SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1087, 28 March 1911, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

MASTERTON CRIMINAL CASES. (From Our Special Correspondent.) Mastorlon, March 2". The sittings of the Supremo Court opened at Maslerlon to-day. The following Grand Jury was empanelled: Messrs. 0. C. Summerell (loreman), W. Whii> taker, J. T. Dagg, IJ. Holmes, W. L I'ajeoner, W. 11. I, Galwe.v, P. Kvans, 11. T. Wood, W. Cooper, !•'. W. Temple' I'. J. Butement, W. l'lati, James M'Uregori Q, Donald, J. V. Gordon, M. K. yarnham, W. U. Cruicksliauk, J:'. W. Baddeley, G, 11, i'erry, A. !i. baniell, D. MUregor, James bcoti, and James ll'lumic. lIIS HONOUR'S ADDRESS. In his address to (he Grand Jury, his Honour said that this was tiio first occasion upon which ha had presided at a sitting of the Supreme Court in Masterton. Ho congratulated the district upon the evidences cf its progress. He could hardly imagine that, since he first visited Mastcrton lor:y years ago, the district could have made such advances. It was, in fact, now a separate community, and lie was pleased to be ablo to congratulate the district upon its immunity from crime. There was one charge at tho present session against a Mastcrton mail, but this offence was alleged to liavo been committed as far back as 1909. The rec? °f tho district was unique, in that absolutely no serious crime had been commuted in the district for over a vear. Ho lound that tho records of the Magistrate s Court showed a similar state- of things, lie did not know of another distx ict m the whole of the colonies which had such a record. Referring to tho Grand Jury, his Honour t;l jd that there were some public men, and even judges, who thought that the grand jury svstcin should be abolished. He was not himself ot that opinion, l'here might not l>e much use for a grand jury now, but tho time might como when that jurv would lie of great service. In a time of political excitement it might even bo required to stand between the people and the Crown. It was thought that the administration of justice should be cast uoon the pcoplo themselves. It might bo held that one individual could do the work better than many. But they had government for tho people by the people, and while this was so grand juries would exist. His Honour pointed out that in America the grand jury had the right to bring in an indictment. The grand jury was a secret tribunal, and there was no need for it to bo unanimous. The Grand Jury returned true bills in the following eases;— Henry Walker, housebreaking; Frank Newman Dixon, Mischief; John Jackson, indecent assault (three charges); Leo Barker, arson. A young man named Himry Walker was charged with having, on or about February I, 1911, at Mangatainoka, broken into the house of Jane James and stolen therefrom a gold watch, valued at <€3 10s., a silver brooch, valued at 7s. Gd., and a plain ring, valued at 7s. Gd. Accused, who was undefended, pleaded guilty. His Honour -remanded accused for sentence until next day, and asked the police to make inquiries concerning his behaviour since lie was last convicted in Palmcrston North, in 1907. The Crown Prosecutor (Mr. Bunny) stated that the accused had also bceil convicted of theft at Hastings in 1908. His Honour said that did not appear upon tho papers before him. John Jackson,-, a negro, was chargrd on three counts with having criminally assaulted three littls girls at Pahiatua on February 11. Accused, who was undefended, pleaded guilty and handed in a statement. He was remanded until 10 o'clock to-morrow for sentence. A man about thirty years of age, named Frank Newman Dixon, was charg. Ed with having, on November 17, 1910, at Parkvale, near Carterton, wounded a bull belonging to J. Tiirlo.v, by shooting it, thereby causing its death. Accused, who was represented by Mr. C. A. Pownall, pleaded not guilty. The Crown Prosecutor (Mr. Bunny) stated that the accused and Turlcv were neighbouring farmers. On November 17 Turley found his bull in a paddock suffering from a- shot wound. The animal died a few days later, and ai\' examination of the wound revealed tho presence of wads and shot which it would be proved corresponded with wads and shot found in the possession of the accused. It would also be shown that accused had told a neighbour .that" Unless Turley kept his bull out of, liis (accused's) paddock,, he wouli shoot it.