SUPREME COURT. CRIMINAL SITTINGS. Yesterday.

Evening Post, Volume L, Issue 42, 17 August 1895, Page 2

SUPREME COURT. CRIMINAL SITTINGS. Yesterday.

(Before His Honour the Chief Justice.) The jury acquitted the lads Panlmior, Conroy, and Brown, charged with having broken into the clothing factory of Charles 1 Cathie and stolen a quantity of clothing. Conroy and Brown are still in custody, on a charge of robbery from the premises of It. Hannah & Co. i This Day. 1 INFRINGING A PATBNT. ' B. F. Davy was indinted for having, On or about the 5 h July, unlawfully and falsely , applied U> tewing machines tho registered i trade-mark of Joseph Werthoim. ; Sir Robert Stout appeared to proseoutei , and Mr. Jollicoe for the defcheo. Mr. Jellteoe niovod at tho outset to qhasli th'o indictinont, on the ground [ that it preferred a charge on which the , accused was not committed for trial, or in , respect of wliinh tho prosecutor had not i been bound over; and further, that the indictment was not founded upon any of the l facts or evidence disclosed in the deposit tions. The information on which the accused , had been committed was for applying a , trade-mark to certain boxes containing I sowing maobine appliances, wheroas the present indiotment was for applying the i trade-mark to sowing machines. His Honour said it appeared to be so, but there was provision for such procedure Under • section 383 of the Criminal Code.' Mr. Jellicoe maintained that there was no : evidenco on the depositions establishing a ] prima facie case against Davy on the present , charge.' : His Honour said there was evidence of a [ fal-.e trade-mark being on a maohine bought . at auction by one of tho witnesses. After further argument His Honour agreed , to reserve tho point, which he said he had , power to deoide at any stage of the trial. Sir Bobert Stout oskod that the witness . Thomas Castlehow, who in the Magistrate's Court had given evidence for the defence, , but had since been subpoenaed by tho prose- [ oution, should be called, as there was reason to beliovo that he would not respond. The witnoß3 failed to appear, and Sir i Hobart then applied for an adjournment of the oaso until Monday, to see if the witness : could be found. Castlehow was a very important witness. Mr. Jellicoo opposed any adjournment. The witness had been told that he would not bo wanted for the defence, and presumably had gone away, as ho could not livo on ; a subpoena. His Honour allowed an adjournment, nud released tho defondant on bis own recog1 nizance. ,