LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 557, 12 July 1909, Page 9

LAW REPORTS.

SUPREME COURT.

SIX PBJSONERS SENTENOED.

I At ft sitting of the Supreme Court on f Saturday, his Honour Mr. Justice Chapman f ' sentenced six- prisoners who had ploadcd ! guilty when tried'in the lower Court. Mr. M. Myers appeared for the Crown, I end Chief-Dete.ctiv'e Brobcrg and Sub-In- ! epoctor' Norwood represented the police. V —; '. / ; A CANVASSER AND FORGERY. Stephen Kotzo, a young man, who had pleaded-guilty beforo Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M., on a charge- of 1 forgery, was represented by.Mr. O'Leary. ' , > ~ Counsel, in pleading for leniency, said t'aat. accused had come from South Africa about twelve months ago, lured by accounts of the great prosperity of the country, and tad not beon able to, find work. . His Honour: He does not appear to bo * fond of work, judging by what ho has dono Mr. O'Leary continued that the'prisoner had inquired at offices and warehouses, and 1 at length, was engaged as a canviiser by tho T. and G. Mutual Life Association. His weekly earnings were anything from.a few shillings'up to £2. It was to save his wire and child from poverty that ho had com- ' mrtted these offences. His Honour, after remarking that a great many forgery casee wore coming before the Court, imposed, a sentence of four months imprisonment. AN OFFENCE AT LEVIN. / . When sentencing Robert Arnott, who had been committed from Levin for/an indecent act, bis Honour said that he would take oc- ' casion. to call the attention of magistrates, ' ' and,'more especially of justices (seeing that / this waa'a committal by juetices), to the im- ! ' portance of seeing that the information cor- ! responded with the evidence. He could understand a poKce officer, in the first mK ' - stance, laying an information far what a£- , " peared to,him to be the offence. The eviv! dence eometimes developed something more eerious, and apparently it had dene so in this case. It was the duty of magistrates and justices, under these- circumstances, to consider whether a new information should 1 not be laid. Prisoner would be sentenced to thd maximum period of two years! imprisonment, t with hard labour. > > -' \ ONE MORE CHANCE., William M'Kay, alias Howeon, alias Robinson, was brought up for sentence on two charges of forgery and uttering at Wellington.,, When asked if he had anything to say, he banded in a written statement. ,- ' Hia Honour, in passing sentence, said that he had seriously to consider whether to in- ' ' flict an indeterminate sentence, but, lookin" on the fact that there was a long interval between earlier .and, later offences in > prisoner's record, he would givo the prisoner one more chance,' not by inflicting a light sentence, but by abstaining from inflicting the indeterrajnate sentence. A sentence of four years' imprisonment with hard labour on each charge would.,be imposed, sentences to be .concurrent. f \ _—— ~ ',•''' OUR CRIMINOLOGY. When a young .man 'named Barrow, ' . who ,was before the, Court at Danneyirke for , forgery and uttering, was sd forward,' Mr. Wilford pointed out that the ' offence which the prisoner had now pleaded 'guilty to was committed prior to tho offenco for which he wae serving sentence. ' His .Honour said that he did not think that this made any. difference.' I ' , Mr. Wilford said that the important con. s sidoration" was the reformation of the , prisoner. In. recommending that , some report should bo obtained,from the gaoler)re- ' garding new prisoners, Mr.-Wilford said that any competent authority could tell in a fort-, night whether imprisonment was going to work a'reformation-or not." ■• " . His Hoifour : L If it were'done, it would have to be done under regulations, so as to. systematise, it. , t , Mr. Wilford said that he could bring police i evidence to say that the prisoner 'Was not n! bad lad. His : That is often the case. We find men who are_ not necessarily vicious, but > who are lacking in will power. Mr. Wilford pointed out that he wished to distinguish the criminal by impulse'and the ' criminal by instinct. ." His Honour remarked that it was a diffli cult, matter, but efforts wer ( e being made to ' 'initiate an adequate prison administration. A sentence of nine months' imprisonment was imposed. , CHEQUES TOO EASILY CASHED. i "This case truth of tfco saying, 'How 'oft the sight of means te do ill deeds makes ill deeds done,'"-said Mr. Wilford when John James O'Connor came up for sentence on a charge of forgery and uttering at Wellington. >It was so easy, Mr. "Wilford 1 went on, for anyone to v cash cheques, that the question arose whether tho tradesman or other person who facilitated the cashing of fraudulent documents should not be ' con- ' sidered a'participant the crime. There was nothing in the young man's history to lead one to believe that -he would be a criminal. ■ ■ . , - His Honour, referred to ,tho dates of the offences, and considered that thcro' was evidence of system. . % ' Chief-Detective Broborg deposed that ,he had known the family -jfor twelve years Prisonor, who had been latterly engaged,in the moulding department -of a brassfounder's shop, was described as an, excop'tionillv good hand. . . . ' J-. .' ..' ' His'JrTonour said that there was a matter of principle involved, upon which he wished to consult ,one of tho other judges. The i prisoner Would como»tip , again. THE, ST. MARK'S BURGLARY. Having pleaded guilty before Mr. W. G. Riddoll, S.M.y to, breaking and entering St. Mark's Church, Michael ptenn&n was sentenced to eighteen months' imprisonment on ' each Of two charges. Mr. R. B. Williams, who appeared for tho prisoner,' stated that there was a, long list of convictions dating back twenty-five years, but since- 1899 the police had had nothing , against the man. He had been living soborly and honestly, and'was a leading member of the Reohabite order. On the night of this theft, he had bad / words with his wife, and niade up his mind to go away. He had yielded to a sudden temptation in stealing from the church, whioh was close to his residence. Hia wife and invalid daughter were absolutely dependent upon him. His Honour: If 'I took that into considera. , tion, punishment would become altogether i capricious. That would enable one class of people to commit crimes with impunity, and obligo others to suffer. MAGISTRATE'S COURT. ,- (Before Mr., W. G. Eiddol, S.IL) INSOBRIETY. Three first offenders for insobriety were convicted at the Magistrate's Court on Saturday 1 morning. Two wera fined 10s. and ono 55., witk the usual alternatives. John Price, who hoi been preTiwMy cenvicted, was fined 55., with the iefauit hrurs , imprisonment. V*r JwitTiuj ia a disorderly manner in Banter Str*et, whilst drank, Samuel KarsUn was fined 2Us., in default seven days' imprisonment, > ' CIVIL BUSINESSvBeforo Dr. A. M'Arthur, S.M.) ! , A HOUSE-BUILDING CLAIM. Further evidence was heard in tho adjourn«d case Alexander Bell, buitder (Mr. Johnston), v. G. , H. Sample, clerk (Mr. Blair), a elaim for £197 10s., tor work dono and goods supplied in connection with the erection of a honso at ' Ilataitai. The hearing of evidence bad not been concluded when the Court rose. , t