those representing the Attorney-Gene-ral in these matters, not as a partisan of a side, but rather as a minister of justice, and it became a question of high critical discretion ac to whether the case should be brought forward or whether the ends of juetice would be served by doing so. Mr Dnncan could only say that under the circumstances of the case under trial there was no reason for him to press for a conviction, and he would therefore offer no evidence.

His Honour eaid of course the learned counsel for the prosecution in exercise of that discretion referred to by him was quite right to decline to offer evidence, as the depositions shewed that the prisoner was under the influence of delirium tremens.

A jury was empannelled, and a nolle prosequi being entered by the Crown, returned a verdict of " Not Guilty," and the prisoner was discharged after a warning by his Honour as to the evil effects of drink. His Honour also took occasion to point out that attempted suicide was a crime of high magnitude, and one severely punished by law. SENTENCES. William Hassall, convicted of forgery on the previous day, was brought up for sentence. Mr Thomas said before his Honour passed sentence, he would like to call witnesses as to character. Dr Dudley deposed to having known the prisoner for some eighteen years, and that -he had borne a very high character for integrity during that period up to the time of the offence. Joseph Cullen and J. W. Tarrant were also brought up for sentence for the same offence. The prisoner Tarrant called Mr Wm Langdown, his employer, who gave him a very good character. His Honour sentenced Hassall and Tarrant to two year's imprisonment with hard labour, and Cullen to three year's penal servitude, WOUNDING WITH INTENT TO MUBDEB. Theodore Arnold was indicted for having on the 22nd December last unlawfully aud maliciously wounded one Arthur Stewart Faithful, with intent to murder. The prisoner, who was undefended, pleaded "Not Guilty." Mr S. Collett was chosen foreman of the jury. The facts of the case must be fresh in our readers' memory, and were briefly as follows: —On the night in question the prosecutor was in the Q.C.B. Hotel, Gloucester street, with some other persons, when the prisoner, who was a shipmate of his, asked him to .come out, as he wished to speak to him. The prosecutor came out into the passage, and the prisoner at once collared him, drew a large knife, and made a stab downwards at the prosecutor. Constable Hughes, who was on duty at the spot, together with Sergeant Wilson, seeing the attempt, ran towards the parties, and collared the prisoner by the arms, diverting the stab somewhat. The prisoner expressed his intention of doing for t Faithful, and also said that that he had been •waiting for him for some time. He was then arrested, and the prosecutor conveyed to Warner's Hotel, where he was attended by Dγ Prins. In support of the case for the Crown, Mr Duncan called constable Hughes, sergeaat Wilson, the prosecutor Arthur S. Faithful, ;and Dγ Prins.

His Honour having summed up, the jury after a ehort consultation returned a verdict of " Guilty of unlawfully wounding."

His Honour, after remarking that the prisoner had had a very narrow escape from "standing to receive sentence for murder, said that the use of deadly weapons must be put down with a strong band. The prisoner would be sentenced to two years' imprisonment, with hard labour. EMBEZZLEMENT. Isaac Cordner was indicted for having on the datea below stated embezzled from Francis Innes, his employer, the sums stated —viz, sth December, 1873, £4 8s ; Ist May, 1874, £2 ; 15th May, 1574, 7s 6d. The prisoner, who was defended by Mr Joynt, pleaded " Not guilty." Mr 0. Allison was chosen foreman of the jury. Toe case for the Crown was as follows: — The prisoner was a carter in the employment of Mr Francis Innes, a brewer, whese duty it was to deliver beer to customers, paying over any moneys he might receive to Mr Innes. The various sums chargtd in the indictment were received by the prisoner from various persons on account of Mr Imee, for which he had given receipts, but for these moneys he had never accounted to his employer. In support of the indictment Mr Duncan -called Francis Innes and Joel Read. Mr Joynt led evidence for the defence. Mr Joynt then addressed the jury for the • defence. Mr Duncan declined to address the jury. His Honor summed up, and the jury after retiring returned a verdict of "Not guilty." EMBEZZLEMENT. Isaac Oordner was then indicted for having -on the dates mentioned below embezzled from Francis lanes, his employer, the sums stated—vie, 17th June. 1874, 7s 6d ; 27th -July, 1874, 11s ; 28th August, 1874, Hβ. The prisoner pleaded " Not guilty." Mr Duncan, on b 3 half of the Crown, •entered a nolle prosequi in these other counts •t>f the indictment. The prisoner was then discharged. MCNICOL'S CASE. Mr Duncan said that in this case one of the material witnesses for the prosecution "was absent, and he would therefore ask his Honor to postpone the case of Regiua v 3leNicol, for perjury, until next week. His Honor said that in that case he would fix the trial for Tuesday next, at 10 a m. The Court then adjourned until JO a.m. on Mondaj next, wheu the civil sittings will take place.