SUPREME COUET.

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 12499, 9 May 1906, Page 4

SUPREME COUET.

CRIMIXAL SESSIOXS.

The criminal sessions of the Supreme Court were resumed ye.-'terday morning, before hits Honour Mr Justice Denniston. SYSTEMATIC THEFT. William George Smith came up for -sentence for theft on five charges. ■Mr Stringer (Crown Prosecutor) stated that aii far as could be ascertained, necused had stolen between £400 and £600. Mr Harper, who appeared for ncruscd. appealed for leniency on the ground that he Lad not been m trouble before. He was a married man with two children, and had got into difficulties through betting on horse races. His Honour said accused had committed a series of systematic and deliberate thefts, extending over twelve months, and had attempted to cover his crimo by forge 17. He would lw I sentenced" to ten months' imprisonment, account being taken of the time ho had been in gaol. ' ALLEGED GAMBLING DEN. John pleaded "Not guilty" to a charge of having, on December 20th, kept and u.-ed a room in Colombo street for the purpose of betting with persons re.-orting thereto. Mr Stringer prosecuted, and Mr Irwin (Dunedin) apiKWied for accused. The depositions of Richard Williams, owner of the *-hop rented by accused, were r<*ad. They went to show that accused had rented the room for a year and ten month.-". Constable Donnelly .stated that ho came, from the North Island in December last, and went to Rouse rcom on December 2Gth. «nd a man named H«.«hp were tnere, and there were fifteen persons in the room. Hoilip waa behind the counter, and a woman made a bet on the Auckland Cup, paying over £2 11s. Witne> I put 10s on Armistice, in the «ira« raa\ ! Jiauding the money to liesiip. Ko 6 was standing at the coinor of the counter during the transaction. On December 27th witness went to the room again ; lljss ami lies'! ;p wore preI sent, and fourt«>eu men. \\ itnoss put ]o.s on Makaroff, giving the money to Herilip. On January Ist ho again vif?ited tho room, and Herriip "was there alone. Witness put 10s on Silky, a.ud Oα on Fre<lerick. He gave a specially marked pound note (produced). Constable, Itoberts deputed to visiting the room e.ll December 20th. He was reiu.-fj a bet then, but returned on the following day, and saw Donnelly make a bet with Ross. : James Win. ]3elcliff gave corrobora- ■ tive evidence. I Detective Ward stated that he went ; to accused's room on January Ist, and seized a quantity of property, all relating to betting and horse racing. The marked pound note, which ho liad given to Donnelly was in the till. A pad of p:i]>er, appairen'tly a. record of bets, showed two entries with a. number of ■ the .luiniee of hoitsee mentioned by Don- | nelly, ant.l tho initials J.D.D. j 'J'iiis concluded tho evidence for the ! prosecution. lieniy Hensley, labourer, was called for the defence. Ho stated that on ; tho afternoon of January Lst ho was j in Ru-nYi room. He had an account to i deliver, but Ro>s was away; Hevlip wae . present. A (lark -man—whom ho now j knew to bo CoiitftaSle Donnelly—onter- ' I'd and wanted to put 10s on Mahu- | tonga. liolip refused, saying that he could not do that there-, atid he had told him before. Donnelly then asked j for change for a pound note, which was I given by Heslip. Soon after tlio police arrived, arid arrewted thceo present. Witness was arrented, but disJcharged, on a charge, of frequenting a gaming house. Ciais-exaniined, witness eaid ho did not remember, but would not swear that lie did not tell tho manager of tl.e Government Poultry Department where } lie was working, that accused wanted ; him to say that Donnelly was refused a bot, but received change for a note. He did nob remember telling the manager that ho had not .seen Donnelly on January Ist, nor that three or four other men were going to Court to say that they saw Donnelly refused a bet. Re-examined, witness said ho was reluctant to have anything to do with the case, as tho manager of tho Ponl- 1 try Depot threatened to di-mire him \ if he gave evidence. He had been din- | milled since the case was before the lower Court. Edward Diggs gave similar evidence. Cross-examined, witness eaid he. went to to borrow somo money. William Alexander stated that he went to ,«ee Rcrs about mending a gate on the afternoon an question. Donnelly canto in, and was refused a bet. Donnelly then asked for change* for n pound, and got it from Heslip. BtMtio Crook stated that ho met Heslip and two other men on tho morning in question, <aud had a drink wit.ii thorn. While they were in Ihe hotel a man camo in and had a bet witn Heslip. Heelip wrote it down, and signed tho initial " J.D.D." Frederick Smith gave corroborative evidence. Silky and Frederick were the horses backed. Maurieo Heslip, who described himeolf as nccu«>d's clerk, stated that Constable Donnelly never 'had a bet in Ross' office. Tho hots on .Silky «nd Frederick were made, in tho hotel, as de.«crrl>ed by tlio previous witnesses. Cross-examined: Frederick won, but the ni.-in h<ul not claimed his dividend. It Mas not letting fit totalisator oddr>. This concluded tho evidence for the defence. Mr Stringer called Fvimuel Nowton, manager of tho Government Poultry Depot, to give rebutting evidence concerning: Hensley'.s statements. Witness wiid H<>n<-loy told him that Rons wanted him to tell falsehoods, namely, that he f,aw Donnelly refused a bot. and given change, for a pound note. Hensley had said previously that he never saw Donnelly in Ross's room. wont to the" depot nnd called Heii'-hy out. qnd tlio latter paid ho had received a subpoena. "Witness warned Hensley that lie '"liiad open«-d hifi mouth toa wide," and had better not forget it in court. After toeing the report of the I c:iM> in the newspaper ho considered it his duty to communicate with the police ; ho accordingly mado a written statement. Three' other employees woro J present when Hensley said ho had not Keen Donnelly. Crosv-exanuiiied : Witnees denied thnt ; he» said ho would dismiss Hensley if l:-< gave evidence for R-css. j Arthur linker, employed at the Go- I vernmont Poultry Depot, stated that ho heard Hc::tOt*y r-ay that lions wanted ; huii to toll a lie about th<» j Janus North, also employed at th;> Pcultry D-c-pct. -aid "he iieard Hmiplcv fay R>is wanted him to swear SrDmethi:\' r in connection wi;h the case, but he <i:** not hear what it was that he was <!;■- ---<-ired -t) &ivear. He heard some reference to a constable going to Ro*fc's office and changing a pound. Recalled by Mr Irvine, Hysiop .«a!d Donnelly was slightly under tho- influence of liqucr when he entered tJie oflic , . Alter being refused a lx>t. Don-Tif-lly .ifikwl for change for a pound, and witno-s givo it. In addressing the jury, Mr Irwin euid it. was not sufficient for the Crown fshow that the material collected pointed to thw conclusion that the oniy , I.usint*carried on was that of betting; it niuet proved that somebody went to the office and actuaiiy made a bet with Roc-s. Iv reply. Mr Sr.rrngfr suggested that the e:ory of the deienco was a trumped up ore. Tiie jury retired at o.'Zi). Four hours later the foreman rtated there Kilo no possibility of agrecinoiu. Tliey were accordingly dLsclun-gcd. The Crown Prolocutor *:»id he would oon-ider his future cour.sj ct action. Th<« Court adjourned at 9.20 until 10 i o'clock this morning. |