SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 51, 23 November 1907, Page 7

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. Tito Court resumed its sittings .vcstfirday morning, His Honour Mr. Justico Cooper taking his seat at 10 o'clock. A SERIOUS CHARGE. ' WOUNDING AND ASSAULT. SENTENCE DEFERRED. The hearing of the caso against Edwavi Murtngh, a jockey, was continued. Prisoner was charged with having on October 11 wounded an infant named Alary Lorraine Tui Leigh with intent to do her grievous bodily harm; with having assaulted hor so "as to cause her actual bodily harm,, and wrc'i having assaulted her mother, Frances Hole 2 Leigh. Counsel addressed the jury at length, ill'., Herdmnn, on bohalf of tile prisoner; said that there were three theories which tho jury was entitled to consider(l) That prisoner was guilty; (2). that .Mrs. Leigh iinflictcd {lie injury, and ($) thut the wound was. the result of an accident. Owing to the prisoner, telling the woman that he had married, or was about to marry, she had becomo. incensed. When a woman was in a passion she was more likely , to commit such a diabolical act than a man. He submittal that prisoner's actions were consistent With _innocen.ce, and that the woman's evidence was. tainted by reason of the fact that she had made misstatements in l the Lower Court.' Mr. Myers, on behalf of the Crown; submitted that, in view of prisoner's evidence, the theory of accidentwas no longer tenabl°. Apart from the evidence, it was much more probable that the.act was committed,by prisoner, and, on the evidence, it was clear that he was guilty. ' His Honour, in summing up, said that the jury must ' bring in a verdict either )f S u ["y '' or. of " not guilty " on'all the. counts. Ihere was, in his opinion, no evidence that tho wound was accidentally inflicted by sonic person or by the little child itself. What the jury had to decide was whether prisoner or the' woman -inflicted the; wound. Counsel for the defence, in tho course of his able ■ address, had suggested that a woman, impelled by feelings of jealousy and with a desire for revenge, might commit a'crueller act than a man. Ho might point out: that thero Wore records of men who were considered the personification of cruelty, and theVe, werb records of women'who had been'equally as bad. Thei'e wits Nero and thero was Jozebe!.It did not follow, ho thought, that because a person was of'the male sex he was less likely to commit a cruel act . than a person of the female sex. His Honour 'then proceeded to review tho evidence'at length. Tho jury, which retired at 12.'30, -returned at 2.25 with a verdict of "guilty." • • His Honour remanded tho prisoner until this morning. • .

ALLEGED ASSAULT AND ROBBERY.

William Joseph Xowo, and John Cornelius Robinson,' two young men, wero charged with having at tfeilding, on September 28, robbed Frederick Hugh Noffke of a purso and £6 in monoy, and with having used, personal violence towards him.,

v Mr. T. Wilford (instructed by' Mr. "A. Ongley of Feildihg) appeared for the prisoners, who pleaded "not guilty." The following jury was empanelled:— Michael J. Hodgens (foreman) and Geo. Duncan,. Eli Young, Jno. Bradburv, ; Diigald Ferguson, Henry Wade, W. A. List, Ed, Mason, Stanley Kirby, Jas. Taylor, Albert G. Rough, arid 0. D. Avison. Mr. jVlyors briefly outlined the'case for the Crown.' ,

Frederick H. Noffke gavo evidence that, when ho cashed a cheque at tho Denbigh Hotel, Robinson was standing near by. Subsequently, witness visited a restaurant. When ho came out, Robinson was standing not far away. Witness went back to tho hotel, but,., a few minutes .hjter^tar.ljed,,.to walk homo. After ho had gono some tance, Lowe came up and said "Hullo I How far. are ; you going?" Witness replied " Makino,' 1 and Lowe said, " Oh, I'm going there too." Further'on, he saw another man. When they reached -a lane leading up to a cottage, Lowq asked him to go 'along it, but'witness replied that he preferred to keep to the road. Lowe caught him by the collar saying, "You speak, and I'll put your •—— lights out." Afterwards, ho pushed him into the lifnc, whero tho offences wore committed. ■ Someone in tho direction of the cottage then called out: "Havo you got him,- Bill?" Lowe replied: "Yes, I've fixed him." As witness was running away ho heard .voices. ' ''. ' ■ ! ■

Cross-examined, witness stated that he had no difficulty" in identifying ' the 'prisoners. He did riot tell anybody that ho would' not bo able to identify them. On the date in question',' he was not tho worse for liquor'. • Re-examined; witness stated that ho .gave a description of tho men to the police •ini-' mediately .after the ocurrence. ■'*'■ ; Richard Buriis, J.P., deposed that' he overheard Lowe say to Robinson on the street' on the night in question, " You are not going to funk on me now."

; Cross-examined, witness stated that, as Lowe was a. prohibited person, he came to tho conclusion at tho timo that Lowe wished Robinson to procure, liquor for him. . Sergeant Bowden gave evidence that no saw Lowe overtake Nolfke, and walk along with him. At Lowe's place ho found clothing on which there was fresh mud. Lowe said' lio was too drunk on tho night in question to remember what ho had dono. Robinson made a statement, which was not, in his opinion, consistent with the facts. .'■■■:■■■ Annie Hobbins, who resides in a cottage in the vicinity of the lano in question, deposed that while Robinson was at her place 1 on tho night of tho occurrence a scuffling took plaoo' outside. ' .-■'•■''■ William T. Hook,- licensee of the Denbigh Hotel, Feilding, also gave evidenco. Mr. AVilford intimated that lie would address tho jury at, length after he had called evidence. '.■■•■'■ ■' John W. Noble, hairdresser, Feilding, i deposed that Nolfke told, him "on the night of the .occurrence, that he had no idea who robbed him. At the timo, Noffko.was the worse for liquor. He said that ho tore his trousers on a stab fence. Cross-examined, witness stated ho had not contributed anything towards prisoners' legal exponses..-' "... Norman ■ Fiygcr, labourer, gave evidenco that he allowed Nolfke .to.stay at his place on tho night of the occurrence. Nofiko was under tho influence of liquor. Ho told witness that ho could not identify his assailant: Cross-examined, witness stated.that ho was not at all interested in the result of the case.' Tho.Court then adjourned until-10 o'clock this morning. , .

IN CHAMBERS. LIST FOR CIVIL SITTINGS. His Honour Mr. Justice Button held a sitting in Chambers yesterday morning. A number of cases on the list for tho Civil SittingS''(which commence on Monday next) were fixed provisionally. Casos before a judge alone" will, as far as possiblo, bo taken according: to the list. Dates for other cases were fixed as follow— Harriott Eliza Adsett. (Mr. Casey) v. Thos, Adsett (Mr. Wilford), for dissolution of marriage, Novomber 28, provisionally. ! Matilda Frost (Mr. Stafford) v. David P. Matthows (Mr. Wilford), possession and £350 damages, November 20. Gcorgo Scott (Mr. Skorrett, K.C.) v.,11. M. H. King, £4500 for breach of agreement, etc., before a iury of twelve, December 2. C. M. Montofioro (Mr. 8011, K.C.) v. A. E. Kernot (Mr. Skerrett, K.C), £1000 damages, libel, December ,3. J. J. K. Powell (Mr. Stafford) v. Manawatu Railway Company (Mr. Travcrs), £2075 125., overcharges for carriage, Decombor 4. Richard Elliott (Mr. Findlay) v. Wellington City Council (Mr. O'Shca), £250 damages, boforo a special jury of four, Decombor 9. Thos. 801 l (Mr. Findlay) v. Wellington City Council (Mr. O'Shca), £501; Thos. Bell, administrator of Eliza 8011, v. Wellington City Council,. £2000 damages, December 10. Arthur Smith (Mr. Wilford) v. Wellington' City Council (Mr. O'Shca), £300 damages, December 11.

Lundon (Mr. Morison) v. George Johnson (Mr. Skerrett, K.C.), £600, commission.

on salo of land, Decembor 6: Edgar Jones v. Hamilton Gilmer'(Mr;.'Brariddri)v;£44s/.commission on leaso and purchase, December 12., '. i ::.

Edmund Marriott (Mr.- Wilford). vi Hannah MacGregor'"(Mf. Field),"'to receive probate, etc., before judga'alone, December 13. H. Ada Smith-(Mr:-Bell,-K.C.-)v. ; National Bank;, of New Zealand and another (Mr. Chapman, K.C.),'„accpunts, "etc.,"December 16. I ■'"" .•■•"•-•'■.' '■■■■

J. W. Stevens and-another (Mr. Gfcy) v, S. S. Mason (Mrl Brandon), '£273 : commission on sale, DccombW 17... '.'' '.'.:.

. Annie Carbcrry.'(Mr.'Von,Ha,:fst)', v. George 1 Allman (Mr. Grey), £100, damages;' slander; December 18. ." •■' " ' " ■*.'"""

Other'eases on the' list'ivhich have not been fixed are as follow;-rAl,ex'ailder'M'Dou-gall (Mr. Menteath) :: v.'Wellington City Council. (Mr. O'Slica), 'recession or £100 damages; John' Henry ' Schmidt' (Mr. Meek) v. Jos. .Nathan Slid Co: and .'Walter',Thos.' Brunton (Mr. Bell, E.C.j; accounts' vand balance due; Kepa'Te Whotanui-(Mr. Monteath) v. l'ctone'and Hutt Building, and Investment Compainv, "■•accounts;""T."'" G. Macarthy (Mr. Skerrett, K.C.) v. Arthur Daniel Kennedy, ,'£2500/ breach of contract; "A. C. Feist and others (Mf-1 Maurisell)' 'v. John Judd (Mr.',,Tatc)i',£pe'cifi'c performance; Honora Gilbert and .Mary' Gjj|)'<!f t.!.(Mr. ;Mcntcath) v. J. M. Batham and others, sot asido transfer, etc.; David Andrews (Mr. Dunn) v. Win. Wilson and Lowry Bay Estato Company. (Mr. Brandon),' lion for .'work .done; Taaro Waitara ..(Mr. Menteath); v.'., ;T. H. Harley (Mr. Bpil, K.C), possession and £96 rent; Leonard'"Cloake (Mi\ "Sharp) v. George Cloake andanothcr. .(Mr. Young), accounts; James R. Foster"(Mr". "Douglas) v. Arthur Whcotleyr specific.-performance and £790 and interest; Ernest Hartley (Mr. Hindmarsh) v. Robertsou-andCo.-(Mr.-Menteath), £200 compensation for injurv; Michael S. Duffy (Mr. Dunn) v.' -W.'-J.- -Hardie, £360 wages and accounts;'Geo. H.vßayliss (Mr. Izard) v. John Carroll (Mr. Dis), £44 55., duo under liceii'Sey Kirkcaldie and'-Stains; Ltd. (Mr. Hcrdman)-v. Collector of Customs, £25 45., duty ove'rpafdV'R."H. ■Fisher (Mr, Bell, K.C.) v. T..J3.D.wan and another, £101 18s. Bd., broach, of.agreement;. DavJA Lawson (Mr. 8011j.K.C.) v. F;.Lr)iidonaiid another, cancellation! of. transfer, etcl| and £1400 and damage's'f''l?hilip'.'llj , Dunn) v. F. G.'ißpftoh and.another,''partition, etc.; ~\V. ;R'.''Howard (Mr. Skerrett; K.C.) y. David,j-A ;/ Eberlet, • accounts, discontinuance of "partnership, etc.; Turnbull and Jones, Ltd^'tMr.'Skerrett, K.C;) v. E. J. Searlo, posses'sipfrarid' arrears of;rent,etc. W r . A. Bowring (Mr. Morison) v. 'New Zealand Times Company (Mr. Findlay), £335, damages, breaclr'.'of'.contract, etc.; Hait-' a'ita Land Comp^fiy.;';,Limited (Air.; E. F. Hadfield) v. John' James' Boyd (Mr. .Findlay), case removed from Lower Court./',

; i ' '','■ ' .:.- A P^BNT- >2; :,.'. : Additional evidence-''.and, argument"'was heard yesterday ./Honour' the ChiefJustice (Sir. Robert'Stout)-in'the case in which Mr. extension of tho term of,,.the., in. respect.„to. "Wade's Skylight." - '..'■■ ■■ '." '- ' Mr. C. P. Mr.' Ncave) appeared for!the.petitioner.}. Mr. H. D. Bell, K.C., fqrthe,Attorney-General (the nominal defendant),-and.Mr. .T. S; Weston ■for the objectov!Mr.''..'F.'"CL Griffith's.':"' .. His Honour' ihfeimjited- !th"aV lib!: wp.uM'.take time to consider lu\; judgment.-,. ■„!•„,.,,'.' :: ; ...: N ': Lavina Dyson- Smith'.(Mr;,. Chapman, K.C.) v. Sidney Smith;'.Nathaniel'"Burgess :.(Mr., Wilford) i.-.Emily ,:/A'.-Ku'rgdss",, and Robert Jones (Mr;.. Skerr,ett,;,K:C.).;: Robert Esther Anderson; (Mr. Serdman) y. Alice Mary Anderson !■ (Mr.'. Wilson);'" Arthur' Os : wald Hoskins (Mii..Wilford)".K''R6s6'Hannah' Hoskins and .Theophilus' Georgo Love (Mr;,.Wilfprd)''v.-.Mary,Lovo; Herbert James M'Lebd'(Mr. Boll) v.' : Mary Edith May M'Leod'i'aiid' Thomas',Frederick Mcrloy; AVilliam'.,,Brown.; (Mr,; Hcrdmaii) v. Sarah J. Brown and, J. Macfarlarie ;' Elizabeth Harrow (Mr! WilfordV-V: William Barrow; May Glennon (Mi-." Barilett)",V.''.'William. Glerinon; William Soanes .(Mr^Hiridmarsh)"'; vi Agnos Augustus i .'Soarieß.'" and /James 1 Lord; Mary Ellen Goodey7Mr! Herdman) v. James Henry Goodey}fSophia";HQwat v. Charles Howat (Mr. Wilford) v'R:.R-.'W.''Welch Mr. Young) Laura.,Welch[; .Arthur Perry'(Mr. Skerrett, K.C.)''\%. Ah'cc'Madeline ...Perry; David Duncan (Mr! Field);, y? [Emily Louisa Duncan (Mr. [Rpbefts.* (Mr" Herdman) v. Marga'r6t'..Rpbdrfs "(Mr. Wilford); Ruby Edith -.Smith.(Mr. r Herdman) "'v. ; Georgo Henry Smith'!'""'? .■.•■.•■■.•-■. ■■•,.•■ OTHER,' , . " ; Probate was granted '..of.-the-iwills-of thefollowing deceased persons:—Andrew;.:;, Cole,. Mary Anno Lockwood, Alice M'Cloy, and Louisa Jane Jeffreys. On the appliea , order was made granting leave to deliver interrogatories in the case Jones v. Gilmer. r . .A motion by' Mr.'; Dunn j. for. substituted service in. the divorce "'case Hounslow v. Hounslow, was granted. '-- : •'■-■■■•-■■•'■■ " Applications by Mr!-Mbfisbri-on summonses for approval of iemuheratibi'v'of "thb~ liquidator and supervisor in ''to;', Wilson J Thompson,and Co., Ltd., and in thb : Gilbert Machinery Co., Ltd., wore approved''asi'prayed. ■-'■■- ; A' summons ..for 'ac'cpu'nts ,'in 'the 'case -of Cloako v. Cloake was/gran'tod''oil/the application of Mr.-. Sharp. ■''■'■"'* -■- ■•■■-.