SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 1973, 1 September 1869, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SESSIONS. (Before His Honor Mr Justice Ward.)

The September Sessions commenced this morning, at ten o’clock. In his address to the Grand Jury, of which Capt. Boyd was chosen chairman, bis Honor congratulated them on the lightness of the calendar, which he said, although comprising a small number of cases, contained some serious ones. Referring to the case of Regina v. Wain and othe s, be said that he was sorry to say that it was for an assault on the poHce. There was pot a finer body than the police of Otago, and being cal led upon to exercise great forbearance, they deserved the utmost protection the law could give them. He could not pass from this case without paying a tribute which is well deserved to the gentleman who had organised the present police force. He was afraid that that gentleman’s elevation would prove a serious loss to the Province ; and if he only succeeded with the Armed Constabulary as well as he had done with the police force of the Province, it would be a most important gain to the Colony. THE ALLEGED LIBEL CASE. Mr Barton mentioned the case of Regina v. Henjiingham. He said that his Honor would be aware that the proceedings in such a case were in existence. No indictment bad been filed, and his Honor had made no mention of the case in his address to the Grand Jury, The Judge said that he understood that no indictment was to be preferred by the pro? secutor.

Mr Barton would ask his Honor to allow the wi nesses, of whom there were a number, to leave the Court for to-day. The Judge said that he had not the slightest doubt that no case would go to the Grand Jury If however, the case were called, and the witness 's were called upon and were absent, he should lie obliged to estreat their recognisances. At present he did not think the witnesses would be required at all. Mr Barton explained that he merely asked that the witnesses might be excused from attendance to-day, it be ; ng mail day. He would give notice to them, should the case be called on. The Judge did not think there was the slightest risk in the witnesses b-ung absent ; more certainly inasmuch as it had been publicly stated in Court on a former occasion by counsel for the prosecutor that no indictment would he preferred by him this session. His Honor enquired if the Crown Prosecutor intended to present an indictment ? Mr Haggitt replied that he did not. The Judge observed that be thought that the witnesses might safely leave the Court for to-day. If, however, an indictment was preferred, due notice would be given. The same indulgence would be granted to the defendant as to the witnesses. Of course, if no indictment was preferred, he would be discharged for want of prosecution, and the whole proceedings would fall to the ground. ATTEMPTED MURDER. John Wardens alias Gallagher (26) was indicted for having, at the Marewhenua diggings, on the 16th June last, wilfully, maliciously, and with malice aforethought, assaulted James Cray with intent to murder. A second count charged him with assault with intent to disable ; and a third count with assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm. The prisoner was undefended. The following evidence was given : James Cray ; I am a storekeeper residing at the Marewhenua diggings. I also purchased gold. 1 made the prisoner’s acquaintance .at my store on the afternoon of the 13th Juno. He had tea and stayed with me that night and the next day. On Saturday he went out to look for work, but not finding any he came back and stopped with me that night and the next day. I was purchasing gold on the Sunday when he was present. He saw me put the gold in a bag in a box, where I also kept my money, which the prisoner saw. In the box I had L 22 in money, and between 21 and 22 ounces of gold. There are two apartments in my store : the one a store, and the other a sleeping apartment. I purchased the gold in the sleeping apartment. When 1 finished purchasing the gold I left the box in the bed. I generally put the gold I purchased under the bed pillow. On the morn ing of Monday prisoner went away, and returned shortly afterwards saying that he had pitched his tent all right. I told him I had bought a horse, and we went together to tether it. I took an iron bar with me for that purpose. We afterwards went to the store, and after staying two hours prisoner went away. I went c own and saw that the horse was all right. A few minutes afterwards, I heard the prisoner speaking to the horse, and going out, I saw iiira leading it. I took the horse .and again te hered it to a Avooden stake, which I drove in with a hatchet. I then asked the prisoner to tie the rope ; and knelt down in order to assist him. In getting up, I was struck with something, and I asked the pr isoner what it was. He said he had been driving in the stake with the tomahawk, and a piece of the wood flew up and struck me in the head. We then returned within to the store. I taking his arm. I believed the story told by the prisoner. On reaching the store, my head was attended to by my wife ; and I asked the prisoner to stop with me that night in case the wound should bleed again. He did so. I was confined to bed next day. In the morning tire prisoner enquired how I was, and asked my wife and me if there was any laudanum in the house. We said there was not. He subsequently said that a digger had came to him and asked him to go a d stay with him. but he refused. I told him to go, but he stayed. My wife made the prisoner a “shakedown” by the fire, and told him to go to bed, but be sat up by the fire. My wife then went to bed. He afterwards came to the bedside, and asked me if I was asleep or if I wanted anything. About twelve o’clock he asked me if L wanted any tea, and he insisted on my taking some. The wife, child, and I had some tea. She and the child afterwards felt sick, and I became drowsy. I went to sleep. The bed was a large one, fourposted, and a sapling connected the bedstead posts, over which the curtain hung. The sapling was about three feet from the bed. I was awoke by my wife screaming, I asked what was the matter, and immediately received a blow on the right side of the head, and turning round received another blow on the le : t side of the head. I rhea saw the prisou-T leaning on the bed, with a tomahawk lifted over his shoulder with both hands. In making a third blow, the hatchet struck the top of the sapling. He fell backwards off the bed, and I sprung out after him. He made another blow at me, but missed me, he ran into the store and I followed him. Mrs Cray came in with a light and I seized hold of a long-handled saucepan, and told the prisoner to lay down the tomahawk. I then took the tomahawk from him and threw it into the sleeping room. He wanted to get up to beg my pardon ; but I threw him back, and told him if lie attempted to get up 1 woxild split his head open. I kept him on the floor until two men, named Smillie and M'Quade, came to my assastance. When we went to bed, prisoner said he would draw the curtains and take away the candle, so that we might go to sleep, and did so. When I woke up the curtains were drawn back, and the caudle wag on the table clqse to the bed. When the men came up, Smillie took c> arge of the prisoner, and M ‘Quade dressed my head. The wounds were bleeding. The prisoner, on being brought into the bedroom, complained of his shoulder, and said Mrs Cray had struck him with a saucepan. While in in the room he said, “Don’t you think I wanted to murder you because of the gold you’ve got under the bed.” He also said, “Don’t you think 1 wanted to murder you ; because if I did, I could have brought down the tomahawk on the sharp edge as well as the flat.” I don’t think the second blow I cot was struck with the edge of the tomahawk. Prisoner was detained in my store until he was handed over to the police. I went to Oamaru, and was under the hands of Dr Ebbs there, for 12 days. Cross-examined by the prisoner : I never aaifl that if I had taken ray diaper, and not drunk so much brandy, I should haye known what I was doing I took no drink at all.

The evidence of Mrs Cray and William Smill e was corroborative of that of the last witness, . William Frederick Ebbs: I am a duly qualified medical practitioner, residing at Oamam. On the 18th June, the prosecutor came to me. I examined him and found three wounds in h : s head. The first was an excised wound at the back of the head, and was inflicted by an instrument. The wound could have been inflicted with the tomahawk produced ; but it could not have been caused by a piece of wood The other wounds were inflicted by a blunt instrument. There was a wound ou each side of the head. The scalp was divided and the scull laid open in each case. I compared the hatchet with these wounds, and the edge of the hatchet corresponded with the irregularities of the wound. I dressed the wounds. If the places where the prosecutor was struck were covered with bandages, the blows must have been delivered with very great violence. Sergeant Bullen deposed to the prisoner’s arrest.

The prisoner addressed the jury, stating shortly that he was guilty of the attack on the prosecutor when he was tethering the horse ; but then it was an accident, and the blow was inflicted while he was under the influence of drink. He denied that he committed any other assault; if he did, he knew nothing about it. The Judge, in summing up, explained the nature of the three counts in the indictment upon which the prisoner was charged. It would he for the jury to say of which of these counts they considered the prisoner to he guilty. If they believed the evidence, there could not bo the slightest question that he was guilty of one of the three. With respect to the first c«mnt, that of assault with intent to murder, the proof of that intent be inferred from the manner of the attack and the weapon used. If the attack was a stealthy and treacherous one and not because of an open qua rel, with a weapon such as would in all probability cause death, the law inferred that the use and intent were to cause murder. It was for the jury to say whether from the evidence they could come to any other conclusion that the prisoner did in‘end to murder the pro* secutor Craig. His Honor then commented on the evidence, remarking that the prisoner seemed to have received from (’raig a most hospitable, kindly and cordial welcome. The nature of the wounds, observed hia Honor, had been spoken to by a medical man ; they must have been extremely severe, and although the prosecutor’s head was bandaged, the scalp had been divided, and the skull laid open ii each ca«e ; it was therefore, no slight blow that could havedone that. It would be f<«r the jury to say, uuder the circumstances, whether they could come to the conclusion that a deliberate and cool attempt had been made to murder the prosecutor. If so, their duty was to find the prisoner guilty on one of the three counts. He was bound to tell them that the law inferred, that a person using a deadly weapon used it with intent to cause the death of the person he intended to attack. The Jury, after nearly two hours absence from Court, returned a verdict of “ guilty ” on the second count.

The Judge, in passing sentence, said that lie was hound to take the verdict of the Jury and they had taken a very merciful view of the case, merely filling the prisoner guilty of assault with intent to disable. Of course the prisoners intention was perfectly clear ; he wished to disable in order to rob. Of all the cases he (the Judge) had ever lizard he seldom heard of a more treacherous and malignant attack than that of which the prisoner had been found guilty found guilty on the clearest evidence that could possibly be b'ought before a court of justice. He had been received by the prosecutor with the utmost cordiality and hospitality, and had remained with him night after night, plotting all the time robbery, and certainly injury of a most previous kind. He, at the first, pretended kindness, in order to mask the prosecutor’s eyes. When he made the attack, the first blow was aimed at the head of an unoffending woman, and although he was not now charged with that, he (the Judge) should should take the fact into consideration in passing sentence. The prisoner would find in the future that “ honesty was the best policy ” if he got the opportunity to use the one or the other again. The sentence'of the Court was that the prisoner be sentenced to fifteen years’ penal servitude. FORGERY. James Leslie was indicted with having at Dunedin, on the 28th July, forged and uttered a cheque. The case was fully reported when it was investigated in the lower Court. The prisoner was found guilty, and was sentenced to four years’ penal servitude, UTTERING A FORGED CHEQUE. James P. Dent was charged with uttering the cheque, for forging which Leslie was found guilty. THE GRAND JURY. The Grand Jury returned true bills in nearly all tiie cases sent to them. They found “no true bill ” in the case of Wiliiam Speed charged with embezzlement, and Charles Jackson charged with larceny. The case of William J. Speedy wall be sent to the grand jury to-morrow morning.