SUPREME COURT

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 37, 7 November 1918, Page 8

SUPREME COURT

YESTERDAY'S PROCEEDINGS PRISONERS SENTENCED Thomas Marchbank, who had been found guilty of assaulting ■ Constablo Konald W. M'ililittu, was brought up tor sentence. Accused, a married innn, liad five. 'previous convictions against him. HiS Honour pointed out that the offence was a most brutal one, and it was his duty to protect the police. Accused would be sentenced to two years' imprisonment with hard labour, to bo followed by three years' detention for reformative'treatment.- : Benjamin Henry Bright, found guiUy of receiving stolen goods, was sentenced to two years' imprisonment with hard labour. Accused had four previous convictions against him. Arthur Watson Green, found guilty of indecent assault on a female, was sentenced to four years' imprisonment, with hard labour. Du'gald ir'CaUum, for whom Mr. l>. W. Jackson appeared, and who had pleaded guilty of unlawfully carnaby knowing a young girl, was brought up for sentence. Before sentence was passed the evidence was taken of James M'Donald, accountant, A. J. Marshall, Salvation Army officer, John Wakeman, Alfred Bowden, and Fanny Mould, all bearing on accused's previous behaviour and character, ik. Jackson asked for probation, but His Honour immediately declined this request. ■Uγ. Jackson then asked for leniency, plcnuing accused's previous conduct. ' In addressing accused, His fionour declared that ha would five the fullest possible effect to the evidence the defence had called. Nevertheless, he had his duty to society, and to tho young girls of the community. Accused had borne a good character, but exemplary pmiiehment was necessary. His conduct in tho preeent case was unworthy of the office lie held in the Salvation Army. He would make the punishment as light as possible, and accused, would be sentenced to oight months' imprisonment with hard' labour. ALLEGED THEFT. Alfred George Jacques, tailor, was brought up for retrial on a charge of theft of M 2 at Carterton, the jury having formerly bean unable to agree. Mr. H. F. O'Leary appeared for accused. , ■ . Kdward Bull was elected foreman of the jury. ; Tho circumstances alleged by tho Crown were that the inlonuaiit, Joseph Knight, hed returned from the racecourse to the boardiiighouse, where accused and ho boarded, with ,£52 in. his possession. Before sleeping on the 'afternoon of July 15, ho placed his purse. under hie mattrass. The contents of the purse wero missing when he awoke. Tho eame afternoon Jacques intimated his intention of leaving tho boardinghouse. When the Uieft was discovered the police were informed, and Jacques was subsequently arrested. . ' Evidence for the prosecution was given by Annio Loir, Joseph Knight. ( Frank Galyar, Constable ■ Grcgor, Constablo M'Holm, Edmund Loir, Nellie Scott, Arthur Stone, and Edward Egan. Mr. O'Leary, in opening, said that Jacques gave the charge an absolute denial, and claimed absolutely no know- , ledge of the theft. Ho had had a considerable amount of money in hia possession prior- to the date of the alleged theft, and was not "stumped" on that date, as th/ prosecution alleged. When arrested ho had nboui £ii in his possession. On tho morning of July. 15 -ho had produced a roll of notes in a hotel during a discussion on a. football matter. This was in tho presence of Alexander N. Johnson. A few days prior to tho 15th accused had produced a roll of notes in the presence of Frederick Thomas Flail.

Hie Honour summed 'up briefly, and the jury retired at 1.55 p.m.; returning at. 6.25' p.m. The foreman intimated thai the jury "could not agree. .

INDECENT ASSAULT. William Henry" Cardew, aged 63, was arraigned on a charge of having indecently assaulted a male on. September 26 and October 2. ' Mr. P. W.«' Jackson appeared for accused, who pleaded not guilty. . Angus Campbell Archer, was foreman of the jury. Evidence was given by the youth, a fellow employee, and Constable Tricklebank for'the Crown. Evidence was tendered by '.he accused for the defeiice, which was a denial of indecent assault, aithough It was admitted that accused had noted" in an indecent manner before the boy. Counsol for accused stressed ,tho probability of the youth's exaggeration and imagination. Absolute relianto could not, \he urged, be placed. upon the evidence of the youth.' The jury retired at 3.45' p.m., and shortly returned a verdict of guilty. Sentence was deferred till this morning. CHAEGE OF PERSONATION. James Luke Eaglan, a voung man, pleaded guilty to two ch.uges of personation in applying for voting papers at the.recent, by-election in '.he Wellington Central electorate. Hβ pleaded hot guilty to a third charge of personation and ( to a charge that having onco voted he applied again for a vote'in his own name. The information was laid nnder Section IG3 of the Legislature Act. Mr. H. 1\ O'Leary appeared fee ac"oused.

It was stated that the facts rf the case would be admitted, but aiscussion upon legal points would be submitted. The third charge wns withdravn. Leonard Cloake was appointed foreman of the jury. _ Evidence given by William Ewart Gladstone returning officer for the electorate, adduced the fact that he saw accused at the booth in Willis Street. He' later saw accused at the Vivian Street tooth, and asked him if he had not voted before. Accused replied that he had not, and denied having seen witness in Willis Street. Formal questions, lequired under Section 128 of the Legislature Act, were put to accused by the deputy returning officer. Accused stated in answer to one of the questions that he had not voted before at the same election. Witness prevented the accused's' paper being put in the ballot-box, and had it put aside. Steps were taken" to make proper identification of accused. Charles B. Carpenter, deputy returning officer,' corroborated the evidence of the previous witness in reference to the attempt to vote again. He added that accused was detained until handed over to Constable Quinn, who arrested accused, i . / Further evidence was giTcn by Edward Beechey, who deposed that accused voted in "the name of AVilliam Gent. Mr. O'Leary, for the defence, submitted that even if accused had voted in another name he was entitled to lawfully vote in his own name. • His Honour pointed out, that in that case accused had two votes. Mr O'Leary further submitted that the Act aimed at double-voting in one namo. Mr Macassey. for the prosecution, submitted that the Act was clear in its provision to prevent fin elector who had voted at all from voting again. / His Honour said that he preferred thn grammatical reading of the Act,- which • was that if a man had already cast a vote either honest or fraudulent, he was not entitled to vote again at the same election.. He would rule- accordingly, and ask the jury to.accept euchruling. ,1,1 The jury, nevertheless, elected to retire and returned a verdict of gui.lty. In deferring sentence His Honour snid he would refer the law point in the case to the Court of Appeal. Prisoner was ordered to come up for sentence on November 9.