SUPREME COURT.

Press, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 5329, 4 October 1882, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

-—— ~ ■■_ CBOONAL SITTINGrS. j

~ fU-DJAT, OOTOB-B 3: rgsfffsk- Honor Mr Justioe Johnston.] B_ J_s« took his seat at ten o'clock. PSBJTTBT. •_j___ Inns* was indicted for perjury ajd to have been committed in tbe BesiMagistrate's Court at Christohnroh on -fhslSsh July last, during the bearing of a ' io__w*ht -J F. Innes and Co. against W. Jtt-t-uUIB-> S_ accused, who pleaded not guilty, was -itytodea by Mr Holmes; Mr J. C. Martin -«ad®te_ the prosecution. 3_» following evidenoe was; led for the {sni- ~.--„ -•■ ■Walter Ckorge Walker deposed that he «icbak to the Berident Magistrato's Court, | {ft&febarch, Hs produced a description of - -«ton_dariss of the Christob-reh district fte.taceeourse was within the d_trict; Js-__ was not. Prcdnoed the papers in -east of Innes v Q-entlsmun. The plaint i tMhsued on tbe 27th June, and the amount Msfot was £79 6s Id. Amongst the items -_tfl_ secount was " one cow, £8." deposed that he was one £ _a Besident -fagbtrates for the Christ* 4gn_ district, holding jurisdiction to the ' «£_**& £100. He presided at the Court on ffcft_Bh July last, and heard the case of F. __«__ Co. v Sentlemun. The aceusad —«_»|__it_r; and _~.ve evidenoa. Oneaf \" feftpnatd for was a cow, £8, Counsel on both sides, Mr Joynt being taSfiWKtusnt. A question of jurisdiction s*_!Bsl»to the item of the cow on the fmngMS&the purcn_se took place outside tfii-fSrfet, Hedecided that the purchase 4-fSfte place outside of his district. The evidence oa tha point, and said isßtissa»ls of the ccv wsa made by him to -,fa_«aaa at the Ohristchnroh races in No* --«__. 1880. He was cross-examrned, but ifiS-js qualify his statement in any way. - was within the C_r_tch_roh " at—St Ijvfca Honor—Evidenoe was tendered by *_» dtfßßdst- to show that the sale of the ewfeok $_cc elsewhere. <jRSM-s___-«d by Mr Holmes—Under the _ s_es cf tbe Court there was bo. mode by " -lisoh the defendant could give notice of the -.fws_li of the defence. The question of j_s»di->ii__ arose in Court at the beginning ,rf _» em.' -fhs trial-wub a very short one. \- Betecnre .XEtomas Neil deposed that the C-astefcareu races-took place on the 9th, ,\Ut_, aad 12th of November; Wig-a'-MfiSheehy Gentlsmun deposed tk- hswas a former Irving at Temnka. He Jwss sotiaG-nstohurob (Suing the month of It-ssmbs nor at the races, He bought a tm from toe secured, but purchased It in C-6bßr,lßßl,fttTemuka. It was nine years «_«|sti&_i_ed. races et Obristohureh, C*_a___ined by Mr Holmes—Bentod a ' «»| trem accused ; it was about six miles TOft.lmo__ Was in Christchurch in i ggg|g» 1880, and saw Mr lanes at bis had iorcecoavereation with him. _*_w;la»w whether any cm was ™ l ffip| at the time. Drank some .fws there, and purchased some. y^'W*C L aay whether there was a there at tho time. Did sot l fK__?'** , -* a there. Did not reatsmber v 2£»P'i day it was. Had some eonvsr- » ,*a*_»B„* naping machine, which it was ' to order for him. Nothing 1 ~2j!j* *hout purohMing a cow. Did not - fsJ[toe_ed at bis brewery, in the presence ■ ; ?2__ mal » 6il - t tl ~** ; oow °f,his was "'li^-*?* 8 - nor °""*** ***' P-fehase it "'__ '$* "&*& no conversation then ggtotnaed about toe ,cow. The cow was Ms to his farm by Mr Olivier, hotel- -__? ,v S» w «*» a red cow with white spots { - j w»«a W. W. oa both ride*. Bought the j." JSy* l6 * « foae days before sho calved, - 2**;taought the cow to his farm to July, - '£__$ wtumsd from Christchurch to - U-T* **"** -Deosmber, 1880., Did not •** whether he travelled with an exour-•to-eket. Never told Ollivier that be had . 8* Lows in town and lunched with him, ___ iW * -**'***■ *-**- fco ***-*• lonc h» hut he Beeolleot some one calling Mr *-V3?_*fc lunch. Osred accused for the cow. : _*»» ou the very best of terms with ,"**-_ ever since the present proceedings ";*g_a«a. J "__** a -y Qentie-mn, nrter *ef last J5* 1 ! deposed that she was in C_r_tohnroh ' 1880, and went to the Cattle the Bases, Her brother drove h«r station at Temnka and did not -"■ ffi-fo ***-* ~ &w aJm on the : Baaday after the races. by Mr Holmes—Had two Ss^__^ BS » WSa °-- w_om-(€re_pge) was at ISd not tee ttie a«ased at the SST-Sl'S* Wm «H«a_ing to hsr brother. ' i-T_S*-* o_vier bro%ht to the farm - leld te-L*!' *-- a wa^e B P° t *' Might have saaM___f r^-t ahe~w-i anuiinnoe, %ahe "__s_y eaaaavored to get away. She ' *<S__* brother that the caw was fi-a-t-_?»_Pl«_hms_, deposed ti«_ Jie li-S-T-?' I **' - ad ■» Member, 1880, waa '»«_r» Was with Mm on Daring the race week he »ia» witness at Temukft. Saw - "^_k?^ y i* »*»* week except en the ' S^* h * Bl »« ir -»hU sister to the rail- * - ;JljE'"aueo. i ■ ■ '" -_^S! t _**-' BB d by 18-HoMea—Mondav.'

«tSa B„«.„i: by Monday, of **»T » wasonMon* «-'.T*fi; '* ** ft "* amploy last har- *' *%fe_: iZ^J** 0 ?* »*»• itred *t %^Ste?d^ e,att3M ; la"sw*mterUrt '* to Saw Mr - *a*lE?*fc** wer * *** *»kg «w week % sl&bbSsS-V 7 - 11 * £*teß*~ws_* J ><»w agaia. It was when " ,^wia t^^tM^lJL- 16^^*?*4 «»o_taß -*.eu ttei£<w^___T WlM ih*bad a e*w ealred ; i *-a»t__?i«SS i r^ M . *_-is. - v

given by tire amused ia fh* Court below «m not material, as it roUtod only toth* question ot jurisdiction, namely, as to wtetharer not tbe sal* of tbe cow took place within the Obristehurah district. His Honor thoaght th* evidence was material far th* purpose of enabling the I Beaident Magistrate to decide whether or not he had jurisdiction in respect to the item of the cow. ! i Mr Holmes *u» raised the jwint at whether the words "erase of action" in tbe fierident Magistrate's Act meant each •sparote tor included all the item*. He oonthat they had the latter meaning,* tt therefore the __g&t»te had jmdsHonor was also ot that opinion j but supposing that the Magistrate was, wrong in hia decision in that respect, (till it did not follow that the evidence was immaterial.

Mr Holmes submitted that if there was no

jurisdiction it was immaterial., His Honor held that the evidence might be material to enable the Magistrate to decide whether he had jurisdiction or not, and that receiving it he was acting within his powers. The point was reserved. Mr Holmes having opened the case for the defence called the following evidence :— Henry Stevenson deposed that be was a carter living at Walt-am. Was in the employment of the accused in November, 1880. Saw Mr Gkntleroun »f the brewery after the Cattle Show in 1880. He was with Mr Innes. Witness was about four yards away. They were drinking some pries ale which witness had brought from the show. He heard some of their conversation. Something ru said about a reaper and binder and about a cow. G-entlemun said the cow was a nuisance, and Innes said he bad bettor send it to Obristehprch, and that he could have it for £9. Q_n_emun said its full value was £8. Mr. Lanes said £1 was neither here nor there. Witness did not hear the rest of the conversation. Some one then called Mr Innes to lonoh. Gentlemen first declined to go in to lunch, but Mr Innes said he would go up town with him after lunch, and he went along the passage with accused. Cross-examined by Mr Martin—Could not swear that G-entlemun went into the house. The passage led to Mr Innes* 1 house. In about ten minutes or a quarter of an hour both gentlemen returned into (he yard and drove away to town. His Honor asked if this line of evidence was relevant. Mr Holmes said the gilt of the charge was that, with the view of tod-tang the Magistrate to exercise jurisdiction over a cause whioh had arisen outside of his district, the accused swore that the cause of the action in a material part arose in Christchurch His Honor said tbe charge was that the prisoner swore that tho contract was made at the C-ristohuroh racecourse.

Mr Holmes Bubmitted that if he could •how that, though the accused was mistaken a* to the particular place within the district, yet if ho was correct as to the district itself, the rest of his evidence was immaterial.

His Honor thought it amounted to this— that the learned gentleman, by the line of evidesbe which ho wished to lead, was establishing more fully than bad already been proved the fact that the accused swore that which was false. Mr Holmes contended that be was establishing that tbe seouied was ineorreot in what he said, but that it was not a corrupt incorrectness. His Honor said—Was it not corrupt if the statement was sworn to for the purpose of inducing the Magistrate to decide upon the easeP

Mr' Holmes thought not, because the accused waa correct a* to tbe district in : which thb sal* occurred. The evidence he was bringing would prove that the incorrect [ testimony given was immaterial, proving, a* it would, that th* sale occurred in theOnriet* church datrict. He submitted that if he showed that tha evideno* was merely a mistake and not corrupt he was entitled to an acquittal. His Honor did not think so, and maintained that the evidence was not immaterial. If the learned gentleman could show that the accused in swearing that the sale took place; on the racecourse made an innocent mistake it would be a different thing, bnt he did not contend anything of the kind. . Mr Hohnet said he did. He held that the evidence was not a corrupt misstatement, but only on innocent mistake as to whether tbe contract was made on the racecourse or at Waltbam, which was also within til* Christchurch district.

His Honor—You make th* innocence the test whether it we* material or not

__* Holmes—lt would not te material if he made a mistake as to the particular place in Ohriitchureh where the sale was effected, end so long a* it was in the district it did not matter whether it wa* at Waltbam or at the races, ;).-■;, -■ .. » - Hia Honor—li you Bay that th* acoused innocently mistook the Waltbam brewery for the Ohristchureh racecourse your ; argument would be good, but not otherwise - I am of opinion that the evidence was matoriaL How. •vet, yon may go pa with your evideno*, Mr Holmefl.

John Milton Olivier, of Temuka, deposed that he had heard Miss Gentiemun complain of th* cow being troublesome, and that subsequently Gentiemun told him that when at Christchurch. he was at the brewery and had some refreshment with.lnne*. . W. G. Walker, „ clerk 7of th* Besident Magistrate's Court, proved that Waltbam was in the Ohristehuroh district. - Thia was all the evidence. The learned counsel having addressed the jury, his Honor summed up. . Th* jujy, after an absence of ten raintnet, returned into Court with a t verdict of ." Not Guilty," and the accussd was discharged. '

BECEIVIHS BSOLSK QOODB, Mary Berry wa* indicted for feloniously receiving, on th* 15th of July last, six yards of. velvet, knowing th* same to have been fltolen from Henry B. May. She wss further indicted for feloniously receiving tte following articles, the property of Henry E.Msy, vis, 12 yards alpaca, 4_ yards insertion, 2. poire stockingß, Si yards embroidery, and 1 yard velvet. Prisoner pleaded guilty to both charge*. His Honor said this was a die* of offence which was of a most serious nature, and he would like to know something abbut the

case. : " ■-- .*j. Mr Martin explained that the good* were stolen by the daughter of the prisoner and anotter girl from the shop of Mr May in jfnspeetor Brohom said the woman had teen deserted by her husband, and had been in the habit of obtaining a livelihood by washing. Other goods were., found in her possession. Her c-dldrenwere in tbe Industrial SahboL Th* prisoner, in her defence, caid her j | daughter had been led into the commission j [of erimeby evil obmps—ions, and that she did j not know that all th* goods bad been' stoles. His Honor, in passing sentence, said this clott of offence was not like common theft, but wo* of extreme gravity, owing to the; facilities it afforded for the creation of juvenile criminals. He sentenced the grisoner to penal servitude for three years. TBSKOSHT ASBAT/Za'. TepeseTe Arowhituwas indicted for committing this oßence at the Chatham Islands on tb* person of a girl named Maki Piripi on the lSbbJcno last. ■ -■■ -5 Ths prisoner pleaded "Not Guilty," and was defended by Mr Joyte; Mr Duncan prosecuted on behalf of the Crown.' Piripo Uiho deposed that he lived at Menu* kau at theOtetinus Islands. Prisoner and witness's daughter, Maki, eleven yean of age, lived in the nones with him. On the 15th June he went to Terefea'e house and returned home at about seven o'clock in the evening. When he opened th* door he saw the prisoner -.-suiting Maki. Oros*fa_mined by Mr Joyce—The land on which bis house stood was a reserve be-

longing to the prisoner end others; but thb house; was his. He was a Maori, but ths prisoner was a Moriori. Th* Maori* and Moriora were friendly now. He knew of no intermarriages at the present time. Tepene denied having committed the offenceTo hia Honor—l started ths prosecution. The ease wa* heard Mr Deighton, the

Berident Magistrate. .'7: Maki Pirifi deposed to an anault haying been committed by the prisoner. Horomona (Solomon), who was present, when tbe prisoner was accused, corroborated the evidence of Pirifi a* tei MsMfa Statement that Tepene had assaulted her, " : This was the case for th* prosecutien, Mr Joyeo baring addressed the jury, bis Bebor summed up. -' - - - '"' Tte ju*7 retired to consider fctefrvejdict, end after a short absence returned into Court,' wto*v*rßMof*Nc>tgnilty.* *' '\ His Honor, in dis__rging th* prisoner, add he thought it right to say publicly that

whatever aught he tha merits of .**• ease— end it was not a very serious an"-* J™" quite nnneosesary to tmL it up to SV W p ß *" laud to be tried. It could easily here heen dUposed of at the Chatham Islands fo> «■* local Magistrate. He would suggest to _'-* Crown Prosecutor that it mightbe deoroWa to communicate with the Department of Jostire with toe view of having some investigation as to why such a esse aa Una had been tm.it up. Mr Duncan said he had done so, but as all thawftneestt* and tha parties were here be thought it. hs duty to proceed with the °* se '' '"'''• _____ ■-"/■-■•'•' -ABO-HT yBOK TEH PHESO - . MatSdn Hansen was indicted for stealing from Thomas Maguire one purse, oontaining £6 10s, on the-2nd August last. The prisoner pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr Joyce; Mr J. O.Martin conducted tbe prosecution. ; Thomas Maguire,* laborer,deposed that he saw the prisoner at the house of Mrs Thomson, at Sydenham, at about nine o'clock on the morning of the 22nd August. He gave her half a sovereign to get a bottle of brandy with. He bad also in the purse a one pound note, a five pound note, and half a sovereign. He knew that the purse produced waa his. Tha brandy was procured, and witness and tbe others finished it, but he was not drunk. He afterwards went to Mrs Hansen's house, where she asked him to shout. He took but his purse, and she snatched it out of his hand, and went down ! the street. This was about four o'clock in tbe afternoon.

Cross-examined by Mr Jovnt-Had been on the spree for a couple of days. Went to sleep aa soon as he got to Mrs Hansen**, but woke up at two o'olook and had some tea. At about three o'clock he counted the money in his purse, and found it to contain £8 103. He remained at Mrs Hansen's house until about five o'olock, when her husband cam* horn* and turned him out. Did not throw his money about in Mrs Hansen's, and was sure that a woman did not pick up a £5 note and pbt it back into hi* purse, Margaret Thomson corroborated the evidence of th* prosecutor a* to what took place at her house. She knew he had a£s note in' his purs* when he went away with Mrs Hansen. She saw him at Mrs Hansen's house in the af tomooon j he was under the influence of drink. The prisoner's husband was a respectable man, and witness* landlord. Woe not annoyed with Mr* Hansen, ; and did not make any threat. Paulina Anatensen, a married woman living at Sydenham, gave corroborative evidence.

, Cbarle* Wm. Brooks, sergeant of police, . deposed to th* arrest of tho prisoner. Frederiok Henry Bowler, son of the : licensee ot the Weltham Hotel, deposed that at about half-past five o'clock on the 23* d August the prisoner purohased a bottle of brandy at the hotel. She gave a£s note, and received £414 i6i change. 7 Catherine Walsh, female searcher at the gaol, deposed that she found the purse produced in the prisoner's stocking, and handed it to Sergeant Brooks. This was the case for the prosecution. Mr Joyce addressed the jury, and his Honor Bummed up the evidence. The jui?y returned a verdict of "Guilty." The prisoner was sentenced to imprisonment, with hard labor, for six months. This wa* the last case in the calendar. The Court adjourned at 6.5 p.m. until Monday next at 11 a.m. -