LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 47, 19 November 1907, Page 7

LAW REPORTS.

SUPREME COURT! CRIMINAL SITTINGS. The final sittings for the year opoued yesterday morning before His Honour, Mr. Justice Copper. [ " ; THE GRAND JURY. Tho Grand Jury was empanelled as .fol-, lows .-—Edward Bull- (foreman), Robt. W.' Kane, Duncan Menzies, Fred. -Schlauch, Arthur Georgo Purdio, Colin C. Crump, Chas. D. Lightband, Geo. Stone, Robt. P. do Riddor,' Yvni. F. Eggars, Herbert T. Riohardson, Geo. Burton, Win. Crichton, Clifton 11. Dickerson, Francis W. Rutherford, Stephen D. Cronin, Adolphus W. J. Cook, Wm. A. Mowbray, Peter H. Miller, Eborhardt 'Focko, Wm. Honrv Fulton, Clias. E. Richardson, and Richard D. Hanlon. HIS HONOUR'S CHARGE. His Honour, ini charging tho Grand Jury, said that there was a long list of eases, in all twenty-two charges were preferred against twenty-four persons, in one or two instances two persons' being charged jointly. Ho was' Sorry that the calendar showed apparently no diminution of crime in the district, but would point out that,'on this particular occasion,cliarges against residents of the city and suburbs did not bulk largely on tho list. At least half tho offences had been committed in districts remote from Wellington. As sittings would not be held in, Napier, Palmerston North and Wangamii until about February, the cases wero being heard in Wellington, becauso it would be unreasonable to delay the ■ hearing of the charges.- While there- was a greater number 'of cases than ho desired to see, there was also the -fact that the offences were varied in the oxtrome — ranging'from alleged indecent language to allegea attempted murder. Some of the charges wero the ordinary charges which came, before the Court.' However, with regard to otliers, it would he necessary for him to direct the- Grand Jury.' Tho case of alleged forgery and false pretences against Frederick Nicolaus presented somewhat peculiar features, but, if tho evidence'tonaered before the Grand Jury was tho same as that which had been given in the Lower Court,, it would justify tho roturn of a true bill. Prisoner opened an account at tho Bank of Now Zealand in the name " H. A. Bollinger." It would be. stated that thero was no such person in existence. A man was entitled to assume a name, but, if lie did so, he must act honestly. Prisoner went to George and George's, where ho purchased a shirt, tendering a cheque in payment. The cheque was subsequently dishonoured. Of course, the prisoner might liavo a good defence. A charge of forgery and; uttering was preferred against a servant girl named Hyland. In the Lower Court prisoner' had stated ill explanation that slio had presented tho chequo on behalf of another girl, who could not bo found. Ho did not think the Grand Jury would have any. difficulty in this case. Tho charge.? in which theft were alleged did not call for special mention. Wm. James ■Webster and George Dunlop wero charged jointly and separately with breaking, entering, and theft. In tho caso in which the prisoners were charged with having broken and entered a lionso occupied by-ono Lokird, tho Grand Jury would not, he thought, hesitato to bring in a true bill, but in tho ' case in which the prisoners wero charged with having broken and entered a house belonging to one James, the evidence as disclosed in tho depositions was not direct. In that case, tho prisoners wero seen ill tho locality, and, some• timo• afterwards, it was obse.-ved that' tho houso had' been brokoii into. There was nothing in the ovidence to show that tho accused had committed. tho crime, but, of course, it was opeir to tho Crown to strengthen their caso. Ail old man liamod Robert Humphries was charged with havi-ig indecently assaulted a girl under tho ago • r twelve years. He would not go' into ,tne ditails; thoy would bo placed before tho Grand Jury in their, room, it would not'be necessary to administer the oath t'b tllo children vho would appear beforo the Grand Jury; all tbat was necessary - was to get them to promise to tell tho truth. .Tbo. witnesses woro principally children under twclvo years of age. He did not think tho Grand Jury would have any difficulty in finding a truo. bill in this c'aso. Another prisoner named Raymond was charged .with having carnally known a girl under, tbo ago of sixteen years, it was alleged that.ho took advantago of tho. girl. Her ago at tho timo was fifteen years ,und nine mouths. The prisoner was a friend of tho family, and the girl and her father would swear that ho knew her age. As tlio girl was undor. sixteen, years.of ago tho ques-. ition i/f consent did not enter, into the case. A man named Olieronshaw was charged with supplying a noxious drug for tho purposo of. procuring abortion. Thoro were tiyo counts— tho first alleging that a drug ivas supplied, and_ tlio other alleging that tho-drug was a noxious one. If the Grand Jury were satislied that a drug had been supplied, even if tlio ding wero not a • noxious one, prisoner had committed aivolfonce. Wm. Burford and Annio Whitaker were charged- jointly .with having unlawfully ifsed ail instrument with intent tc procure miscarriage. Tho' malo pri'soner, it was alleged, iu'duced the femalo prisoner to perform tho operation oil a girl, 'if tlio facts wore proved lie was a principal. Tho coso against Edward Murtagh, charged with having wounded an iiifaut with a razor during a quarrol with its mother, Would not,' he the uglit, givo the Grand Jury any diili.culty. His Honour said 1)0 did not know oxactly what form the 1 indictment aghiiist James M'EUiDii, who was chargod with having attempted to commit murder, would take. It was alleged that the prisoner visited a houso at night, and, boing rofiised admis-,. sion, fired two or three shots at tho occupier. Ho.vover, all tlio Grand Jury would require to do was to ascertain whether tho'prisoner had discharged tho revolver in the circumstances alleged. There were threo other cases to which he would rofer. W. G..Tustin, wlib' carried on business as a painter, was charged with having committed breaches of tho Bankruptcy Act. Tho first,count,alleged that ho had lVilcd to keop proper books, and tbo second that ho had contracted debts at a timo when ho had no reasonable expectation of having tho means to pay the same. It was alleged in this ease that, in April, 1905, prisonor was at least £2000 to tho bad, and that between, that dat-o and 1007 bo had increased his liabilities to such an extent that, when ho filed, he was owing £4000. If these circumstances woro proved, it would be a reasonable inference that prisoner had no reasonable expectation of being able to pay tho dobte ho contracted between the dates mentioned, ns well as those which he was owing previous to that period. Arthur Beeson was charged with having committed defamatory libol. It was alleged that ho sent to tho head of a Government Department a letter containing very fernve charges against ah employee. The question of justification would not roquire consideration by the Grand Jury. All that they had to ascertain was whether prisoner bad sent the letter. The contents of the letter would speak for themselves. There wis a case against a man named Egan, who was charged with having used indecent language to a woman in the' public street. Usually such charges woro dealt with in tho Lower' Court, but, as tho offence was punishable by imprisonment for over three months, prisoner was within his rights in electing to be tried by a jury. In conclusion, His Honour said that most of. tho cases would not give tho Grand Jury very serious difficulty. It was true that the. calendar was a lengthy one, but, as be had mentioned before, a considerable proportion of tho cases had come from the country districts. Another matter which would have to be taken into consideration in determining whether crime was on the increase was that a' great number of the offences wero alleged to have been committed by prisoners who were old offenders.' Of course, lie could not toll the Grand Jury which prisoners had been convicted previously. Ilis Honour then requested the Grand Jury to retiro to consider tho various cases. NO BILL. . No Bill was returned in tho cilso of Eric Stone Olieronshaw,' charged' with' supplying a noxious drug. Mr. Myers pointed out that tho principal witness had not been called beforo tho Grand Jury, and that a medical certificate, had been

handed in to' the effect that she. was too.ill to attend. It was understood that tho Grand .Jury had been. informed of tho ijiatter. and it was expected that it would, if necessary, ask for a copy of the depositions. Mr. Myers also said the Grand' Jury should not ignoro ; a Bill without hearing all tho witnesses. His Honour deferred, for later consideration, tho question of submitting tho matter again to the Grand Jury, if that could be. done. Subsequently,'he said ho thought it would be better to leave the matter m tho present position, for, oven in the event of tho Grand Jury finding a true Bill if the matter were again referred to it,' tho prin-i cipal witness might not bo able to give evidence this session. If it so desired the Grown could present a Bill at tho next sitting. Mr. Myers said that although what happened in the Grand Jury room could not bo matter for discussion, lie thought His Honour inifjht take it that,' although tho girl herself, had not ;becn called, her statement was placed fully before, the Grand Jury. 'l'ho disenssion then terminated.' 1 TRUE BILLS. The Grand Jury brought' in true Bills in tho following cases William Thomas Raymond, carnally knowing a girl under sixteen yoars_ of age; Ernest Siggleko, theft from a dwelling';' George Dunlop and Wm. James Webster, breaking and ontering; George Dunlop and William James Webster, breaking and entering, "and-theft; Wm. Burford and Annie- Whitaker, unlawfully using an instrument with ' intent to procuro miscarriage; Patrick Brady, doing wilful damage; Edward Murtagh, wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm; Wm. Joseph Lowe and John Cornelius Robinson, assault and robbery; Georgo• Cowan, -theft from the person; Daniel Desmond O'Brien, theft from tho . person ; Waka Waka Hepere, rape; Frederick Nicolaus; forgery ana falso' pretences ; Robt. Humphries, indecent assault; James Egan, using indecent language; Arthur Beeson, defamatory libel; Wm. Geo. Tustin, broaches of the Bankruptcy Act; James M'Eilion, attempted murder; Thos. Haynes, theft from a dwelling; 'Frank Carroll and Francis Gordon Lyons, arson and attempted arson; and Emily Hyland, forgery and uttering. Tho Grand Jury were occupied until 4.30. In discharging them from furthor' attendance, His Honour, on behalf of the country, thanked them for the care and attention which they had bestowed, on their duties.

THEFT FROM THE PERSON.

SENTENCE DEFERRED. George Cowan, a middle-aged man, was charged with having, at Feilding, ou October 16, stolen the sum of £13 from tha person of one David Morgan. Prisoner, wlio was undofended, pleaded " not guilty'." ' ; ' ' . The following jury. was. empanelledA. D. Kennedy' (foreman),. S. J. Watford, . W.. S. Indian; J. Taylor, A. G. RougE, 0. D. Anson, J. Bradbury, H. A. Hurrell, j. R. Hornor, J. 1 Kirker, A. Paterson, A. E. Schultze. ,

Mr. Myers, on behalf of the Crown, said that Cowan arid Morgan'occupicd the samp room the night before. the theft, was committed. On the morning in question, both had liquor at the Manchester Hotel..Morgan shouted, but Cowan did not. Subsequently, both returned to the house in which they were living. At this time Morgan had £13, made rip of a five-pound note, several singles, and silver. Morgan went to lie down on the bed. After a whilo, Cowan came in, and put his hand in tlie pocket where tho ; money was. Morgan asked him what lie .wanted, and ho said he was feeling for some tobacco. Subsequently, Morgan missed the 1 money. Cowan left Feilding that, day. Previous to his departure, ho stated to the landlady that he could lay his hands on £13 or £14. Ho left Feilding' without paying for a day' or two's board)' and without collecting wages due to'him for the same period. On arrival at' Wellington, he was met by Detective Connolly. At th'd''Polite-' Station,, ho was searched and itr'wifs? fßiilid' that lie had in his possession several pounds, including a-, five-pound note; which Morgan could recognise by a mark on the back. • ■ David Morgan, who gave detailed evidence, ■was ci'oss-oxamincd by the prisoner. In reply. to. questions, lie' stated that ho was drowsy .at. the time .the offencewas. cornemitted, and that he did .not feel in. his pocket to see if he had tho money immediately after prisoner visited the,room.

Mabel Cleland, . boardingrhouso keeper, stated tlmt neither Morgan nor Cowan was sober on tho morning' in question; William Wilkinson, builder, said ho had soon Cowan undor the influence of liquor, but he always attended to his work, nnd,witness would give : him ' employment afc : 'any timo. . • • • ; ■ '

, Detective Connolly, and Thomas M'Gillivrnj, barman of tho Manchester Hotel/ also gave' evidence. ' , .. Prisoner, addressing th(j jury, said he. did not take the money. '

The Crown Prosecutor did not address the jury.

His Honour summed tin briefly, and the' jury, retired at on<! o'clock. The'jr returned at 2.45, with a verdict that prisoner was guilty of simple, theft. His .Honour intimatod that he'would pass sonfcenco this morning. . ALLEGED THEFT FROM A DWELLING:' , VERDICT OF " NOT GUILTY," ' Ernest Siggleko, a young maiv'wiis charged with, on September 9, ; ll)o7;'at' Patakonui,' liear Martin borough, having broken and entered the dwelling-house of Frederick Charles Hofmeyer ami-stolen a' watch, a razor-strop; a bachelor's outfit, and a quantity of tobacco and cigarettes. Thero were several minor counts. •

Prisoner, who was defended hy Mr. Fair, pleaded " not guilty." The following jury was empanelled :—C, ll.' Osmond -(foreman), 11. Wade,' J. Eglin, T. Carrig, J. Hollis, A.. H. Waugli, N; G. Einnie, "H.' Aii iiison, T. M. Peters,' J. H. Musson, C. G. Fcrdham, and D. Fijguson. : Mr'. Myers, n: opening tho case'j said it would be proved, and probably admitted, that the' prisoner did enter wharo. If he broke into tho place ho was guilty of tho major i-ount, but if tho door wore open he must be found guilty on a minor count. It was not necessary to trace all. the articles which it was alleged had been stolen. Prisoner lived about a milo from the wharo, and tho articles wcro .removed about sis o'clock at night. When Hofmeyer and a constable visit?.! the placo in which prisoner lived he • (prisoner) came out and said, "I know what you have come for. I will go and get it l'or you." Subsequently, some tobacco, which Hofmeyer claimed, was found in prisoner's room. Prisoner had no right to enter the whare. The onus was an tho prisoner to ■ show how ho came into the possession of tho outfit. ■' ■ ■ ! Evidenco for the Crown was given by F. C. Hofmeyer, W. H. Norris, and Constnblo Leckie. ' • ;

Prisoner gave evidence on his own behalf. He stated that lie. required tho use of the outfit which, ho believed, belonged to a young follow named Norris, who was Hofmcyer's mate. Ho did not remove any other article from the wliare, neither did ho know at first that the mall who accompanied Hofmeyer to his place was a constable. When they caino up ho guessed what Hofmeyer wanted. Ho was not oil very good terms with Hofmeyer, who had threatened to "get oven" with him. Cross-oxaniincd, prisoner admitted that he had served two seri.tonces for theft. Counsel addressed tho jury, and . His Honour summed up. . The jury, who retired at 3.45, returned at 4.20 with a verdict of ."Not guilty," and prisoner was - discharged.

BREAKING AND ENTERING.

"ONE PRISONER DECLARED AN HABITUAL CRIMINAL.' ANOTHER FOUND "NOT GUILTY." William James Webster (a young man) and George Dunlop (a lad) were charged jointly (1) with, at Winiato, near Utiltu, oil September 14, having broken into and entered the dwellinghouse of John Joseph Leland with intent to steal, and (2) with, at Winiato, . on September 14, having broken into and entered 'the dwellinghouse of Reginald 'John Jamos, and having stolen tho suru of

305., the moneys -Dillohi : and; 10s., the moneys of John'M'Fio. Mr. Buddie appeared for the prisoners. Webster ploadod guilty, but Dunlrip denied the offences... • ..... . v .. . ... ... , Webster ;alono- was ' th6iv'- fu'rthor chargcd • with having, at Huntervillo, on _ September 10, broken and ontored the dwcllirighoiiso of John Lowry, and having stolen the sum of '£1 lis.. viVisona- ! - Mr.; Buddie- said that at thctiimo: Webster committedithe'offcnces'iho, was' drunken burst.- ' Pristoiieriliad decided, not to put the Court to the espouse' of - trying him; 1 but would give cvidenco later that'Dunlop Was not conned, ed' with the crimps;- Counsel tisked- tho Court to xical 'as; loiiieiitly -'as'' possible 'with prisoner." '•«><«>«•«; Ai'i v/m* 1»/v j ' Prisonek'-'admiiitfefl l baying ;«sol;Ved" tfcriiis of imprisonin<jnt r :''for" ga'mliliiig "at "Tiiili'aye, breaking r 'alid: entering;' breaking out ■ jof prison in. ' 19U4 ? t al v ' Wolliiißtohi escaping-' frcjin custody; 'breaking; and" ; initcring 1 at :Paliitorsto'n Nprfcliy ; and nouse-brcakirig at Adclalcfe,'' but' denied IVdviiife' been 1 convicted of hirfceny, also of breaking and oiiloring- at Porthi' j . . His Honour:'r shall soiitonco you to two i years' inMH'Sohiriciit upon' each 'charge;';*t|io 'rWi,concurrently. I shall iiral;o : tho sentewife comparatively short, because; l< now declare you to be a habitual criminal.;, Yon have spent.two-t]iirds of the past fifteen, years in I don't know whether drinlc or'Crhhlnal-instinct'is responsible). At any ratcjtytttf ate not-fit to bo at .large# As prifl)n^r>was''being'removed. f romy'-tho-dock' His' '■ .that •. wits. the only way to 'deal I'witlr'avprisbnor of; this description'; l "'"':'' ;.ft ..v ' George Pnnlo]i,'"'"the ipther f'prisqncrp- was' then charged'''on the first;'conu't. _ The following • t4M.-,-. J. Gi-'-Duiicair,. W;' A. List, J, R:"-Hori\4, Ct. T. Stutter;''A. G'v RpughfiO! Dr Anson,"and J. Mockridge': : -""""' -; <•' ?(•»-<•■,

Mr: Myersj- Oiv-behalfjof'ithe:-Crown,- said that, in Septembor l '-'l4, It'elandis house ".was., broken into',' and" therrfueStioiWor rthe 'jury was whetfi'er'. the 1 prisoner - had' 'beenr>a- : party' to the OffMicef' wh6;;.liad.:: been. , chargcd joivitly' Svitli ''prisonbr, l - had '■ pleadpd guilty, 'i Oh. tho 'day'in question, :a Nativo woman saw'-"Webster f and;. Dunlop :<bangin£ about Leland-'s~.'-*place,f. and: .she;'.lnfoi'inea' Leland; 'Wij'eji 'on :tho:'teone;"j he saw Dtthlop' , ''6tanding'f<oti nth«!Njpath;r>out-J side-his front door. Dpoin'caijohirig sight 'of, him Dunlopcalle'd Wt'-"Got.".-viplanil'wont.; round to the back and saw Webster running away towards tho bush. Ho found that the" house lia'dl lieeii-.lirokon "i'lito'.u Ifi-thOliNatiyo-j woman had .not warned him in time s.ome ;of his ..property:..would', in -il! probability,have, been stolen: : v.'"' Evidence .for, the' ! CioftiKWftf. by John J. vtelari'd',.-, 'Whaaxi'i dlidyColl'' stable - i Mr. Buadje. fonfondejtf' < Don•lop was in Webster's; compi|fly,''fe'did-' not know an"' Jjrtdh^c:' Webster journoying'- -from the; 7 Kuig .Couiit'ry:: '"to: ■Taihapo 'for ' tlie'' pu/jjo'se" of ''obtaining"'ein T . ploymont.., .Punlop, was' influenced'' hy. Web;, ster". v .'.V.' L ,-,.'. " ; Prisoner t^ayG^; .evidenco ' ; in' f siippbit; jof' 'counsel's ,< remSilis" , i v 'v!i" i i'- ■ Webster'/'\in' : not know ; jthat the' .house... Just' -aiid been' chased '* j-jrafi* off along ;of, his money, "witness 'did - not 'neaif'-TJunlop., call out " Get," but rau,.flut because ho .saw Leland 'appyOaching.''' ''" i • 4' lo ,J n b'.' Wa u<s when His Honour finished {his > brief- summing- .up it Livas; aboufc'' ; 6.lS. «sv-..%<0-v # s4;k,!.' ; t ;

.The jury,' \vlio were absent for-'only a'few; .minutes, 'a"''vordict ! of" "not'guilty l ,'''' and the 1 ' prisoner :Svas;;rcmanded;vuntilf this morning "oii' mbutiohwT' in-tho 'sccond count.-' '• i The Court , thett:"'adjouraed'.> r until-'.'ttn o'clock • thiS'/mofmpg.'".'!/ .'«i j IN BANKRUPTCY. ' ! , Mr. Jus tico.Button Jin bankruptcy .Vycsjtenlay,,, pf' Cprlyle Sydney Free, deiitist..;'_; J."'...! I 1 Mr. Mr'.'Slyers" appare^ : fof''.th"e" Official Assignee (SlK''J/'Asncrpft),' and,-'. Sir.' Jjevvey for. Mr. "B"' W'.' Ndsoii,'"creditor,.'and .'for-'-merly a jjartner of' tho debtor. I . ' Under oxaniinatjon "bj; . the ! bankrupt'statcd' that'h'6 coriJnionce'd'business in Wellington on. April 6,; with no capital; but equipment to" the valuo of £35. He estimate® This', .'buampssj Jo :Ijo i-.worth £100.He borrowed £70 from, his mother, .giving her a billpof' : salo' (uiiregisters'd) over the. plant,' and : Mr: Nels6riy';whei\ he joined the business in April, put., in,.£loo: > Bankrupt:also borfowed' : '£loo, front.his brother in ChristchurchV to~' , wh6m' ,; he'''gave ja'tsccurity" (unremstpred) oyer the plants'^"He'told Nel--son'of loan7J)ut'Jni)t of the'loan from his m6thetf;/ r 'Ha loStfmoiifey''bH';the'biisiness; ifrom bcgmniSg'-'to vlti' July l 'lio'v got; maiTicd,'.'incurring J.vGodber (£B}V'*and : ,'''V'eitcli ra'nd'Allaii" (£29) 'in tlmt conhfcctioli... Had he sold his business 'at his ow'iV'Valuatioh it -'tho titno of his niarriago he c&uld" have paid all debts.' ' Mr. Myers: -How was -it * your: .plant' Was seized?. .

Bankrutsij: l ''My ■'br'otb6tV:.seized'it;- as his 'scGurity.^ t i?'wToie"toMiM r^nd;, said-l' colild: not keep 1 grtiiigr'but'i bdfild-'iitit say out if h6 : l adyjsed 'm6' , 'to.file.^'-'''';-' ; ; ,■ • Mr: Myors :" Why .did you not'-file, in fairr ness >'-tb" y'ovir' v 'othfcr creditors, instead of allowing this unsecured'"'creditor to >'seizo ; your assets? • Bankrupt: 1 w\is-trying ; td'-raise £100 !onpersonalTicoilritynfroni Mr. Crump in Wei.lington, in!order Jo'pay- .off all the creditors, i Bankrupt [stilted that his plant, ..was.. >; noW' iin--tho aubtion:' room., Whon ho. fileft.>the firm's, tratlo-debts amounted, to.,£77.;'s'iHis private debts amounted to .£195, ,whi<?li eluded £76 to his brother,, apart froin (lis : security. v <?lt:'also. included £5p owing to Mr. .-Nelson. . . • .... \ ■: • My- Mycr.st; To-pay all theso debts.-, you 'had £6. iiL-'.assetai.),-," V, .v. , . :';r ;«:'j ■'• •.Bankruptsi'es<te ' f c.-.• ; Examined .byvMr. ; .Le\;yey, ibanknipt- said ' that he .-'told. >Mr, . Nelson, -'.when ho- joined tho ,business,-.that it-was worth; £2: jOsI- a week, nobvifilC, 'and : ' asked -hjin -toput iin £100. He bad vbeen drawing from £1 to ;£4 sa .week out of .the bvisinessi -«The furniture and clothing'' Obtained: . from' Veitoh ~ ind •Allan's of.cbedding,-'bodstiiad and clothilig.f6r b.unself',.'nui l ujf.c;.vi Mr. Ashcroft: I .knoiy-,;.t>ho ; C.oUct .■ allows: £20 worth-;of~ clothing, but it' never contemplated: getting- into debt ?for ; clothing like this. . .- ; His Honour: -Yes ;-but I have not to deal with thatJipuji- \ .... Bankrupt; ili' l renly'tb'Mr. Levvcy, said' he could :*not.'possibly , pay. more than £2 a month. In answer, ,to;. His Honour he, ( said. that he was 22-or-23 years old. ; ~' Tho Court jiw.de the usual, order, declaring the oxanißiatMli"clb'seyr' " !

MAats,OTTt^C®Rt:

(Before jSPAt/<f: Biddoll. S.M.) !•• MIRVMUI INCIDnNTS SUBSTANTIAL' PENALTIES IMPOSED. . The adjourned Janies, Miller, .charged -.with, having, .br6X<ui"'~two_. pahop | or glass in aVtraincav.,iit alifamarj '!), was called ' on J also ~ two. separate...charges : against tlio, of., .haying, .as' I ,'saultcd 011 tho samp.qccasidn'.;. Mr.' Aho and Sub-Inspector o'Do'n6van v .j)rosecutod. rJohn Guy-,Marshall dflpb , sed'that'ho>'.was:st r Miramar' Pli, th'ft .nightj o.f;tjjq.lircakjng'of tho tram windows. Ho sa\v, ;; a:'.'..st9np' .'tlirojwiithrough the window, and "caught sight 'of iv man running:' ill a aiul ;; was,,aiTestb l d by tlio. mbto'rnian and.conductor of Mjio'.car...'...,„ ( . '. ; -»• Cross-exammcd' ilid hot seo: the ( pwji, oc.sppi Him" actually. ~ broken, anothertman', in 'the. vie-' Unity, .of the car,;. whbso.iclbtlibV.Avere .tlußtj 1 ' and rnfflqd-rs .thpugh lib;,had ..bfbn^fightmg.' Mr. Herdmanjjaid tho.caso' : was"Vrijeiijayi/-' able one, .aud. pointed lout'..tlijit, tho. .stated menta ncciisVd bad'made "to huii led liimi to believe that there had been a, mjsta.ko.on tho part of the .witnesses, for tho prosccu^ionfas t.i tlio id'inEififcatibn''of aceus&l" -So subi mitted tlMf rtoiio '<Sf 'tho'- w'iliiosSos'liSd; I>febn able to identify-'accused:."'. Mr. Herdmari' sugpestcd that thoro had probably beon two

'rows oil'the ; night iii question, and that the mail whom tho witness Marshall had seen was the man who had assaulted M'lntyre and probably the man who had thrown tho stone through tho window. ' James Miller stated that ho and his wife and family wont out to Wonderland 011 tho evening of November 9. He saw his wife and family on to tho ground, and then returned; to''town tp purchase provisions for Sunday. Ho had 0110 drink during tho evening. Ho left town again at 9.5 p.m. to bring his family back from Miramar. On arrival at tho Miramar terminus, he $aw a number of people getting' on to a oar on tho siding, and wont over to it to see if his people wero amongst tho crowd. Ho did pot see them, and went on. to another car. Here ho was knocked down and -assaulted, being kicked about tho body and robbed of his watch and chain.- '

Cross-examined, by Sub-Inspector O'Dono- j van, defendant said lie had pleaded not guilty ' (to all thrOo"charges when the case was first , called oil, although' tho newspapers said, lie I pleaded guilty to, tho cliarge of Waking- tho .windows. , , *

... JI is. ' Worship said there - waa ' a 'lieHaiir '"{iiiio'unt' of ■ indofiniteuess' alibut ' 'the' 'fovidonce i for ■ tho . prosecution. Hoivt;ver, _ lip considered, ther-o was. a * .prima, fapie caso against accused; and the .} only thing \vas whether defendant had given 4 a'satisfactory -account of tin; proceedings'on . •the-night in question. There *was no direct J •eviilencc that-accused threw tho stono, but ; when, the case was first culled on ho, had pleaded guilty to tho charge of breaking'the i windows. Ho subsequently denied that plea and' ploaded not' guilty; Defendant's story, • : if-;true,i-was- a' most extraordinary one.. '.In His Worship's-opinion; the .circumstances .pqiiitpd to qefenclant as tho person who coniiliittOd tho assault on Booth, and. threw the stotio. Tho presumption was -also that :dofendant was tho mail who assaulted . j M'lntyre. On tho ch'argo of wilfullybreqk- i ing. the. windows accused would be convicted and fined 2Qs., with costs 245., and" ordefed 1 to pay the value of the windows,'3os.,'in "§e■fault ;6evon days' imprisonment: - On the <;hargc. . assaulting defendant. would be conv;cted andfincd 405., in default sovon days' imprisonment. His Worship considered the chai^'o'of assaulting Booth'was •the inost seriotis one of tlio!three. Tho stone 'was a largo-one, and tho charge against dojfcndantjinight easily liavo been a more epri.ous gnp, Tliero was no excuse' whatever'for throwing a missile of tho' weight and size ; thrown: Accused would be convicted and "'sentenced to 21 days'imprisonment.

SELLING TOBACCO TO.'A BOY,

; ' A'Chinaman, named Sing On Wah,' up# pearo<l 'on' a charge of having, on Ootolier, '22,;.501d, tobacco to a youth under 15 ' years of-ago. Dofoiidant pleaded guilty, and waa warned by His Worship that it did not'matter whether a hoy purchased tho tobacco : for •himself- or for■'someone olso; the Act mado •it. clear that tobacco must not bo sold tp a boy .under tho ago of .15 years. A fine. of. 205., and costs 11b., in default 48' hours' -pprispmnent, was imposed.

DAIRY PROSECUTIONS.

; tTho Dairy and Stock Departments Imd ft .field-day before Dr. A. M'Arthur, S-M.: : For hot having kept his stockyard cleaned, 1 draped, and in-sanitary condition to the •satisfaction : 'of the Inspector of Dairies, / James . Ferguson was .convicted and fined ,ss. and. costs,'£l,lßs. Gd., in default three days' imprisonment.!'.

James Kearneyj jun.,' was convicted and fined £2 and costs, £1 18s. 6d., in default three . days'' imprisonment, for using a cowshed, the ground space of which was broken away,;and,insanitary and not floored to 'the . satisfaction of the Dairy Inspector. "V 1 Julius Lamberg was convicted and fined £l'-and costfij £1 18s. 6d., in default three I days' imprisonment, for using a cowshed, the walls of' which were not sufficiently coated ! with whitewash, and on a second information ' of permitting milk to bo taken from a cow, 1 the udder and teats of which had not been ' thoroughly cleansed. .> Oliver Death was convicted and fined 20s. j and costs, 1 £3 10s., in default three days' < imprisonment, for feeding swine with meat and offal that had not. been boiled.

. Jast- W. BraitKwaite was convicted and ;filled 20s. .and costs, £1 18s. 6d., in default three- days'-.,, imprisonmont, for having occupied a cowshed for dairying purposes without collecting and romoving after, milking all droppings, manure, oxcrcment and filth, and Mother-, impurities. .

,!.'• For allowing swino to remain within fifty, .yards, of a milkhouso where milk was cooled Alfred Cudby. was convicted and 'fined ,ss. costs, £1 18s. 6d., ; in l default three days' imprisonment. A similar penalty was im- i : posqd on'Wm. George Clout for haying used a c6\yshed'. without recoating the walls and •• ;roof with limo every three months. ' , i For- having permitted a heap of., manure to ,remain within 30ft.-. of dairy premises 1 : John A.! Gordon was convicted and fined.'&s. . and costs, £1 .18s. 6d., in default threo daysV imprisonment. 'For a similar breacby i ■Frederick S. Witton was convicted and fihec £2 and costs, £1 18s". 6d., in default thre« days' imprisonment. '.

• . • MAINTENANCE OF CHILDREN. Kate'M'Conagliey was ordered to coritri- j buto 3s. per week towards the maintenance i j aud education of her child, an inmato of the ' .Receiving Home Industrial School at Christ- . church.' 1 '' , ' j ; An order was ; made' against Sarah Martin , i IFlower to pay 4s. per week towards' the . .; "sftpporjt of'her child, an inmate of theAuck- . ' '~hnd'lndustrial School. ■ ■ '• /• ' *! ' . ; ;F6r;-'disobedience of an order for tho I 'maintenance of his wife, Richard'C. F/G. ; 'Wdrtk 11 Was .'convicted and' sentenced' to '. 21 | I days" inip'risonment, warrant to be suspended so'lung'as £2 per week is'paid off "arrears, . ! which" amount to £7 14s. ' •1 -. j MISCELLANEOUS. 4 j ! ■ Phillip Sharkey , was , convicted and Sen* JieripCd. to 'pud. month's imprisonment 'on a j *qliargdj of. habitual drunkenness. Three first 1 'offending,. .inebriates, were convicted and V;| .fined 55., iii default 24 hours' imprisonment, '"'! >hd ono was convicted and discharged. : J Arthur Stewart Muir pleaded guilty to a | charge of haying committed a grossly v in- ; decont act in Frankville t Terrace, and was ! 'q.dimettd iind lined £3', in default 14 days' 1 .imprisonment. ,' i For procuring liquor from a hotel during the currency ot a prohibition order Edward Townslicudi.was- convicted and fined 40s. .and , costs, 75., in default seven days' imprisob- ' iiidnt." "' ' ' -;