THIS DAY.

Evening Post, Volume XVII, Issue 313, 7 January 1879, Page 2

THIS DAY.

SENTENCES. George Webb, alias George Smith, was brought up to receive judgment for forgery. Mr. Forwood proposed to call the prisoner's wife, who had lived "apart from him for some years, to prove that be had for a long time past been laboring under a species of dementia from excessive drinking, but his Honor said he could not receive her evidence. In reply to his Honor, the police said they knew nothing against the prisoner, who was a stranger in the neighborhood. Mr. Forwood added that tbe prisoner had for several years been wandering about the West Coast. He was very respectably connected, and had some expectations. His Honor said — The juryj ury ha ve recommended you to mercy on the ground that you had a wife dependent upon you, but had they known what has been stated by counsel^- -that would not bave weighed with them, as you have not supported your wife for some ' time past. Taking into consideration the circumstances under which tbe offence was committed, the character given to you by your late employer, Mr. Smith, and the fact that you gave yourself up to the police, and informed them of your misconduct, I am disposed to pass a lighter sentence than is usually passed for forgery. The sentence of the Court is that you be confined in the common prison at Wellington for twelve calendar months, with hard labor. William Watson, alias Sutton, was brought up to receive sentence for stealing a watch. Several previous convictions were* proved against the prisoner. In reply to his Honor, Superintendent Atchison said he could not say whether the prisoner had gained an honest livelihood since his release from gaol, but he had been shifting about from place to place, • and bore an indifferent character. j His Honor said— l am not quite satisfied that I am about to pass a proper sentence on you. It is highly probable that you have not been gaining your living honestly since you were last released from gaol, but I have no information to that effect before me. If I had been satisfied of that which I am inclined to suspect — that you are an habitual criminal — I should have been bound to pass a longer term than that which lam about to impose. The sentence of the Court is that you be confined in the common gaol at Wellington for three years James Murphy was next called up for rentence for attempted rape. His Honor sad—T he jury have convicted you of the misdemeanor of attempting to commit tbe felony with which you were charged. The Legislature has provided that a very severe punishment may be allotted for this offence. It is difficult to conceive, I think, that an offence of this nature could be committed under circumstances more criminal than those under which this was committed by you. There are matters which I may not be permitted to take into consideration in apportioning your sentence, but, at the same time, I mention them. My belief is that the knife you held opon in your hand you were prepared to use to take the life of the child. [Prisoner — | No, sir.] I say that is my belief. The child was found with a stone in her mouth, and your hand over it, to prevent her crying out, and you also held an open knife in your hand. Therefore, my belief is that you were prepared to take the life of the child. At the same j time, as I have already stated, and I repeat it, j I am not taking that fact into consideration now. I think only as I am bound to think, that this offence is one which must be severely punished. Tbe Legislature has said it shall be so ; the feeling of all classes of society agrees with the expression of the law. The sentence of the Court is that you be kept in penal servitude for three years, and tbat you be once privately whipped with tbe instrument known as the cat, with 25 lashes. THE ROBBERY AT THE BMPIRB HOTEL. | Charles Schmidt was indicted for stealing £200, the property of Robert Cooper. Mr. Izard prosecuted ; Mr Buckley appeared for the defence. The circumstances of the case were fully reported by us when it was before the Resident Magistrate's Court. The money, which consisted of ten £20 notes of the Union Bank of Australia, was stolen from the pockets of Mr. Cooper, who was staying at the Empire Hotel, during the night of the 19th October. Next morning when he stated his loss, the conduct of the prisoner, who was night watchman at hotel, aroused suspicioo, and hi 3 room was searched, but none of the missing notes were then found. Two or three days afterwards the prisoner changed a £20-note with Mr. Wakeford, of the New Zealander Hotel, and when arrested two other notes of the same value were found on his person— one in his pocket-book and one in the lining of bis waistcoat. In bis trunks were found thirty-one £l-notes and one £5-note. Tbe notes could not be identified as those which Mr. Cooper lost. Toe jury had retired to consider th»ir verdict when we went to press.