THE COURTS.—TO-DAY.

Evening Star, Issue 6038, 19 July 1882, Page 2

THE COURTS.—TO-DAY.

SUPREME COURT.-CRIMINAL SESSIONS. (Before Hia Honor Mr Justice Williams.) His Honor took his seat on the Bench at ten o'clock. THB GBAND JUBY. The following gentlemen were sworn in aa the Grand Jury:—Messrs L. 0. Beal (foreman), Henry Young, N. Y. A'. Wales, John Thomson, W. H. Terry, James Sooullar, William Sanderson, Farquharson Proctor, F. W. Petre, C. M. Howison, John Hercus, Charles Moore, J. R. Morris, Ben., J. R, Morris, jun., R. S. M'Vicker, John M'Neil, John Hislop, George Hindle, James Hazlctt, E. D. Day, J. E. F. Coyle, and W. H, Churton. ins honor's charge. His Honor, in hia charge, referred to the fact that most of the offences were of an ordinary character. In the murder case the jury had not to consider whether the prisoner was sane when he shot his son-in-law. TBUB BILLS. The Grand Jury found true bills in the following cases i— Thomas Hodgetts, stealing from a dwelling; Charles Cokman alias Amos Haynes, forgery (twe indictments); Samuel 11. Lees, forgery ; Thomas Hamate, rape at Green Island ; John Wilson, stealing money from the person ; Hlka Whiitet, stealing jewellery; John Hewitt, Btealing bollock hides; Charles WUMns amd Andrew Neilson, forging trade marks; Ah Yew, robb«ry with violence; Richard Nelmes, cattle-stealing; CuthbertJi£ lKellar,embezzlement; John Francis Kitto, murder j Eliza Whiitet, stealing from a dwelling. In Lees's case the Grand Jury wished to make a presentment, but His Honor ruled that as thoy had found that there was a prima facie case for him to meet it was undesirable that any remarks should be made which would prejudice the case in any way. NO BILL. The Grand Jury threw out the bill against John Stevens', charged with forgery. ABSON. Philip Waldmann, convicted last sittings of arson at Queenstown, amd whose case had been reserved for appeal, was now brought up for sentence. On feeing called on, The prisoner Baid he wished to make a few remarks with regard to the charge. When ho left Queenstown shortly before the fire he came to Dunedin to see his wife, and one of the boxes which had been used in evidence against him contained provisions for her use. In the evidence of Mrs Woodyear it was shown that he waa in the garden of the cottage burned on January 22, some twentyeight hours before the "plant" was discovered in the cottage. Now, it was impossible for him to have put the light there at that time. As a matter of fact, be was not in the cottage for a fortnight previous. Ho had been convicted principally because it was supposed he had the keys in his possession. The cottage was situate outside the town on a terrace, and any person had the same chance of getting into the place as ho had. He considered he had not got a fair trial. He requested' that half the ]ury might consist of his own countrymen, but the application was refused. It %&& always boen his belief that every man had a right to bo tried partly by Mb own countrymen. He had been convicted on what he considered was not evidence, and had again to state that he was innocent of the charge. Perhaps His Honor might see more favorably into the case if he (the prisoner) did not make these remarks ; but he had always been accustomed to speak the truth, and must do so now. After his release from gaol he would devote his life to proving his innocence and to the bringing of the guilty parties to justice. He trusted the Court would take into consideration the fact that he had already been six months in gaol, and that he had hitherto borne a good character. In conclusion, the prisoner Btated that he had a wife and five children, the oldest of whom was not six years of age. His wife, who was in delicate health, was thrown on the mercy of the world without anyone to assist her. He hoped His Honor would take these circumstances into consideration and make the sentence as favorable as possible, in order that he might be released and given an opportunity ofproving his innocence. Another

matter which he wished to mention was this: suspicion in connection with the fire attached to a resident of Queenstown. A constable inquired into the matter at the time he (the prisoner) was committed, and because he refused to join in with the other officers in attempting to fix the guilt on him (the prisoner), he had been removed from the district. His Honor i Prisoner, you have been convicted of one of the moat serious offences known to the law* and I am bound to say that you have bfecn donvuited after a fair trial. You were ably defended by Counsel, cud the jury Have fotmd, you guilty, afld I am bound to say i tliinK they were fully justified on the evidence in so finding you guilt*,; I nhilll tako this, into consideration in passing Bentencc : that the house jn which the offence was committed, and whioh the jury found you attempted to burn down, was ,&n isolated house, and consequently there waa no danger to life involved by the act, as sometimes hi these case*. I shall take that into fldnsideratiodi .At the same time the offence ie one which I aitt aftaid is top common in this country, and it is one wiiich is very difficult to procure a conviction on, and when a conviction is obtained a proportionately heavy sentence should be inflicted. The Benleiic& bl the, is. that you be kept to penal servitude in the Ctlony of Mew Zealand for the term of seven years. The Crown Prosecutor applied for leave to enter a nolle prosequi with regard to a second indictment in connection with a similar offence'. STEALING FKOM A DWELLING. Thomas Hodyelt* pleaded guilty to a charge of stealing money and other valuables,, the property of John M'Kay, from a dwel-iing-hotiflS at Duliedin,on the 15th of April. The value of the goods stolen amounted to L3O 17b. On being challenged prisoner had nothing to say why sentence should not be passed. Mr Caldwell, the governor of the Gaol, deposed that the prisoner had Berved sentences for being illegally on premises and for obtaining money by false pretences. His Honor i This does not appear to have been your first offence, prisoner. You appear j to have been convicted before thSi Magistrate's Court of obtaining money by false pretences. The sentence of the Court is that you be imprisoned in the common gaol at Dunodin ] for the term of two years and kept to hard labor. FORGERY. j Charles Colem/m Haynes pleaded not guilty to an indictment charging him with having on Jane 22 forged a warrant for the payment of money. A second count charged him With uttering the same. Mr Haggltt' conducted the case for the Crown j tfis prisoner -#aß andefended. The ease for tha Ctdwii was that about 8.30 o'clock on the morning of June 22 Prisoner went to Mrs Duncan's hotel, at 'almergton t aiid.,afiked the landlady for a blank cheque". BHe gave him a form put of her own cheque-book, which waa from iHe Palmerston branch of the Colonial Bank. He took the form away with him, and about two hours afterwards the prisoner, accompanied by a man named Stevens, went to a store in Upper Shag Valley kept by James Glover. There he purchased from Miss Glover a pound of tobacco, for which he tendered in payment a cheque for L 4 14s 6d, Eurporting to be signed by William Pattieon. n answer to an inquiry priaoner said that Mr Pattison was a station-holder, and this seemed to satisfy Miss Glover, who cashed the cheque. On presentation at the bank the cheque turned out to b« a forgery, and the facta stated were t#en.discovered. The Jury, without leaving the bk>x, fottnd the prisoner guilty of uttering. On a second indictment, in which the prisoner was changed with forging and uttering the cheque coßJoiatly with a man named Stevens, the Crown offered no evidence.

His Honor: Is anything knewn against the prisoner ? The Crown Solicitor: Oh, yes. He has been a criminal almost ever since he came into the country. He has received a number of email sentences in the lower Court, and in 1876 he received five years' penal servitude in this Court. Your Honor tried him for horfle-BteaUng, and almost as soon as he got out of gaol he received six months' from the Magistrate'* Court That time could only just about have expired when he committed this offenee. I have the convictions here; Mr Caldwell can identify him. Mr Caldwell, governor of the Gaol, said that prisoner was known by several aliases. As Charles Coleman he received a sentence of five years en July 3, 1876, and there were a number of other convictions against him. He came to this Colony in tho s.s. Basby in 1874. Hia Honor: Yon seem to have been in gaol almost ever since you came to the Colony, prisoner. It is really difficult to know what to do with a man like you. It is n»t the slightest good passing a _ short sentence. The sentence of the Court is that yon be kept to penal serritnde In the Colony of New Zealand for the term of five years. BOBBERY FKOM THE FEBSON, John WUeon pleaded guilty t* a charge of stealing the sum of L 6 Is and a pocket-knife from the person ef Henry Kaye. Prisoner said this was his first offenoe, and ho therefore trusted the Court would deal leniently with him. He was under the influence of liquoF when he committed the offence. The Oewn Prosecutor intimated that nothing was known againßt the prisoner. His Honor (to prisoner): The sentence of the Court is that you be imprisoned for tho term of six months and kept to hard labor. IMDECEKT ASSACI/T. Thomas Raimgt was indicted for having on April 8, at Green Island, criminally assaulW Ellen Thomson Walker ©rEamage, aged nine. Mr P. E. Chapman defended the prisoner, who pleaded " Not guilty," The girl was the prisoner's grand-daughter, and had lived with him "and his wife for the greater part of her life. It was alleged on the part of the Crown that this was not the first time prisoner had had intercourse with the girl. [Left sitting.] RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. (Before E. H. Carew, Esq., R.M k ) Judgment was given for plaintiffs by default in the following cases:—Charles Cooper v. Archibald Moir, claim, LlO 19s, on a judgment summons (to be paid, by August 1, in default seven days' imprisonment) ; R. Blackadder v. William Dale, LBl 16s, on a dishoaored bill; Newton v. Archibald Niool, 7s 6d, for goods supplied. Robert Wright v. Henry Scott. Claim, LlB 13s, balance due on a cheque deposited by plaintiff with defendant. Mr Fitchett appeared for plaintiff; Mr E. Cook for defendant.—This case, the evidence of plaintiff in which was taken last week, was now resumed.—Henry Scott, defendant, stated: Plaintiff carao to ray house on the morning of June 28. He spent a few shillings, and then said he had to stay in town, and he would like to stop at my hotel. I said "Very well." He then said he had no change, but had a cheque for L4llßs on the bank at Palmerston, I said I would advance some money on it. He asked me for L 5 advance on it, and I gave him L 4. I gave him a receipt for the cheque, and he fave me this receipt (produced) lor the L 4. [e was seber when he wrote the receipt. I paid the cheque into my bank next day. On the 30th 1 inquired at tho bank, and found that the cheque had been paid all right. On the afternoon oi the 28th plaintiff was in my bar "shouting" for a number of men. He was slightly under the influence of drink, and I told the barmaid to give him nothing but soda-water or lemonade. She said he was " shouting " for everybody that came in. About eight at night he asked me for L 3, as he "wanted to see some lady friends." I gave him L 3. He was "a little jolly " at tho time—more drunk than in the morning. I did not get a receipt for the L 3. He went out and did not return till near twelve o'clock, still slightly under trie influence of drink. On the 29th I saw plaintiff in the bar shouting for a number of people with whom he appeared te be on intimate terms. This was about nine or ten o'clock. He came to me and said " My money is done; I want L2." I gave him L2, and made a note of it at the time in my pocket-book. He went to tho bar again, and I think ho was drinking there again, but I went away. I came back in the afternoon and found that he was away, but about seven o'clock in the evening he came back and asked for L2 more. He was

not " very bad" then, but jocular as if he had been drinking. I gave him L2, but again did not take the precaution to get a receipt. He went a'way till about j 11.30 p.m., when he came to the" bar and I said "I want drink, but I have no money. I Giv'J me LI." I found that I had 5s 6d loose ] in my pocket, and gave him that. On the j 30th plaintiff said "My money's done ; give me L 3." I asked himjhow he was spending his money. He said " Never mind ; you've got my cheque." I gave him L 3, but again I did not get a receipt. This was in the morning, and he went away till seven o'clock at night. That was the first meal ho had bad in the house that I know of. , Soon after tea he said "I want L 3," which 1 gave Mm. I did not get any receipt.—His Worship ;' When he was sober you appear to have given him a receipt-; but as jpoon as be got intoxicated you seem not to imve it nec6ssary. —Witness: I did not tmnh H worth the trouble of getting paper and statu'ffe Ho went out again that evening, and On coming back said he would leave next day, as the place was too quiet for him. Orf the morning of the Ist July he said "I want to square tip; how much is coming to me?" I said "1 Biippose about L 15," but looking at my book I found that he had more to get, as ho had spent in cash for and refreshments L2B 10s. —His Worship : Do yoti .know the meaning of the word "spent?'' Do you mean that he had spent that amount ? ~ Witness I mean that he had drawn caali ivotii ; me and owed for board and refreshmentis Lfiß J.Os. [The Witness here got into an almost inextricabl"? state of confusion as to the amount owing cy plaintiff, but at length set it down as L2l lSs, no*L3B 10s.] The amount was L2l 18s, made .up as follows; Cash drawn by plaintiff, Ll7 5s 6d ; board and bdginff, L2l2s 6d ; refreshments, JL2. The refreshments consisted of drinks at meals and cigars. The board and lodging is charged at the rate of 2s 6d per tteal and bed.—llia Worship :—You have told us already that pontiff was always out of the house from morning till night, and that he had only one meal in it. Do you mean to say that you charge a man for meals if he does not have them '—Witness : Certainly; it's his own fault if he does not have his meals—they are provided for him. It is the custom in all hotels. To Mr Cook : He might have come back and had rae&ls while fwas away. When I told him he had ld() coining to him he said: "I'm well pleased, and when I come to Dunedin again I shall stop here." He gave me a receipt for the L2O. To Hia Worship: This hj the receipt, whieh I wrote out myself. It says: "Received from H. Scott L4l 18s, for goods dhd board amounting to L2l 18s, and cash L 20." It ought to be "cash"; instead of goods, because the goods only amounted to 14 12s 6d, The account (pro- j duced) shows what the goods consisted of.— Hia Worship : I see that the refreshments come to exactly L2; the plaintiff did not liave either one drink more or one less than stated, I suppo.'fe ?—Witness: No ; just that number.—His Worship t Where did yon get that account from ; do you enfer all your boarders' transactions in your books?— Witness : Oh, yes; I keep books and enter all the meals and drinks in it. I kept plaintiff's account in my books and copied this account from* them. The L2 for refreshments is not a merfi guess plaintiff did not have one drink or. cigar more or one less. To Mr Fitchett » When paying the cheque in I told the bank clerk that I would like to know if it was right. I went down the same forenoon, and the clerk told mo that he had wired to Palrhefstcn and the cheque was all right. I will swear that the account I have produced is correct, aiid ih'ai.J never gave plaintiff any other account. In the letter (produced) which I sent to Macdermott I did put the refreshments down as LI 10s instead of L2. The state of the account is the same, because in my letter I said I had given him L2O 10s instead of the L2o. His Worship: Have you any objection to produce your books ? Witness j It would take me a long time to get them.—His Worship: How long would it take you ?—Witness:' I &mld not get them before an hour or two.—His Worship : Where do you live ?—Witness : In Princes street south.—His Worship: It would not tako you Jong to go there. Do not you think you could get there in half an hour or a quarter ?—Witness: Well, I might be able. —His Worship: The fact is you object to produce them; is that not so?— Witness: Yes, I do object.—His Worship : That will do. The defendant is evidently afraid to produce his books lest they should* make evidence against him. I will give judgment this afternoon.—Mr Fitchett (to defendant): Did you send anyone out to plaintiffy after ho had left your hotel, offering to pay his fare in and out if he would come to town and square the affair ?—Witness : I did not. —Mr Fitchett: Well, those are my instructions ; but I cannot bring evidence to prove it.—At the afternoon sitting of the Court, His Worskip gave judgment for plaintiff as follows : —" The defendant admits having received a cheque from plaintiff for L4l 18s, and I was in doubt as to how far he has accounted for the proceeds of that cheque. He has proved by a receipt, which the plaintiff admits, that he paid the sum of L 4 to the latter, who also admits receiving the sums of 10s, ss, and L2O. The defendant says that he has paid other sums of money amounting to Ll2 10s 6d, but the plaintiff swears that he has no recollection of having received any part of that money. The defendant says that each time he gave the plaintiff money the latter was sufficiently sober to know quite well what he was about. I have, therefore, no reason to doubt that Wright was conscious of what money he received, and as there is oath against oath I cannot say that Scott has proved that the LI 2 10s 6d was paid to the plaintiff—he has not given testimony that will outweigh the evidence given by plaintiff. The plaintiff offers to pay defendant L2 10s for his board and lodging for the two days and a-half, and I. think that a very liberal allowance. That, added to the L 24 15sreceived by plaintiff, makes L 27 ss, which, deducted from 14118s, leaves a balance due to plaintiff of Ll4 13s, for which amount judgment will bo given, with costs."—Mr Fitchett: Will your Worship consider the costs of the previous hearing?— His Worship: I give all costs, for the transaction has been a disgraceful one. W. S. Douglas v. George M'Gavin.— Claim, Lsl 15s, for work done as manager of a brewery. Mr Solomon appeared for plaintiff ; Mr Macdonald for defendant. [Left sitting. ] CITY POLICE COURT. (Before J. Logan, Esq., J.P., and R. Chisholm, Baq., J.F.) Drunkenness. —Jeremiah Brogham and T. E. Gray were each fined 5s for commiting this offence. Labctsny.— Herbert Hulclimgs was charged with stealing on the dates mentioned the following artioles from Charles Edwin Watkins: —One pantograph, value L 5, July 4; pocket aneroid, value L 4 4s, June 21; one level, value L2, June 26; one eliptograph, value L 3 13s, July I.—Accused pleaded guilty.— Sergeant Bevin said accused had been in the Colony for about eight months. He had been in informant's employ, but had been dismissed. While informant was at Christ- : church accused went to informant's office, \ took the things away at four different times, and pawned them.—He was sentenced to six months' imprisonment, with hard labor. Henry Poppkton, a boy, was charged with stealing, on the 14th July, a perambulator, of the value of 10s, the property of Richard Maddox.—The boy's mother admitted that the boy had taken the perambulator wheels, but they had been returned. She stated that Cargill road was "infested with bad boys," and others were as bad as her son.— The boy promised to behave himself in future, and to avoid bad company.—He was cautioned, convicted, and discharged. Intkrfkkin'g with a Railway Waggon. Charles Page and Thomcm Fairlie, two boys, were charged with moving a railway waggon on the line at Caversham on the Ist July.—Accused pleaded guilty. W. H. Lewis, station-master, stated that he was much annoyed by boys at the station. These boys had started some truoks on an incline, and if not arrested the trucks might have blocked the line. A train was due seven minutes after the time of the interference. The boys had no right to be on the line. He had not noticed these boys on the line previously. The brakes of the trucks were down, and witness saw

one of the boys *Kft the brake. Their Worships ex-pressed toe opinion that some precaution should be taken to secure these tracks, so that boys could not endanger the safety of the public—Sergeant-major Bevin said that the boys had no* light to 6e o» the fine. The parents were greatly «o blame to allowing the boys to wander about. HaL. the injury done by boys in the town was attributable to the neglect of parents u> looking after them.—The boys were informed that a re-appearance for a similar offencewould entail a heavy fine.—They were each fined ss. Trespass ox thk Railway Link.— Jcmr* Smith was charged with trespassing on the railway lineberwten Parksidetand Caversham» on the 9th July, contrary to the railway byelaws,—Accused admitted that he had walkedon the line, but as he was an officer of the Public Works Department he thought hewas not committing an offence in doing so.— Fined Se.