SUPREME COURT.

Press, Volume XXXI, Issue 4195, 7 January 1879, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. Monday, January 6, 1879. \ (Before His Honor Mr Justice Johnston.) The usual quarterly criminal sessions of the Supreme Court took place at ten o'clock, at which time his Honor took his seat npon the Bench. GRAND JUET. The following gentlemen were empannelled as ; a Grand Jury .-—Messrs T. M. Hassal (foreman), Chas. Walkden, Wm. Buss, J. B. Sheath, ' Wm. Kennaway, Wm. B. Browne, James Shand, Wm. Saunders, F. A. Bishop, James Tipping, G. Stead-D. Davis, Jan., Wm W. Cobb, Samuel C. Farr, G. Booth, Frank Kgan, Chas. Flockton, J. S. Monk, D. Craig, Josiah Birch, F. C. Tipping, J. W. McAlpine, and G. D. Lockha.t. HI3 HONOR'S CHARGE. In addressing the Grand Jury his Honor said he had hoped upon this occasion to have been able to have unreservedly congratulated the colony upon it. condition, bat unfortunately he was not able to do to, in consequence of the severe disasters by which they had been visited during the past year. During the year just passed it was a matter for congratulation that their railway facilities had been so _ greatly increased, and that in a manner which was certainly an epoch in the history of the colony to be long remembered. No doubt a gloom had been cast over certain industries by the melancholy condition of affairs during the last few months through floods, which would no doubt j interfere with the prospects of a certain class of the community. However, taking the year past as it had been, he thought he might very fairly congratulate tnem upon the evidence of progress and advancement that was to be found on every side, and which was only to a small extent overshadowed by a consideration of the cirsumstances to which he had alluded. With regard to the administration of justice generally, he saw little in the calendar that rendered it necessary for him to make any comment. On looking over the criminal lists of other places he found that crime had decreased elsewhere; but it was not co here if they were to judge from the returns they had received, and from the calendar before them. He would advise the public generally not to form too hasty a conclusion as to the siate of crime from mere statistics, and without knowing all the circumstances under which they were compiled. In this portion of the colony he saw no reason to believe tbat any considerable nucleus of a criminal population had,been introduced. The calendar showed the usual character of crime— a prominent offence still appearing to be forgery and the passing of valueless cheques. He felt that this great crime would not be fully eradicated until the community awoke to the very grave responsibilties which they themselves possessed; and he must repeat that those persons taking forged cheques or valueless cheques from strangers, were participator, in the crime. It was very difficult to draw a line between the culpability and the stnpidity of such persons; but there could be no doubt that it was the cause of the crime being so very prominent as it was. He wished to impress upon that class of persons—not the Grand Jury of course—he alluded to shopkeepers, small storekeepers, and publicans—the great neces ity of taking more care against allowing themselves to be cheated in the ridiculous manner which was so prevalent at the present time. Perhaps in no part of Her Majesty's dominions was the crime to which he was alluding so common as in these colonies. While there were people who were amenable to be gulled, they would, no doubt, find other people ready to gull them. In all cases that came before him where such persons had allowed themselves to be foolishly gulled, he should mark hia sense of the impropriety of their conduct, although, no doubt, in some cases there were excuses to be offered. The condition of the country and the large number of cheques that were given by tradespeople and others for small amounts'made the offence, perhaps, more easy of accomplishment than in many other places. In many instances it -was impossible to pay monies except by cheque, and therefore it behoved shopkeepers and others to show the greatest care in taking them ; and unless snch people took care to protect themselves the crime would be still further on the* increase. There were one or two other matters in the calendar to which he would call their attention, and to which he wonld ask them to give important consideration. There were altogether some twenty commitments comprising the following cases. [His Honor proceeded to go through the list.] This, bethought they would agree with hitn, was a very considerable number, but he did liot know that any individual case would render- it necessary for him to comment upon it at length. There was one case of libel in which the Crown Prosecutor offered no evidence, and it would, | the efore, be necessary to make proclamation in j tha usual way, so that if the prosecutor himself intended to prosecute he might come forward and do so. [The name of the prosecutor was then called outside three times Wt he did not' j appear.] His Honor continued that it was com- , petent for him to come forward and offer to pro- j seonte until the Grand Jury waa discharged, and therefore it would, perhaps, be as well to . tell them what the case was, although he had no • doubt that the Crown Prosecutor had exercise! ] a wise discretion in intimating his intention of | not going on with it. It appeared to him (the Judge) that public justice had not been ; outraged in any way. The law of libel - was this:—That where anything waa published tending to injure a person in the eyes of his fellow men, and to cause a breach of the law, then he was entitled to have redress at the hands of that law. If a letter were written j to a man personally making certain statements , to him, that might be good grounds for a civil < action. [His Honor was here heard very indistinctly by the reporters.] He lost nothing by it, it not being a public libel tending to injure him in tbe eyes of other people. It might, how- ■ ever, make the offender liable to punishment , as tending to provoke a breach of the peace. In this case they would have to be the judges, and if they thought the contents of the letter were libellous, then it would be their duty to bring in a true bill. The present case before them appeared to be a trumpery affair altogether. His Honor proceeded to give the facts of the case, from which it appeared that the prosecutor was a bookseller and stationer, and that there was a matter of accounts between him and the prisoner. Prisoner appeared to take exception to certain sums of money that were demanded of .him. However, he enclosed some money to the prosecutor, and in the letter called him a " bill sticker," and added " that he was happy to say tbat he was able to pay twenty shillings in the pound without keeping a brothel." That was the libel. If it tended to do discredit to the prosecutor, then it was a libel, and this they would consider when they retired to their room. Wish regard to the case of manslaughter on the calendar, it was one which would, no doubt, receive J their most earnest consideration. The deceased hod died in the Hospital after he had had a struggle with Dempsey, the prisoner, and the case for the prosecution was this—that the prisoner John Dempsey was engaged in a struggle with a man nameed McClatchie in a publichouse, and that McClatchie's death had been accelerated by such struggle, and from the effects of which he afterwards died at the Hospital. He need not tell them that if any person used violence to another, and if it accelerated in the slightest degree the death of that other it was in the eyes of the law manslaughter —and the fact that the person might have died without such violence none the less made it manslaughter. He would advise them that in bringing in a prima facie case, they must not only consider whether death had been caused, but also whether trey considered it had been hastened by tho violence referred to. He (the Judge) understood tbat the deceased had died from natural causes, and the jury who had enquired into the cause of death had brought in a verdict to that effect, so that it was the police who were taking the present steps. It would hardly be enough to justify the Grand Jury in bringing in a true bill that some violence used might have accelerated death, and if on the medical testimony they were not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the death was accelerated, then there would be good grounds for not returning a true bill. More than that it would be a qnestion of considerable importance too whether the act of violence was oac for which the accused was responsible. (His Honor then proceeded to speak of the facts of the case.) It would be for them before they could bring in a true bill to say that the act which had caused the scuffle, and the fall was purely voluntary on tbe part of the prisoner. They would have two things to consider; first, was there reasonable ground for belief that death was caused by violence; second, and if violence was used, was it used by the prisoner, and was there justification for it. These were matters which they would have to consider before bringing in a trie bill. He would now allude to a class of offences that he was very sorry to say were only too common in this colony. He meant cases of indecent assault. There were two cases of this character on the calendar this session. He ventured to most sincerely impress upon parants the necessity of looking more carefully after their children than - many of them appeared to do. Children in this colony were no doubt more precocious than they were at Home, and were exposed to a great deal more temptation, though not so much perhaps as among the worst classes of tbe community in the old country. He thought society had a right to expect that reople would look verycareffUy %fter their children, and that they would not | allow young girls to be left in tbe presence of men or youtjia under circumstances where there was the slightest possibility of any assault or familiarity taking place. It was very much to i be regretted tbat children were left exposed to temptation in the way they were. (His Honor then proceeded to speak of the two indecent cases on the calendar in detail.) Among the offences to be heard was one of arson. This was an offence that was far too common in this colony. Possibly the reaspn of this was two fold. A very large proportion of the houses, jraxe built of woqd, and ww. pwsequeutty

eisily inflammable, and there were a much larger number of insurances than would be the case if they were built of less inflammable material. These things, ia co-opera-tion ' with a man getting into difficulties and requiring money, no doubt accounted for the great many c-ises of arson they had in the country, bnt whatever the cause, there was nnqnestio—ably a very large number of such cases. No doubt, occasionally such cases arcs i through revenge, and sometimes fire 3 were the result of the large wages which the people received, which induced them to drink and what was called "loaf," during which time places were often set on fire through their carelessness. His Honor then proceeded to speak of the particular case on the list, and also of the other cases of lesser importance. In concluding his remarks upon the calendar, and before dismissing the jury to their room, the Judge siud the Sheriff had reminded him of one thing upon which, perhaps, it. would be as well that he should speak to them with a view of eliciting an expression of their opinion, if they desired to make any presentment on the subject. There had been complaints made at home abont the jory list, and it was now part of the law of England that special jurors were also to be on the petty jury list. Possibly it was a wise thing, and one from which the county might derive considerable benefit, but how it would act it was not for him to say. He did not wish to express any opinion on the subject, but merely to remind them what was the state of the law. The Grand Jury then retired to their room to consider the bills. BURGLARY. George Muff, indicted for burglary at Ashburton, pleaded " Guilty." Mr George Harper, who appeared for the prisoner, asked that he might .stand down rill to-morrow, in order that witnesses might be called. His Honor hardly knew how witnesses avail on such a serions charge, and where the prisoner had himself pleaded guilty. Mr Harper said the guilt was not denied, but there were some extenuating circumstances he would like to bring under the notice .of the Court. The case was accordingly ordered to stand over. BREAKING AND ENTERING. ! George Brind was arraigned on an indictment charging him with feloniously breaking and entering into a store at Ashburton and stealing ■a watch therefrom. The prisoner pleaded " Guilty." The sergeant in charge of the Ashbnrton police stated that he had known the prisoner for the last three month?. He had been employed at Ashburton during that time. He had never heard anything wrong of him before. Mr Hicks, the employer of the prisoner, also gave him a good character. George Davis said that when he had seen the prisoner at Ashburton he was the worse for drink, aud had told him that he had been " having a lark with old Fluffum." •In passing sentence, the Court expressed its regret that there was no place in which such youths as the prisoner might be placed during a • term of imprisonment instead of having to go to the common gaol to herd with all classes of felons. The ada inistrators of the law bad nothing to do with this, and could only regret it. The sentence of the Court was one year's impiisonment. FORGING AND UTTERING. Edward McKenna pleided guilty to having forged and ottered a cheque for the sum of £7 10s npon — McNamara, late a publican at Kaiapoi. The prosecutor stated that the prisoner was a stranger to him when he presented the cheque for £7 10s to him. He received the change, £7. The Judge, addressing the prosecutor, said that he-was one of those persons to whom he had alluded in bis charge to the grand jury. It was such people as he who enabled persons to commit crimes—to become forgers. He would not be allowed his costs. Unless this sort of taking strangers' paper was put a stop to. instead of decreasing there was every chance of forgery J being on the increase. I

Sergeant Maurice, of the Christchnrch police, proved a previous conviction against the prisoner, who was sentenced in January 1875 to Jiree years' penal servitude for horse stealing. Mr Phillips, the gaoler at Lyttelton, said the prisoner had only just come ont of gaol. In.passing sentence, the Jndge remarked how exceedingly easy it was, as had been just shown, for any stranger to get a cheque, commit a forgery, arid go to the first hotel and cash it. Prisoner was evidently determined to become one of the criminal classes. He evidently knew the ridiculous facility which people in this country had of cheating others by passing upon them valueless cheques. A light sentence upon snch a man as the prisoner was apparently no g.od, and he wonld be accordingly sentenced to ponal servitude for six years.

Yj FOKG-ET-lAlfred King Harlock was charged with comforgery at Akaroa in August last. Prisoner, who pleaded " Not Guilty," wa3 defended byMrJoyc3. John Nixon, a tailor and. clothier residing in Akaroa, deposed to knowing the prisoner, who was a schoolmaster in that place. In August last witness was starting business, When prisoner offered to endorse a Bill of acceptance for him for -2100 if witness would afterwards give him a grant of money and endorse a bill for mm too. The signature on the bill produced was not in his handwriting. In examination by. Mr Joyce, the witness said I was not impl cited in an arson case. My partner was in Timaru. It was Bickerstoff who got ten years! He was my partner. I was engaged in the tailoring business there. At the time of the transaction he told mc he had sent one bill for discount, but not the other. The bills were then torn up. I did not believe I had signed them, but he said I had. I swear that the bill produced iB not one of those bills/ and that the signature on it is not mine. My signature on the information helps mc to swear that. I had a doubt of it on my mind before I saw the information. It would be very difficult to swear to a lie right off. When I saw my signature on the information I said, " That is a fixer for him." He is a schoolmaster, and is capable of doing anything of tbe kind, and a College bred man seemingly. If I don't __ get him convicted I shall have to pay thb money. If the Bank sues mc I will have to pay the money. I told you before I did sign two bills, but they were torn up in my presence. It was seven or eight days after the 16th of August. You confuse mc man.

Hia Honor—He is exercising his Caledonian reasoning. Witness —Yes it was in September. His Honor—By what process of reasoning do yon arrive at that. Witness —I say now after reflection that it was about the 23rd of August. I thought I was Bafe when tb«» bills were torn up. If he said he did not come brick from Christchurch till the 7th I should not like to contradict him.

Fredk. James Robertshaw, telegraphist at Akaroa, deposed he knew the prisoner. He had a conversation with the prisoner in September or October last. Harlock said he intended to give Nixon assistance by getting _£_0 worth of goods for him, with one £40 promissory note, while the other .£lO promissory note he held aa collateral security. Harlock said " a few days ago Ni ion came to mc about these bills; said I had been trying to' swindle him, bo I tore both the bills up in his presence, and would have nothing more to do with them. I know Harlock's handwriting. All the writing, except the signature of Nixon, is Barlock's writing. By Mr Joyce—That is not like Nixon's usual signature, but it would pass for his. I have known Harlock for" the last two years, not as a friend but as a mere acquaintance. I was not interested in these bilk; they were a common topic of conversation. I am generally not interested in hearing these things.

Edward Wither, deposed—l was accountant at the Colonial Bank of New Zealand, Christchurch. Received the bill of exchange from Mr Harlock. It was sent by letter in his handwriting. The bill was not discounted, but was retained as collateral security for an overdraft. Mr Harlock had an account at our bank. He has had bills discounted at our place—a good many. There has been an apparent system of kite-flying in connection with Harlock, at Akaroa. There have been two or three failures in connection with Harlock, at Akaroa, lately. tharles Olger, a tailor in Akaroa, deposed —Harlock came into my shop in October and said that Dixon had stuck him up and accused him of discounting bills in Christchurch, and that he wanted either the money or the goods. Harlock then said he had told him that if he wonld go to his house he would tear up tha bills. He added, what more does the fellow want. The witnesß was cross-examined by Mr Joyce. Tbis was the case for the Crown. Mr Joyce having addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoner and the Judge baying summed up, the jury retired to consider their verdict., After a brief absence they acquitted the prisoner, who was then discharged, the Judge observing tbat he had undoubtedly been guilty of great fraud, though it had not been proved against him. LARCENY". John Ca fey was arraigned on an. indictment, charged with stealing two purses and a sum of -.41, the property of Thomas Ge__m. Prisoner. who was defended by Mr Neck, pleaded " Not Guilty." The proeeontor deposed tbat, on the 23rd of December, he had two -£20 notes and three half sovereigns in his possession. He got that money from the Bank at Ashbnrton. He arrived at Christchurch on Christmas Day and went t$ stay at the Port Phillip Boarding House. He slept in No. 3 room, but was shifted that night into No. 9. Before shifting, however, he had folded his money and two purses in a towel and placed them nnder the pillow. When'he moved from the room he did not take" the money with him. He returned to No. 3 next morning and found the towel lying ones but the purses and money gone. Then gave information to the police. Was present when tbe prisoner was ffreitei and searched. Jb» vm p. £5Q was

: found on him. There was a hole in one of the notes witness lost, and he believed that produced to be tha one. By Mr Neck—Had the two _320 notes in one pnrse and the other change in the other, £1 4s. When he left Longbeach in the morning he had his breakfast at about six o'clock. He hud nothing to eat till he arrived at Rakaia at eight o'clock in the evening. He had nothing whatever to keep up his spirits—he was too careful of his money. He did not look if there wa3 a swag in the room where he had lost his money. He was too much troubled to take notice of anybody. Hichard Westenra, teller at the Bank of New Zealand at Ashburton, deposed to cashing the cheque produced for j£_l. Could not say whether the prosecutor was the man who cashed it. By Mr Neck —Notes had holes in them from wear and tear. The hole in the note produced did not appear to be one of that nature. His Honor remarked that he was not aware that a prosperous bank issued old notes. The witness said it was not usual to issua notes such as that produced, but there were no definite rules on the subject. Mary Jane Buxton deposed she was the daughter of the prorrieter,of tho Port Phillip restaurant, situated at the corner of Durham and St. Asaph streets. The prisoner lodged in their house on Boxing night. He slept in No. Son the previous night. Thomas Gallon had occupied it. Witness described the rooms being changed as already stated, and added that the prisoner afterwards slept in No. 3, when it was vacated by the prosecutor. Prisoner left in the morning about half past seven. The other witnesses examined were William Kirlrwood, of the railway refreshment rooms, and Mary Anne Shaw, of the Terminus Hotel, each of whom changed a £20 note. Detective Benjamin deposed that on searching the prisoner he fouad upon him six £5 notes, thirteen £1 notes, six sovereigns, three halfsovereigns, and a small quantity of silver and copper. Mr Neck addressed the jury, and the learned Jndge summed up. The jury found the prisoner guilty withoutleaving the box, and recommended him to mercy on the ground of the temptation thrown into his

Tie police said there was nothing known against him, and he was a stranger in Christchurch. He had just arrived from Melbourne. Prisoner said he had been working in the Ferry road. The Judge said when he saw a man fall through sndden temptation, he would like to treat the offence as lightly as possible. He would let the case stand over until Wednesday. TBXTE BILLS. In the course of Ue day the Grand Jury returned true bills in the following cases:—B, M'Kenna, forgery and uttering ; J. Harlock, forgery; George Muff, burglary; Geo. Brind, larceny from a dwelling; John Casey, stealing from a dwelling; — Abdool, larceny; J. H. Keig, indecent assault; — Schultz, forgery and uttering; A. Cowan, incendiarism ; John Freeman and Thomas Eyan, larceny from a dwelling ; W. Atack, indecent assanlt; George Brind, breaking into a store ; and F. H. Valpy, embezzlement. NO BILLS. Begina v Dempsey, manslaughter; John Beeve, infamous offence. THK GEAND JTTBT. The Grand Jury haviDg got throngh all their business, The Foreman said the Grand Jury had asked him to inform the Court that they were of opinion that it would be better to meet at 11 o'clock on the first day of the session than at 10 o'clock, from the causes stated by his Honor. The Jndge said he was glad they agreed with him on the subject, and he would take good care that the recommendation was forwarded to the proper executive quarter. ; PROCLAMATION. The cases of Duncan Campbell for passing a valueless cheque, and Alfred King Harlock for obtaining security by false pretences were not proceeded with, and the usual proclamation having been made on their behalf, and that of John Beeve, against whom the jury had found "No bill" for an infamous offence, were then discharged. STEALING FR©M A DWELLING. Abool, a colored man, was charged with stealing the gum of .£lO, the property of Captain Loverock, from the Lyttelton Hotel. The prisoner was defended by Mr Neck. From the evidence given it appeared that the prosecutor had been staying at the hotel in question, and that within a short time of hie losing , his pocket book containing ten £1 notes, and prisoner, who waa a cook in the hotel, was found dealing with the same. " A number of witnesses were examined, and alter Mr Neck had spoken on behalf of the prisoner and his Honor had summed np, The jury found the prisoner "Guilty," with a recommendation to mercy, and he was sentenced to six months' imprisonment. liABOHNT. ; Jfcun Brind, who pleided "Guilty" on the former part of the day to stealing a watch, the who was then sentenced to a year's imprisonment, now pleaded "Guilty" to stealing a quantitylof wearing apparel. He was sentenced to one yeai's imprisonment, to ran concurrently with the former-sentence. The Court adjourned at ten minutes to seven nntil ten o'clock this morning. [Pressj Special Wire] DUffEDIN. DtrNEbiN, January 6. The criminal sittings of the Snpreme Court commenced to-day. Mr Justice Williams, in charging the jury, said: —Mr Foreman and gentlemen of the Grand Jury—The calendar en the present occasion presents no very unuenal features. Thereare twocase3 of perjury. There is a case where the acensed is charged under the Fraudulent Debtors Act with having as atrader, obtained property on credit, under the false pretences of carrying on business and dealing in the ordinary way of his trade. In the preliminary proceedings before the magistrate, the trustee in bankruptcy of the acensed was examined, and gave evidence as to statements mado by the accused to him as trustee. By an Act, however, passed last session this evidence is no longer admbsable against the accused, so you yill have to consider the of it. The evidence is that the acensed was a. retail grooer, and that the day before he filed his delaration of insolvency, he ordered and subsequently obtained from a mershant, with whom he had been in the habit of dealing, certain bags of sugar which be did not pay for.. If you think that an order given by a retail trader for goods of a kind dealt with in his trade to. n wholesale house with; whom he had been in the habit of dealing amoants to a representation that the goods were required for ordinary trade purposes, and if you think that the circumstance, that the retail trader became bankrupt the day after be gave tbe order, affords a reasonable inference that the representation was false, you will find a true bil. There is a case where a woman is charged with the murder of her infant child. If you think that there is prima facie evidence that the child died by reason of the wilful act of omission, and that the accused intended to bring about the death of the child by such act of omission, you should find a true bill for murder. If, however, you think that, although the death was caused by the' accused, yet that the conduct of the accused amounted to culpable neglect only, yon should find a true bill for manslaughter. Lastly, ehonld you think the evidence does not establish a prima facie case of culpable negligence, but only that tbe death resulted from accident, yon should ignore the bill altogether. The Grand Jury ignored the bills in the case of Begina v Johnston and Thonuw McNorton, in which, the prisoners were charged with robbery. In the case of Margaret Scott, charged with murder, the Grand Jury reduced the indictment to manslaughter. In : all the other cases true bills were found. James Millar, charged with fraudulently obtaining goods under the Bankruptcy Act, ana Welter "Wooley for larceny, were acquitted. James Morgan and Hyatn Lyon Metz pleaded guilty to forgery, and were remanded for sentence. Booert Angus was fonnd guilty of larceny as a bailee. Dennis Allan, charged with perjury, did not appear. Hβ had been admitted to bail in. the total sum of £ 40. His Honor said that fixing the bail in so email a sum was perfectly ridiculous. He wa? astonished, and he did not know what the magistrate could have been thinking about, taking bail in such a trifling amount. A man would be a great fool if he did appear, when he could get off for £4s). His Honor directed that the sureties be estreated.