SUPREME COURT. — Criminal. UNKNOWN. [Before his Honor Sir G. A. Arney, Chief Justice.]

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXVI, Issue 4001, 18 June 1870, Page 6

SUPREME COURT. — Criminal. UNKNOWN. [Before his Honor Sir G. A. Arney, Chief Justice.]

Friday, June 17. Hia Honor took hiB seat upon the bench I yesterday at 10 o'clock.

Selling Firearms to the Natives. — William Fagg was agaia brought up under the charge of having sold, on the 3 1st of j May, 1869, a gun and certain warlike stores to a member of the native race. The examination of native witnesses was continued, Mr. George Brown acting as interpreter. Mr. Brookfield conducted the case for the Crown; and Mr. MacCormick, with Mr. Beveridge, for the defence. — Wiremu Waitaki, a native living at Taupo, being sworn, made a similar statement to that made by Heneri about the prisoner disposing of the gun ; and, when the gun was produced, identified it. — In cross examination by Mr. Beveridge, the witness proved that Heneri had paid £42 for the gun and warlike stores produced, and that, on the day following the purchase, Heneri came out to the door of his house and informed all the people that he had bought the gun, and what he had paid for it. Witness also informed all his frionds of Hcneri's purchase on the same day, but told no Europeans ; not even Mr. Lundon. He knew Inspector Thompson, but did not inform him of it until he attended the Court at Hauraki. Heneri and witness both belonged to the Ngatipaoa tribe. He never received any portion of money from the Superintendent for the purchase of land. He heard of Heneri receiving some, but did not know whether it came fiom the Government or from Mr. Gillies in his private capacity. All he knew was that Heneri had some money, and the money was Heneri's own. Heneri gave £42 for the gun. The money got from Mr. Gillies for the land, he had heard, was £1.000. He had i»eard that Mr. Gillies had purchased the land, but did not know how the money was divided. Heneri was the principal owner of the land. He could not speak as to whether Heneri had i eceive 1 the largest portion of the money for the land. He did not see the money paid. He swore positively that he did not know the persou who gave Heneii the money with which he purchased the gun. He did not know whether it wa.3 before or after the purchase of the gun that the money was got from Mr. Gillie3 for the land. He never saw any other gun in Heneri's possession, and had no gun himself. — Re-ex-amined by Mr. Brookfield : Several miles separate plage fiflin Henen's one. — George JEvjtf, licensed gundealpr, residing in Auckland, deposed : I sold one gun to the prisoner on the 29th April, J86.9. If; was a breech-loader. I could not identify it ; but it was similar to the one now produced, On the day previous I sold him a pound of powder, _101b. of shot, and 421 cartridge cases, similar to those produced. Those cartridge cases can be used more than once. The niaehiue produced is a cartridge-filling machine, ( Witijesa thpa described the process of filing the empty cartridge parses by means of the machine eshibited).t=r-C'ross. examined by Mr. MacCormick : I have seen the natives who gave evidence in this case. I canno'. say whether I sold a gun to th§ native who gave evidence yesterday. My sljqp fa \i\ Pppgr Queen-street, a little above the Junction, by Mr. Brookfield : There is another gunsmith a little below the Junction. — David Lundon deposed : I am Sub Collector of Customs at the Thames, and LicenFing Officer under £he 4 rm S Art- The prisoner had no license \o sell arms tfl any uei-sqn in th.e yea,r 1§69. — Cross-examined by Mr. MacPofmipk : \ ain a licensed officer under the Arms Act. J8§6, more particularly for the Thames district, I have not my appointment with me. — This was the case for the prosecution. — Mr. MacCormick argued at great length that the prosecution }fas, bad,- The two direct points he rai&ed were— first, theie >v ag no eyfdeijce before the Court to show that the Arms Act, 1860, was in operation in the province, and that the place at which this offence is a.ljp§pd to have been committed is any place within tjjis province j a.n4 second, there is no evidence givpn tjjafc the pvqsequtfoji has been brought by a, person duly a.u.t'b.Qvi3od jn the manner prescribed by law to prefer the prosecution. The third section of the Arms Act was declaratory, and showed that the Act would require tj be brought into operation by a.n order in Council, which also would require tp be prqyeq', Ag |;q tbe irjdiptment itself, it was laid under the' Apts qf 1860,1801, andl§Q6,alfchought;heappQi u "tment to prosecute produe d by Mr, Thompson anthoiised him to lay informations against persons for breaches of the Acts of 1800 and 1861. He considered the appointment as invalid, it being dated the 2nd June, 1870, after the parsing of the Arms Act of 1869, section 60 of wnieh repealed ajl |])p fgrpjer Acts entirely, and therefore he thought the Governor had no power under the Act to make the appointment lef erred to, as the 4pj;s, v)n4er which it was giYen ha,d been repealed J and argugd thaj; tfjere wa.s no ease to go to the. jury.-^-fy[r. Broqkfield replied at considerable length to t-he obiecjions. taken by Mr. MacCormiclt, both to the inrliotmont and to the appointment of Mr. Thompson to lay informations under the Arms Act. \ s to the first chief objection taken by Mr. VlacCorniiek, Ije did not think that it was necessary tj prove that the Aot of I860 had been in operation in this province-^-the Aofc itself proved that ; and as for the Order in Council bringing the Act into operation in this province, he thought that it had been the opinion pf the legislature that no such order was required, He .agreed with Mr, MncCormitk that the third section of the Act was a declaratory one, but not in the same sense in which Mr. MacCormick understood it. When it was remembered that th§ Act was passed in i^ovember, 1860, and as the Act was of a highly penal character, it was necessary to give time to the colonists to kuow -the scope of its provisions before it should become established law. He held that the Act had been virtually in force since the 1st day of March, 1861.— His Honor reviewed the arguments adduced by the different counsel, at great length and with care. He differed from Mr. MacCormick, and thought th^re w»9 a case to go to the jury. The statute of 1866 gave force and life to the Act of 1860. To his mind it appeared that the Acts of 1861 and 1866 had been brought into operation from the 1st day of March, 1861. They had a series of Acts passed on that subject, all affirming the Act of 1860, which showed that they had application to the whole colony, and were still in operation for all tho purposes of the prosecution. He would reserve the second point raised by Mr. MacCormick for appeal, if it should be thought necessary. — Mr. MacCormick suggested that, if one point was reserved for the Court of Appeal, they both should be. Mr MacCormick addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoner, after which Mr. Brookfield replied on behalf of the Crown. — His Honor summed up, in a lengthy manner, during which he referred to the blessings of freedom enjoyed in this country, and so far as the franchise was concerned, the people had almost universal suffrage, and yet, notwithstanding all the advantages of free institutions which they enjoyed, the Act under which this prosecution was begun had been oontinuod on the statute-book for a period of ten years During that time it had not been repealed, which would lead to the belief that it was the will of the people of the country that it should remain there. For a long time there h&d been two sections in the country, one that saw nothing but truth andjustioe in the natives, and the other saw nothing but deceit and falsehood. That impression was now 'disappearing. Some time ago, when he was in England, he had heard . it often stated, even by those connected wifch the ' Government, that the natives did not get jus- ! tice in this country, a statement which he oombatted with all his might. He was glad of the change of feeling that had been brought about between those of white and dark skins. There was now no longer a desire to refuse the evidence of those of dark skin — it may be, skin of the »me colour as £he Groat Founder of Christianity Himself. If all dfcrk-skiaaed people art to be dubtliered,

the sooner llie Courts of justice wet^" closed the better tor all. After passing in review the evident'* adduced, the jury were charged in the usual manner, *nd. without retiring from the bos, returned a verdiot of Guilty. — After the counsel for the Crown and defence had consult? i together, Mr. Brookfieldsaid, if it mot v ith his Honor's approval, he waswilling that the other charges against theprisoner should be tried by a new jury ; and, as a new jury were summoned for tiexfc-wreek, ho would postpone "the other casea against the prisoner until then ; and, in the interval, would consult with the Govcn.n.ent Agent, Dr. Pollen. — His Honor consented to the auwngement, and said it lucl always been been Jus practice, when rnoi e than one charge was brought against a prisoner, and the jury found him guilty on the f rat charge, to discharge that jury, and have a, new jury for the other charge. — Tl e jury were then discharged, after which the Court was adjourned until Tuesday first, at ten o'clock.