SUPREME COURT.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 4904, 3 May 1887, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

This Day.

(Before His Honor Sir James Prendergast.)

CRIMINAL SESSIONS

SENTENCES. Robert George ■Williams, forgery, and Thomas Conroy, forgery, came up for 86 Mr Dick spoke at length on behalf of the prisoner Williams. Me made an application to Hie Honor to place him under the Probationers' Act. Williams bad always home a good character. In 1865 he arrived at Masterton, and there he held a very prominent position, being chosen Mayor. Williams had had very great trouble. Mr Dick read letters from Mr Beetham, R.M., showing the good character which accused had had, and also from several other prominent persons. His Honor said this case of forgery was a Tory rare thing in New Zealand. It was a -•real case of forgery, Ho did not think prisoner could be put under the Jf robation A-ct, seeing that h6 was 42 years of age. Mr Dick further appealed, and at length aealtwith the Act and its provisions with regard to of the description of His HoßWutiwught that the Act did not irTtond to apply to a caso of tho nature of the present one, the forgery of an endorsement to a promissory note. It had not been his misfortune previously to deal with what might bo called a real case of forgery, The cases of forgery that came before him 3n Hew Zealand were those of half drunken men filling up cheques, without imitating • the name of anyone. Tho Probation Act could not be applied, as it would have a disastrous effect commercially. If the ease hadbeenthatof a young person, he would hesitate before applying the Act, even if the deed had been done in a drunken state. Robert G. Williams was sentenced to penal servitude for three years. P Mr Dick said ho intended to make a Similar application in the case of Thomas (Coy, that ho be put under the Probation Act fho man was under the influence of drink at the timo the offence was comW. Tattersaliaeposedhehadknown the prisoner for many years, who was a man of good character, but at times gavo wov to drink. ■ George Lett deposed he knewthe prisoner for four or five years, who was a very persevering, steady man. Occasionally he would go to town for a day or two on a His Honor said this offence was of an entirely different class to tho ono which he had just passed sentence on. If the prisoner were a very much younger man, ho should thit k it probablo it would be a case for probation, but ho could not think so in • the case of a man of his age. The sentence '.. would bo imprisonment for fifteen calender months.

AESOJT. Rebecca Braham ancl George E. S. Braham were charged with sotting fire to a : house on the 30th March. Mi EasceUes appeared for the prisoners, . , W WSKnfstated tho facts on ,*r* .Aualifiei medical practitioner reading at ¥■- %aipawa. Knew.Mary Sheehon, a mtT ,ne£flexlnmiedattheß.M. Court at Wai- '. ' 'lawa. She was unable to travel. He had ■W attending her for ten days, and she "* was in » very low state indeed.

Frank William Garner deposed he was Deputy Assignee in Bankruptcy for Hawke's Bay, and in the estate of G. E. S. Braham. Braham filed on the 28th October last. He was a fancy-goods dealer in Emerson-street. Took possession of the property when Braham filed. Sold £110 worth of goods belonging to Braham. They were sold to Rebecca Braham, the female prisoner. The male prisoner had not yet received his discharge. The money was paid for the stock-in-trade £80, and for the excess of furniture £30.

Austin P. Sheath deposed he was a solicitor practising in Napier. The bill of sale (produced) was prepared by him. It was from Rebecca Braham to J. A Turner. The bill of sale was executed in his presence after being read over. It contained a covenant to insure the goods in the, namo of the mortgagee. The arrangement was that the goods wore to be insured in Mr Turner's namo, but it was not to bo taken out at once, as it was intended some of tho goods should be removed for sale. The goods were described as being in Carlylestreot. To Mr Lascclles: Mr Turner had to soe to the insurance. James Alfred Turner deposed ho was a commission agent, and was in tho habit of lending money on personal security. Knew the prisoners. Recollected making an advance of money about tho 18th of November. Advanced £55 cash, and endorsed a bill for £55 14s, which was afterwards paid.. Took security—a bill of sale. Some jewellery was also deposited as collateral security, consisting , of a bracelet (diamonds and sapphires) worth £13 or £14, a necklet, locket, diamond ring, dress ring, and some other articles. The jewellery at a sale would havo fetched £25 or £30. The stock Under the bill of sale was in tho shop in Emerson-street, and the furniture was removed to the private house in Carlylestreet. Tho male prisoner left with him a case containing toys ; they were loft after they went to Waipawa, and after the bill of sale was given ; that was part of the agreement. The goods were left to be sold at his discretion. Had not sold them yet. Wrote to Waipawa, requesting them to sond money on account. It would be a

fortnight or three weeks before tho fire. Got a reply. Could not say whnt was in his own letter Could not say if he asked for goods. The reply was dated the 26th of March. (Letter read. It stated a caso of goods had boon forwarded, which should be sold and the proceeds placed to his credit.) Could not say if he had replied to that letter. Previous to receiving that letter an expressman told him there was a case at the station for_ him, and he gave orders to take it to Duncan's auction room. Tho goods netted £6 Gn, which was placed to the credit of the accused. Could not say there was an understanding that they should sond him goods, tho proceeds of which should be placed to thoir credit. After hearing , of

the firo wrote thorn a letter. (Letter from G-. E. S. Brahnm to -witness read. The policy was effected by Mrs Braham. He had nothing , to do with the policy, which was taken out by Mrs Braham owing , to his bankruptcy. A-β they had not a chango of linen, it would he awkward for them to tneet Mm at Napier). There was £101 duo to him at that time. A quantity of the things in Court were included in his bill of sale. (Witness here named tho various articles ho identified as included in the bill of sale). Tho goods were removed from Napier to Waipawa with his consent. To Mr Lascelles: Could not say why he had not written them. Had not given any detailed account. The goods were sent to auction. Could have seized the goods if he wanted them. Wrote to Mr Braham after the fire. Ho was told the goods were insured in Braham's name, but afterwards found out that the insurance was in Mrs Braham's name. He knew nothing about it at the time. Thought Mr Sheath was to see to the insurance. The jewellery was not included in the bill of sale by an omission. Still had the jewellery, which he valued at £25 or £30 at a forced sale. If they were his he would n?t sell them for £40, nor co\ild not say if ho would take £50. Understood the jewellery was Mrs Braham's property. Considered he was well secured in the goods in the bill of sale for the £110 he advanced. It was an omission on his part that the jewellery was not included in the bill of sale. He would have been secured if the goods were in his hands, but they had to live on the proceeds of the sale of the stock —they had to live on the stock. Formed no valuation of the case of toys left with him. Thought the goods sent to auction would have realised £20. Did not know that he had informed the prisoner how little they had fetched. When he said £104 was due to him, the jewellery and case of toys would have to be deducted from the amount. Nover took any steps in regard to insurance from the time of tho bill of sale being given till the fire. Spnt up an agent to Waipawa to look after his interests. The agent was to seize all the goods he could find. Did not know what was in the case at the Waipawa station. Morris Flynn deposed ho was astorekecper residing at Waipawa. On the 31st March lust he owned a house in Waipawa. Tho house was occupied by Mr and Mrs Braham. They went into occupation on the 3rd of February. Mrs Braham rented tho house, and witness received some monoy for rent from Mrs Braham. Tho house was burned down on the 13th March. The house was a new one, and he had only bought it a few weeks before. Previous to the fire neither of tho prisoners made any complaint to him regarding a defect in the chimney. They said after tho fire that there had been a defect in the chimney. Could not say whether Mr or Mrs Braham told him that. Only bought the house a few weeks before he let it. Bought tho house from a Mr Warsnop. To Mr Lascelles: Saw the prisoners in the house two or three times. He (witness) while tho houso was in the occupation of prisoners made improvements to tho house. Could not say if prisoners added any improvements to tho houso. Josiah Warsnop deposed he was a contractor residing at Makaretu. At tho commencement of this year he was tho owner of a house situated in Waipawa. Sold that house to Mr Flynn. Having lived in it himtelf previous to having sold it. There was a chimney in the kitchen; also a mantel-piece, which was made of first-class timber. During the time he was in the occupation of the house there was nothing the matter with the chimney. Built the house himself, but not the cnimnoy. The fireplace was about three feet wide, and there was a colonial oven in it. Never noticed any smoke issuing from between tho mantel piece and the chimney during the time he was in possession of the house. Was present when the chimney was being built, and superintended the building of it. Employed a first-class bricklayer to build that chimney. To Mr Lascellos: The flooring of the house was of white pine. The houso was built in every respect in a first-class and workman-like manner. Would swear the piece was boarded over where he had previously thrown chips. All round tho chimney was lined and papered. Ebenezer Harwood deposed he was a bookseller residing at Waipawa. Was present at tho inquest on tho fire. Was one of the jury. The jury inspected tho premises. The chimney was there standing on tho sth April. Examined the chimney a very careful examination. Had a particular reason for examining tho chimney, as it was stated by Mrs Braham tho chimney was defective. Found no defect in the chimney. Believed it to be a very sound one. Examined it right down to the ground, on all sides. Ernest Britten deposed ho resided at Waipawa. Remembered a house occupied by the Wo prisoners being burnt down. Previous to the fire removed two cases from the house to the railway station, on the 22nd March. He did so by the directions of Mr Braham. Had to givo them' in charge of the railway porter and say Mr Braham would come .down afterwards and consign them. The'cases were marked J.A.T. over N. Mra Braham was present when he took them; delivered them to the porter. To Mr Lascelles : Nothing was said as to whqm they were for, or where they wore to go. Did not know where tho porter put them ; he left them on the platform. _ Received thorn about a quarter to eleven hi tho morning. William Pellow deposed he was porter at the Waipawa railway station. On the 22nd March received two boxes from Ernest Britten. Put the cases in the parcel room. They were marked J.A.T. over N. Recognised the cases in Court. Subsequently saw the male prisoner about tho cases, the day after the cases came. He told him he had sent the cases by mistake, and asked if they could bo allowed to remain for a day or two, to which he assented. Accused sent a fresh case away marked J.A:T. over N., tho prisoner consigned it to J. Turner, Napier. Remembered the fire in the Waipawa bush. The day after the fire saw the prisoners botween four and five in the afternoon. Had no conversation with them, they went into tho parcel room, where the two boxes were. The boxes were not covered up ■witk other goods. To Mr Lascelles; Anybody could have seen the boxes. Prisoner asked that the boxes might remain in the parcel office. Did not know who took the boxes away. John Henry Jull deposed he was stationmaster at Waipawa. Remembered tho night of the fire in question. Subsequent to tho fire both the prisoners came to the station and asked . for a parcel. It was eleven

o'clock in the morning when they came to the station. The door of the parcel-room was locked when prisoners came to the station. Could not say if they received the parcel on the day of the enquiry into tho fire. To Mr Lascelles: The parcel was ono which they were expecting to receive. A parcel afterwards came addressed' to the prisoners. Tho Court then adjourned till two o clock this afternoon.