SUPREME COURT.

Press, Volume XLVIL, Issue 7719, 26 November 1890, Page 6

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SESSION. _____ AY, NOVE_3_—2s. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Denniston ) BURGLARY. Manders and Perry, who were brought np for sentence, had nothing to say. In answer to his Honor, ~ Mr Martin stated tbat in 18S1 Manders was cautioned and discharged for breaking into and stealing; in 1887 he received two years; in 1888 he was sentenced to six months' hard labor. Perry was originally sent to the Industrial School at Auckland, whence he was licensed out, but was sent back again. Iv June, 1837. he got two years and corporal punishment lor indecent assault. In 1837 be received six months concurrently on four charges of larceny, and both he and Manders were undergoing sentence for a burglary that happened only a week before tbe present one. His Honor sentenced prisoner to five years' penal servitude each. indecent assault. In respect to Timothy Kelleher, charged with tbe above, and present for sentence, Mr Beattie spoke on behalf of the prisoner, who, he said, had nothing against him; he was a man of family, baa only been a little time in the colony, and his offence was not serious of its class. Hia Honor said that though the case was not serious of its class, it was a very serious class, and prisoner had only just missed a term of penal servitude. He would be sentenced to twelve months' hard labor. SHOOTING" WITH INT—NT. Jas. Adams, captain of the ship America, w\is indicted on the first count for that be did on 14th September, 1890,. shoot at one- Karl Johanson with intent, to inflict bod-ly harm, and with second count (that be did maliciously wound the said Karl Johaiuson. Prisoner pleaded " Not guilty. Mr Martin appeared for the prosecution, and. Mr Stringer, with him Mr Nalder, for the prisoner. . Mr Martin opened his case, reviewing the facts he intended to bring forward by means of his witnesses. Charles Stockall, the cook, gave evidence. In cro3S?e__mination by Mr Stringer, he I said he was treated well by the captain, I who was as good as any one unless he had a drop of drink. He had had some drink. Witness got drunk. He 'did so at Wellington, and lost his ship, which he again joined at Lyttelton, where he also got drunk twice while he was there. Witness never threatened Captain Adams during a quarrel. Ac another time witness swore roundly at the captain, and he had been on shore without leave. Several rude and obscene remarks mentioned by counsel witness denied ever having used. The captain, when he fired, did so at witness. There was nobody between him and tbe captain. Tbe second mate told a lot of lies at the Resident Magistrate's Court. Tbe second mate was aft. He was neither near the captain nor the witness. A good deal of the first mate's evidence was also lies. Witness never threatened to use a knife. (Witness here explained the positions of himself, the captain, and Johanson.) Johanson was on witness's right. He did not know how he came to say in the Resident. Magistrate's Court the man was on his left. Mr Stringer read something from the depositions to prove, as he said, how unreliable tbe witness was. Witness replied that he was not unreliable. He was nob there to tell lies. He had no dgbt with the mate. Ha mast have had a struggle with Che mate or his hand would not have been cut. Re-examined —In bis evidence in chief he had said Johauson was oa his right.

John Houston, a lamp trimmer in the employ of the Harbor Board, and a new witness, deposed that he recollected the affair on board the America. He was trimming an electric lamp alongside, the vessel on the Sunday morning. From the platform of the lamp he saw on the deck ; the captain, with a pistol in his hand, walking towards the galley., He heard some altercation, and saw the captain. point the pistol twice at the cook's.bead. Then be lowered it and walked away. The cook said something and the captain turned round and suddenly fired at tbe cook. He afterwards saw the captain remove something into the cabin. Cross-examined—The cook was abaft the galley and clear of the house. He saw no knife in the cook's hand, and did not see the mate take hold of the cook. That must have happened before he went to the lamp. Sergeant O'Malley, of Lyttelton, gave evidence as to the distance between the parties, according to the information supplied by Houston. He also repeated tbe statement made in the lower Court. Frederick Lionberg, who was an A.B. on board the America, gave his version of the occurrence. To Air Nalder —The captain walked a few yards away before he fired. Witness did not say in the Resident Magistrate's Court, "I heard the cook threaten the captain's life." The cook swore; ha was drunk. The ship was heading out, and Sad the bullet missed everything, it must aye gone into the water. .... a,.-.. Gustave Petersen ateo gave evidence. To Mr Stringer—He said he did not think the captain fired' high.. He was sure the cook had no knife with him on the deck.* Johanson was a bit to the left of witness, who was between him. and tbe cook, as the cook was between witness and the captain. Johanson was on the left of the cook. Witness hesitated about answering the question if the captain treated his men well. To the question, if he bad quarrelled witb the captain, he said "No," and to that, if tbe Captain was a good captain, he replied, " Oh, he's right enough."' Karl Johanson, an AB. on the America, stated what he saw of the quarrel between the captain and the cook, and the result. In cross-examination, he said that the parties were not in a. line. He saw the captain fire without aiming at, anything. He did not hear the cook threaten, nor' did he see anything in the cook's hand.; Tbe captain was a quiet man, and had no quarrel with his men except the cook, who that day would hot get the dinner. „ ? Dr. T. O. Guthrie gave evidence as to the nature of the wound and its characteristics. In answer to Mr Stringer, the witness said that the more probably hypothesis was that the bullet had struck something above and came down. This concluded the case for the prosecution. Mr Stringer called evidence. Captain Adams, who was sworn, said that he had been forty-three years captain; five years in charee of the America: with the owners for twenty years. During the voyage he had no trouble with his men, excepting the cook, who deserted In Wellington and again joined the ship at Lyttelton. On the 31st witness was in the cabin with the captain of Serica. The cook walked in and demanded money, and when refused swore and called names, and the captain of the Serica put him out. The following day the cook apologised, and the captain forgave him. The cook after tbat was continually drunk, and the steward had to do his work. .On the day in question, from information from the steward, witness went to the galley door to the cook and asked what was all the trouble about, and why the dinner was not ready. The cook, with a knife in his hand, threatened witness-life, and swore profusely. The chief officer took the knife from the cook. Tbe chief officer went for a policeman. The cook was now raging and raving, and the second mate took holdof him. "If you use that language again Til shoot you," said witness. He turned away, and the cook again used abusive and indecent language while be was struggling with the mate. Witness turned and fired his revolver in the air to frighten the cook. ■ It quietened him. Witness could never have bit the cook, as the second mate was in front of him. From the position Johanson Was in, and from the elevation of the pistol, the bullet could not have struck in a direct line. The bullet must have struck the davits or tbe rigging and turned at right angles, otherwise the bullet must have gone to sea. The second mate had been with witness for twenty-five years. -■• The first had been with him three voyages. Both were reliable ofiicers. Cross-examined—There were two or three people on the wharf. About six and seven men were on board. He might bave summoned assistance; but he did not think there was time. He had carried the revolver in his pocket for a week or so. He was not much out of temper. The chief officer-had gone for a policeman during the while. The cook waa raving like a ~)frf~*an about the centre of the ship, and the captain went forward with the second officer to quiet him. Witness' .life he felt was in danger. At the moment he fired he felt that if the man got loose he would use the knife. He did not wish to fire at the cook, and had he wished he could not do so aa the mate was between him and the cook. The depositions of the chief officer and the second mate were pat in.

Beverley Buchanan, the _*____ shipping reporter at Lyttelton, gave evidence as to the account of the occurrence given him by Stockall, the cook, on the 14th September. Cross-examined—Stockall was not sober. Witness would have taken notice of what he said. ■ Mr Stringer then addressed the jury, and Mr Martin replied. His Honor summed up the case, and the jury retired at 1.45 p.m. Tbe jury returned at 2.25 p.m. with a verdict of "Not Guilty." Prisoner was then discharged. BOBBERY. Mary Doyle was indicted for that she did, on the -7th August, 1890, feloniously steal the sum of £2 from the person of Harry Smith. Prisoner pleaded " Not Guilty." Mr Martin prosecuted, and Mr Weston appeared for the prisoner. After hearing the evidence, which was similar to that given in the lower Court, the jury found the prisoner " Guilty." ASSAULT AND ROBBKBY. William John Lee and Michael Dooley were indicted for that they did, on 27th August, 1890, at Christchurcb, assault Harry Smith and rob him of 10s. The accused, who were defended by Mr Weston, pleaded " Not guilty." Mr Martin prosecuted. The case arose out of the previousone, the accused being in the house of Daisy Dale, in which the prosecutor Smith was robbed by Mary Doyle. The prisoners emphatically denied that they assaulted and robbed Smith or that he was assaulted by anyone in the house. • Counsel having addressed the Court,

His Honor summed up. The jury retired at 5.50 p.m. to consider their verdict; and returned .in ten minutes, having found both prisoners "Guilty." Mr Martin stated the convictions which were against Lee, and said there were noce against Dooley. Prisoners were each sentenced to two years' hard labor, after his Honor had commented on the seriousness of tbe crime. Mary Doyle was then brought forward and sentenced to three months' hard labor, his Honor taking into account the three months she had already been in prison awaiting her trial. The Court rose at 6.10 p.m.