SUPREME COURT.

Evening Post, Volume LX, Issue 115, 12 November 1900, Page 6

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. The' Criminal Sittings of the Supreme, Coiu-i commenced this morning, Mr. Justko Edwards presiding. THE GRAND JOBS". The f oHwving were sworu in as a Grand Jury :— Messrs. W. A. Kennedy (fore* niaa), F. C. Crease, W. F. England, J. B. Finlay, J. M. Richardson, A. M'Pherson, I. Graves, C. A. lnnas, H. Pauli, J. KeJlow, W. S. Downs, E. B«H, P. Pwity, <D. W. Benbow, A. Young, F. Carter, W. A. tfitzherbert, R. E. Rawnsley, J. G. Duncan, W. G. Buthie, H. W. Moss, .R. J3. Bannister, and H. HIS HONOUR'S CHARGE. His Honour, in charging the Grand Jury, said he regretted that a very large number of cases would occupy their attention, aacl several of them -were of a very serious nature. He need not, however, draw their attention to more than two- or three matters, because his function Was simply to point out to them matters "of law which it might be necessary foV them" 'to Know in the course of .their deliberations, x and not to deliver a morarl lecture "On those matters or to deal in any wa.y J ' with 'the facts. Tho first matter" to which he wished to draw tieir atterttitih wa«f'a charge of murder which would "probably be' "presented against a woman' nanie'd Henderson, who was charged' with' having procured abortion ■upon a", young "woman" who in consequence ■ died. The iaw was this — that afthoegh the person, who committed the unlawful act might not have intended to murder or. kill the person upon whom it was performed, stifl it was murder in the contemplation of the law if the person who committed the unlawful -net knew .or ought to have known that it might cause deafck. If ifc was established ' to their satisfaction ffeafc fije woman ought to be put upon her" tmi before a common jury for having committed the act of , abortion, that of coarse was an unlawful act, and if she Ivbcw or oesjlrt, to have known that if she procured abortion upon thai girl itnxigiht "cause death she might properly bo cqiasTcted of murder • but if site did not 3cskmtoi or ought not to have known .that it was likely "to have caused death she jSpould not be jjui upon her tuial for i»urder. £>fre mrgftt, if charged with mtrrder, ' be 'found girilty of the crime of culpable Iwanicide. She would, howevei', be ])robjafStly also iadicted-^for the offence of which she realJjr, if the Crown supported its' case, was guilty — tamely, of procuring n-bortion, fm- which a person was liable to imprisonment for life. A letter had A>een .seat to Mm requesting him to prohibit the pu-bheation .of the details of 4Ms case ami to hear it with closed doors. He was not aware that he had any such' {ptmer, and cvtjn if he had he showkl'^e'; "veig r unss'iJiing ,w> exercise it, both be«i\usc it was veivy \i«desiraWe that rmy one should he able to say- tl»at-a case-w«s eecretly tried aud because it was-iymeces-sary to «c€rcisc such a power in Wellinigton, as the press aftways eKekided evesjij-. thiftg of an improper nafeire from its* cokHnns. There were also several charges sagainst men of offences against giris imder ibe age of sixteen years. In regard to* those cases lie pointed out 'that the con- ■ sent of the girl was- no defence whatever. If tke Grand tJiay found that tbeiact had been conmiit-feed it was quite inajaateriafc far tlieiv purpose whether the girl consented or even inciteel to the act. ■ The last and most unsavoury case to which he found it necessary to direct their attention was that in which a person who was recently employed at the Stoke Orpha»age at Nelson was charged with having committed acts of indecency with , regard to certain boys under his care. fa. that case, as^jn the case of girls under « the age of sixteen, the consent of the person upon -whom the act was committed was no justification whatever. X they came' to the conclusion that there was sufficient to call upon him to answer t the charge against him of haviag committed those. acts l it mattered not one iota whether they came to the conclusion that the boys either actively or tacitly consented to tno acts which were alleged to have been committed. , TRUE BILLS. The Grand Jury returned True Bills , in the following cases : — George , Osman and William Dolan, assault and robbery ; Samuel Cousins and Thomas Teece, escaping from custody; Edwin J. Holmes, theft; Angus Young, rape; John Clancy, assault ; W. H. M. Jobson, F. Stephenson, and J. Johnson, escape from gaol ; William Olliver, escaping from gaol ; Mary Hawkins, arson ; Mary Henderson, murder and procuring abortion. ASSAULT AND ROBBERY. The first case taken related to a watch robbery and assault, • which occixrred in Wellington on the 21st September. George Osman and WiUiam Dolan were charged with having robbed George Coker, of Carter ton, of his gold watch, and used peisonal violence in eommiting the act. o?man was defended by Mr. Wilford, and Dolan conducted his own defence. Both pleaded not guilty. .Mr. H. D. Bell prosecuted on behalf of the Crown, and Mr. W. C. Hickey was Foremau of the jury. The short facts as relied on by the Drown were that Coker, who had been drinking, was helped from, a local hotel into a back street, where he was set upon, robbed of his watch, and leffc lying in the road bruised and bleeding. Tho two accused had been seen together, and Do\T,n subsequently pawned Coker's watch. JNo evidence was called for the defence. In summing up, His Honor said ho did not quite scu what evidence the Crown ielicd on to connect Osman, with the offenoe. Mr. Bell pointed out that the men Lad been seen together the same night. Tho jury acquitted Osnnan, and found Dolan to be guilty of having received stolen properly. Dolan was remanded for sentence. POSTPONEMENT OF TRIAL. Mr. Wilford applied for the postponement of the trial of John Clancy," indicted for assault, until nexfc sitting". Accused had not been able to get bail, and consequently had been unable to see two important witnesses who had been traced to Christchurch. Eventually it was decided to' adjourn the ca.se until next Monday, allowing Clancy onfc on approved bail in the meantime, and to grant a postponement of trial tiU next sittings if the present adjournment Avas insufficient. BREAKING GAOL. Samuel Cousin;? was charged with having broken panl at Wellington, in August, while serving :i sentence for burglary. Prisoner said that he was "guilty with an explanation." Ho admitted that the sentence he wns now serving was just punishment, but said there had been a degree of hardship in the method of his eonfinempnt, in that the vigilance at the, time of his escape was not strict onough. H^ was allowed to work at the rifle range, "where in the spring days," said the prisoner in quite a poetical outburst, "nature looked at her best." For a- few days he worked in these surroundings without thought of escape. Then the longing for freedom overcame him. An opportunity presented itself and he seized it. He asked his Honour to believe him when he said that liis o\m yearning

prompted him. Everything seemed to will him from captivity. He hud broken i.<> moral law, and had harmed neither person nor property. When he he^an his sentence he registered a resolution that lie would rectify his way of living. Ho asked the Court run to add to the sentence he was now serving, bub to make his prison life more rigorous. When his sentence expired he would return to the world with the firm intention of never again breaking its laws. In reply to his Honour, Mr. Garvcy, Gaoler, said the prisoner's conduct since Ms escape had been exceptionally good. His Honour said he did not regard the offence as a serious one. The opportunity of escaping offered itself, and he was nofc surprised at prisoner accepting, it. At the same time this sort of thing must be checked, because otherwise if would be impossible for the gaol officials to carry out the discipline of the prison without having warders to look after each man. He must pass a short sentence, but if at the termination of the sentence prisoner was no>v serving Mr. Garvey was able to report that his conduct had been good, he (Mr. Justice Edwards) would recommend the remission . of the sentenco of threo months' extra imprisonment now imposed. Cousins — I am very much obliged to you. Than]; you, your Honour. Thomas Teece, who escaped at the same time, pleaded Guilty, and submitted a statement that he escaped because he heard that his wife was ill. On it being stated that Teece had broken gaol on a previous occasion he was sentenced to an additional six months' imprisonment, his Honouivsaying that he would be prepared to recommend remission if prisoner's conduct was good. William Oiliver pleaded guilty to escaping from custody at the Forts on the 26th October last. He was not, well at the time. His Honour said that was no reason for breaking away. His Honour sentenced prisoner to three months' hard labour, but said that if his conduct was good he would be prepared to recommend a remission 'at .the end of the sentence he was now^serving. Just -beforo 3 o'clock the three men, Johson, Johnson, and Stephcnson, also charged with having attempted to break gaol, sent up word from the ceMs that they desired to alter thsir j>lea. On. going into the dock Stephenson and Johson pleaded guilty. Johnson, still maintained hi£ ininocence, and Mi 1 . Bell (as Crown Prosecutor) said ho would enter a nolle proseque in Johnson's case. John--son was the man who was, or feigeed to be, asleep Avhilst the other two prisoner's were -making efforts to escape. His* Honour severely criticised the. action of ■the two accused, and advised them, for their own good, to maintain, their best behaviour during the remainder of their term. Stephenson and Johson. were sentenced: to six iwonths' imprisonment •each, the sentence to run after their present term has , expired. THEFT. Edward James Holmes pleaded guilty- , to -the theft of a cheque for £10, the nro,.p©rt.y of F. J. Wilson, of the Public 'Trnsl Office, where prisoner was a clerk. •On the application of Mr. WiMord prisoner was placed on probation for two years, and ordered to pay £8 costs. [fiT TELEGRAPH. — PRESS ASSOCIATION.] CHRISTCHURCH,' This Day. His Honour, in his charge to the Grand Jury on 'opening the criminal sessions this morning, deplored the fact that many of the charges were offences against the person. Some of them were of a. serious nature. There were three bad cases- of indecent assault on young children. As to the case against a man and his wife for assault and cobbery, the law did not now presume that a wife committing a crime in the presence of 'her husband acted under compulsion. The facts in the Burnham stabbing, case were v«ry simple, and the jury would have no difficulty. As to the criminal libel ease, his Honour poiwted out the principles which governed such cases. The criminal charge was preferred on the ground that there was risk of the public peace being broken. A True Bill was found against Harry Hills, charged with breaking and entering and theft. The prisoner, a Burnham boy, pleaded Guilty, and as his record was bad he was sentenced to six months' imprisonment. Charles Brown, another Burnham boy, pleaded Guilty to a charge of forgery, aad was admitted to probation for twelve months. True Bills were found against Edward Wilson, charged with theft ; Charles Miller, theft ; John Dryden Webber, theft ; and James M'Gillvery and Mary M'Gillvery, theft. No Bill was found against Sophia Thorsen for breach of the Births Registration Act.