LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 204, 22 May 1908, Page 4

LAW REPORTS.

; SUPREME COURT. CRIMINAL SESSIONS. YESTERDAY'S PROCEEDINGS. , The.-Criminal Sittings of the Supremo Court ,wero resumed yesterday morning, Mr. Justico Chapman taking his seat' at ten o'clock. ! ; CRIMINAL ASSAULT. SENTENCE DEFERRED. Roderick M.'Konssie, a middle-aged man, : was charged with having, on January 27, 190S, at Wellington, indecently assaulted two ! girls, : six years and eight years. old respec-' lively. . Prisoner, who was unrepresented by counsel, pleaded not. guilty. Tho following jury wero empanelled:— Robert Wilbcrfoss (foreman), A. S. Cliap- ' .man, Ja.s. Dykes, H. E. Long, R. G. Hill, W. "Wilson, Joseph Tilyard, W. Tait, A. J. G. Smith", D. M. Johnston, H. Donkin, and H. K.'Vilo. , His Honour made an order excluding. the public during tho hearing .of the case, and forbidding the publication of tho evidence. - The-jury,-which retired at 11.20, returned ;at 11.40 with a verdict,of guilty. Sentence was postponed until this morning. ALLEGED FORGERY OF A RECEIPT. Wallace. Herbert Stowart, a young man, . was arraigned on- a charge of having, 'on September 10, 1907, at Wellington, forged tho name of Horace V. S. Griffiths to a receipt for £5 55., and having used the same as if it wero genuine. ' • Mr. Toogood appeared on behalf of tho prisoner, who pleaded not guilty. Tho following jury wero empanelled:,—W. J. Thompson (foreman), William Brown, A. Reid, H. Hayward, XV. Collings, F. A. Laws, D. Wilson, Thomas August, D. Fraser, H. T. Hicks, A. Webley, and W. Hales. The Crown Prosecutor outlined tho facts relied on in support of.tho charges. Walter D. Rough, joiner, gave evidence, that prisoner told him that lie wished a plan of a shop prepared. Witness introduced him to H. V. S. Griffiths, architect. : Cross-oxaminecl, witness stated that lie inferred that .the plans were not for,.prisoner himself/ H. V. ,S. Griffiths deposed tha.t tho building in question was'.to bo erected in, Cuba Streot. ■ The .necessary particulars were given to him by Rough, who had informed him that the plan wa3 for a friend. When applied to for the cost of preparing the plans, prisoner stated that the plans were for another party, from whom ho would have to obitain tho"' money. Up to the' time that prisoner was committed for trial, ho had" not 'received anything in reduction of his fee,, which was eithor £5 or £5 ss. A document (produced) purporting to bo his receipt for. the amount .due to him was a forgery. Witnoss had novor authorised prisoner to sign his name on any document. During the present woek-prisoner had offered him ,£3 9s. in full-settlement of his account. Witness had 'since, taken the amount in part 'payment, tho understanding being that tlio balnnco should bo paid as soon as possible. Cross-examined, witness stated that. when lio jir.epar'ed the plan he'was in tho employ of tlio Government as a draughtsman at Wei-, lington. As far as ho knew, thero was nor. thing to prevent him from accepting payment for tho plan. He had never requested payment from Rough, but had asked him to see about the matter. Prisoner had admitted ,to him that lie was .personally liable for the amount. : He considered tho signature on tho document in question a. poor attempt to imitate his signature." ■ '

Re-examined, witness stated that he had never instructed prisoner to institute pro-ceedings-to recover, tho amount. ..- : A. H. Holmes, clerk to tho Magistrate's .Court at Wellington,' deposed' that "prisoner ( ~broughtl an action in the Magistrate's Court against: one! :John. Morris'-'fpr ; £l 5 Is. 'IQd; Among the items: on the statement of olaim ' was one for £5 ss..,.moneys paid for plans 'of a - shop to be .ereeted in Cuba Street. Upon oath, prisoner affirmed that-lie had paid' the: £5 ss. to Griffiths. Tho amount for'whioh he; obtained judgment included tho sum in question. - ' ■ ■' / •Detective -Andrews .gave evidence ; that. prisoner, had admitted having used the rc.coipt. It was, he said, a question whether he had not authority so to do. .-

This closed the case for the prosecution." Prisoner, on oath,i. stated that the plans were prepared for Morris through him. Ho instructed 'Rough, and not Griffiths, to. prepare . them. . Griffiths agreed, that Morris should be sued for' their cost. The receipt in question was produced-in Court.'bc-causo Griffiths was not available to tender evidence. ' , j Cross-examined, prisoner .stated' that he did not sign tho receipt himself.. He. would .decline to say who wroto the. signature. ' John Morris Schipero, house furnisher, was then called. Mr. To'o^ood: Your business is carried c-n under tho name of John Morris, etc. ?—Yes. Counsel: Why ? '-. ; His Honour (to counsel): You- are attempting to discredit your own witness? Counsel: He is a hostile, witness. . i -, His Honour: Ho has not disnlayed 'hostility. . . v.:.-. Counsel: He will prove to be hostile,. His Honour: Your questions must bo relevant. Couusel (to witness):, Has pri-souer not lent you various sums of money? Witness: Never..; ....... Counsel: Have there not been proceedings The Crown Prosecutor (to His Honour): Are these questions relevant? ' Counsel : If is my intention to prove malice His Honour: If that is tho only reason why the witness was called, I should not allow him to remain in tho witness-box. Counsel: I was leading up to something 1 His Honour : The whole question is ' between tho Crown and the prisoner as to .whether forgery, has , been committed, or whether or not tho document has ' been treated. as genuine. Witness then left the box. W: M'Lean,'company manager, and Alf Longmore, land and est-ato agent, gave evidence as to character. Counsel addressed tho jury, and His Honour summed up, concluding at three p.m. The jury, at 4.30, inquired whether it would be necessary for it to be unanimous, and His Honour in tho 1 affirmative. ; At 5.20, the jury returned with tho following verdict: " Guilty of forging and.uttering the receipt,'.but not with 1 , criminal intent." His Honour: I shall have to .consider tho effect of tho'. verdict!'-'"lt is .'possible I may have to rofer the point to the ,Court of Appeal., In tho moantime, T won't say whether I think' it necessary. to adopt that course.. My decision. ; will : be given to-morrow. Priwnor was'rbre'ased'oil his own recognisance.' ■.■"'!'

ALLEGED THEFT FRO JI THE PERSON. HEARING UMCONCLUDED. John Sidney Hines was charged with having at Wellington on May 27, 11)07, stolon £115 froni the'person of David Sutherland. Mr. Kirkcaldio appeared' oil behalf of tho prisoner, who pleaded not guilty.. Tho following jury was empanelled:—Thos. Lcydon (foreman), Y...'-Ay...Pettwrick, • A. S. Chapnum, 'A. Gray, Win. Tait, C. Clark, H R. Vile, G. Milne, R.'G. H.illj H. E. Ling, AV. A. Poarmeii, and H. Donkm. Alex. Armstrong, gaoler at tho Wellington prison, stated that, wlion Sutherland was imprisoned for' drunkenness,- he had £120 Os. 3d. in his possession. ; .tlpon' being disehargod on May 21 he was handed a clicquo for £115 and tho balance in money. .Prisoner was in, custody -at- tho -same timo .as Sutherland.;, Hp was -'discharged' a day- later than Sutherland,, and % was w;t)iout meaii.'!,'. Constable Bailey stated that on May 23 when Sutherland was fined 20s for. drunkenness, he still had tho checpio in his possession. Annio Sherwin, lodging-houso keeper in Abel Smith Street, deposed that Sutherland had resided occasionally at hor place, being last there on the momug of May 27. , .

'Henry John King, teller. at. tho Bank of New Zealand, stated that tho chequo was on May 27 cashed as follows:—Five £20 notes, fourteen £1 notes, and £1 in silver. Constable Scott gave cvidenco that, when Sutherland's body was recovered, there was a pieco of paper, showing how tho chequo had been cashed, in the pocket. • i John James Uvan, labourer, of Taihapc, evidence that on the date in question Sutherland, prisoner, and a man 'named M'Nab were together at the .rear of tho To Aro hotel. M'Nab took something out of Sutherland's pocket. Witness followed M'Nab and prisoner down tho street, and asked M'Nab how ho got on. 'M'Nab replied, " It's all right. Como on." T'hcy went into tho_ Cricketers' Amis Hotel for drinks. M'Nab handed him a £'20 note, saying that he would get. it cashed quicker than ho could if ho acted as " bushman." As they could not got it cashed there, prisoner and another man went elsewhere to get it cashed. They said they got it 'cashcd through buying some furniture from a secondhand dealer. Later on tlicy went to a Chinaman's house in Haijito buy a lottery ticket. There M'Nab gavo prisoner and witness a £20 noto each. Prisoner shared tho change ho obtained from the furniture dealer with M'Nab and witness.' Afterwards prisoner cashed his note at Newtown, and witness got his cashed at tho Cambridgo Hotel. M'Nab had two £20 notes left after tie had given Hinds and witness a £20 note each. Witness know that tho money had been stolen. Evidenco 'was also given by Detective Cameron, Annie M'Donald (barmaid at the Britannia Hotel at the time), Elaz Daubncy (second-hand dealer), John C. Mason (barman at tho Cambridgo Hotel in May last), C. M. Harden (licensee of tho Kilbirnio Hotel), and W. A. Tyson (bottle dealer). At this stago the Court adjourned until 10 o'clock this morning.