THE COURTS-TO-DAY.

Evening Star, Issue 10791, 28 November 1898, Page 2

THE COURTS-TO-DAY.

BUPREME COXJBT-CBIHINAL SESSIONS. (Before His Honor Mr Justice Pennefather.) The criminal sessions of the Supreme Court were opened this morning at 10.30. grand jury. The, following were empanhelled as the Grand Jury: Grant Preston Farquhar (foreman), Latham Osborne Beal, Alexander Burt, Thomas Burton, William Robert Cameron, Henry Crust, Robert Edward D'Oyly, William Fraser Edmond, William Anderson Ewing, John Henry Hancock, William Kettle, Henry Harraway, William Cargill Kirkcaldy, John Lethbridge, Peter Miller, Thomas Moodie, William Godfrey Neill, John Bradley Shacklock, James Cox Thomson; Benjamin Throp, and William Abraham Walton. HIS HONf'R'S CHARGE. His Honor: Mr Foreman and gentlemen of the Grand Jury,—l am happy again to meet the Grand Jury of the City of Dunedin, and to be able for the third time in succession to congratulate you on the lightness of the calendar. It is very satisfactory to observe that not only is the number of accused persons so small, but that the offences with which they are charged are not of that serious character which so often disgrace communities in other parts of the world. I am not one of those who hope that the dream of the theorists will ever come true—that crime will be abolished and gaols and policemen will be unnecessary. But it must be satisfactory to anyone who has the interest of the community at heart to observe the gradual decrease of crime, not only here, but also in other parts of the British Empire, and I think it may bo taken as some evidence that the custom of awarding short sentences is at least as valuable a deterrent as was the old system of a more severe character. There are few of the cases which come before you to-day which call for special remark from me. One on which I wish to say a word or two is of a, person who is accused of attempting to bribe a witness. That may seem to you to be a strange offence for a man to be charged with; but it is of the highest importance that witnesses should be free to give their evidence in the courts of justice without any fear of intimidation, or on the other hand, without being bribed to. remain quiet. That is important as connected with the purity of the fount of justice. [His Honor here referred to the cases of criminal assault.] Of the other charges which are brought some are serious, but they do not present any special legal difficulties. Jrf you will now retire to your room, gentlemen, the bills will be laid before you in due course. TRUE BILLS. True bills were returned in all the cases submitted, and the gentlemen of the Grand I Jury, after having been occupied for two ! and a-half hours, were thanked for their ! attendance and discharged. DAMAGINO PROPERTY. William M'Kay was brought up on an indictment charging him with having, on the 9th of October last, by night, wilfully damaged one pane of glass, of the- value of £B, the property of the Standard Insurance Company. Accused pleaded not guilty. Evidence was given by E. J. Gibb, James Richardson, James Wren, Plain - clothes Constable Bodham, Constable Taylor, and I Constable Evans. I Prisoner had nothing to say except that I he was drunk at the time, and knew nothing about breaking the window. The jury, without retiring, returned a verdict of guilty, with a recommendation to mercy on account of the state accused was in at the time the deed was done. The police record showed twenty-five previous convictions, extending over a period of ten years. These included two charges of malicious injury to property. Prisoner was sentenced to six months' imprisonment with hard labor. niIEAKING AND ENTERING. Frank Cannon (28) was arraigned on -ft charge of breaking and entering the dwelling of John Mackie on October 3 and stealing one diamond ring and 5s in money. Mr Hanlon appeared for prisoner, who pleaded guilty. Learned counsel made application that prisoner be liberated under the provisions •if the Probation Act. He understood that the probation officer had put in a report, but, if ifc was necessary, he could call evidence to show that prisoner's antecedents had been good, and that he had been in a position of trust for some nine or ten years in the Dunedin Savings Bank. During that I imo absolutely no fault had been found with him as to his honesty, and the manager (Mr Smith) was willing to give evidence to that effect if necessary. His Honor: Where would he go if liberated on probation?

Mr Hanlon said that prisoner's father would take him home at once. He'had two offers of a situation, one of which he would accept. His Honor, addressing prisoner, said: You stand convicted of a serious crime, but T am aware that your character hitherto has 1 been good, and that there are reasons why it would not be desirable that you should be sent to prison. Your father has liberally and kindly consented to make arrangements for your maintenance in the j event of '-our being admitted to probation. i The sentence of the Court, therefore, is i that you be admitted to probation for twelve I calendar months on the payment of the costs ■ of the prosecution, the value of the stolen property, and witnesses' expenses. THEFT FROM A DWELLING. Annie Pilet was arraigned on an indict- ! ment charging her with having, on September 12, stolen one tablecloth from the dwelling of Roderick M'Kenzie. Prisoner pleaded guilty, and stated that she had been drinking heavily for three weeks previous to the offence. She was dared to take the tablecloth from the Oban t Hotel, and took it. In the morning she was taking it back to the hotel when she was arrested. The Crown Prosecutor said there were forty-one previous convictions. His Honor said that it was quite evident that short terms of imprisonment were oi no use in the case of prisoner, and the sen- | tence of the Court would accordingly be ! that she would be sentenced to twelve i months' imprisonment, with hard labor. I _ LARCENY. ! " James Bowling Smith was charged with having, on October 22, stolen from the raili way station a gladstone bag containing a : quantity of wearing apparel and carpentery | tools, the property of David Millar. j Prisoner pleaded guilty. ! Mr Mouat appeared for prisoner, and applied for his admission to probation. He did not belong to the criminal class at all, but had given way to drink. He had pleaded guilty to the offence, and had showed his contrition in a practical way by enabling all the articles to be discovered. Generally, he had borne a good character by those who knew him, and there was a person willing to re-employ him if admitted to probation. His Honor said he was willing to take into consideration that this was prisoner's first offence, and that the man from whom the property was stolen was very foolish in leaving it in the way of people on the railway station. There was a proper place for leaving luggage, and he should have put it there instead of putting temptation in people's way, which no s Mie had any right to do. Prisoner was admitted to probation for cne year, the costs of the prosecution (£6 19s 6d) to be paid in monthly instalments of £1 each. THEFT. William Thomson (17) pleaded guilty to the charge of stealing a gun from a house at Tomahawk, and was. admitted to two years' probation, the costs of the prosecution and witnesses' expenses (£7) to be paid in weekly instalments of 2s 6d each. Andrew Dickson was charged with having, on or abou* January 1,1898, stolen one overcoat, the property of Walter Green, of Henley. Prisoner pleaded guilty. Mr Hanlon said that prisoner was twentynine years of age, ana was born at Kuri Bush, where he hod resided all his life. His parents were very respectable people, but he seemed to have taken to drink and fallen into indolent habits. Under the circumstances he (learned counsel) could not ask

for probation, but would leave prisoner to the clemency of the Court. Prisoner was admitted to six months' probation. ALLEGED ATTEMPT TO BBIBE A WITNESS. On the case of Peter Grant, charged with attempting to bribe a witness, being called, Mr Sim said he appeared with his friend Mr Hanlon for accused. Accused was only committed for trial on Thursday last, and Mr Hanlon had been out of town until Saturday night, and his brief had only been delivered to" him this morning, and they had not had time to brief the evidence. It would be doing an injustice to accused by forcing the case on to-day. He (learned counsel) understood that there was no necessity for forcing the case on. His Honor: Are any of the witnesses coming from a distance? Mr Sim : No, your Honor. They all belong to the town, and very much in the hands of the police. His Honor: I do not see that the case can be prejudiced in any way. Mr Sim: It will not be prejudiced against the Crown, but it will be prejudiced against accused if the witnesses are not briefed. His Honor; Do you object to that, Mr Fraser? Mr Fraser (Crown Prosecutor) said that he had so arranged his cases for Grant's to be taken at two o'clock. He would be very sorry to be the means of doing any accused person an injustice, but he could not see how any injustice could be done to Grant by his case coming on to-day. The evidence was of the shortest nature, and there was practically no other case that he could go on with. His Honor: As I understand, there is only one witness. Mr Sim : Including accused there are three witnesses. Mr Fraser: If the witnesses were not accessible it wtmld be ground for adjournment. I am desirous of the case being heard in due course, and that is just now. It is inconvenient to have the order of the cases interfered with, and I beg to that the case proceed. Mr Sim: I put it to your Honor that it would be doing an injustice to the accused by going on to-day. Mr Fraser asks you to disregard that for his own convenience. (His Honor: lam very unwilling to do an injustice to any accused, but so far as I can see there is no reason why the case should not go on to-day. Mr Sim: It is very necessary that we should know what the evidence of the witnesses for the defence will be. Mr Fraser: I have special reasons for asking that this case go on to-day. Mr Sim: State them, then. Mr Fraser: I decline to sav what they are. It is sufficient that, as Crown Prosecutor, I should state that I have reasons. I believe that if the case is not taken to-day a grave miscarriage of justice will talie place. His Honor : I cannot see that I should be justified in adjourning the Court for any reason Mr Sim: It is not suggested that you should do that. After further discussion His Honor decided to take the two criminal assault cases first, sit lato, end take Grant's case either this afternoon or the first thing to-morrow morning. ALLEGED CBIMINAI, ASSAULT. Alfred Wellbourne was arraigned on an indictment charging him that he did at divers times between November 11 and 15 unlawfully carnally know a girl under the ago of sixteen years, to wit, fifteen years eight months, at Broad Bay. Accused pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr Hanlon. The case was proceeding when we went to press.

MAGISTRATE'S COURT. (Before E. H. Carew, Esq., S.M.) C. and W. Shiel t. William Henry Noel Claim, £3, on two lOU's. Mr Moore for plaintiffs.—Judgment by default, with lis costs. Official Assignee in the estate of John M'Lean and son v. John Dempster (Green Island).— Claim, £2, on an account. Mr Moore for plaintiff—Judgment by default, with lis costs. New Zealand Co-operative and Agency Company v. Helen Smith.—Claim, £lO, on a promissory note and for calls. Mr James for plaintiifs.— Judgment by default, with £1 10s costs.—A similar claim against William Duncan (Waikawa) produced a corresponding decision.—The company also sued Robert Hamilton, Harry Parslow, Robert M. Todd, and Robert M'Kenzie, all of Niagara, the claim in each case being £7 13s, for calls due, and judgment by default was given, with costs. Joseph Sparrow t. Frascr and Morley (Skippers).—Claim, £7 Bs, goods supplied. Mr Thornton for plaintiff.—Judgment by default, with £2 Is 6d costs. Morris and Co. v. Frederick Harley.—Claim, £3 10s, goods supplied. Mr Riddell for plaintiffs.—Judgment by default, with lis costs William Miller and Co. v. Ellen Bragg Claim, £ll, on a promissory note. Mr Brown Durie for plaintiffs.—Judgment by default, with £2 10s 6d costs. Annie Edmonds (Serpentine) v. Joseph Hughes (Outram).—Claim, £IOO damages, it being alleged that defendant, a common carrier, did not carry out his undertaking to convey certain goods from Dunedin to Serpentine within a reasonable time, whereby the goods were lost to the plaintiff.—ln this previously heard case, Mr W. C. MacGregor, counsel for plaintiff, moved for judgment, and Mr Sim, representing defendant, replied.—His Worship reserved his decision. Alexander M'Kenzie v. Walter Loring.— Claim, £4 7s 6d, for damage alleged to have been caused to plaintiff's house whilst defendant was a tenant thereof. Mr Sim for plaintiff, and Mr Moore for defendant.—His Worship reserved his decision. CITY TOLICE COURT. (Before Messrs A. Solomon and W. C. M'Nee, J.P.8.) Drunkenness.—Henry William Fleet, Alfred William Neylon, and a first offender were each fined ss, or twenty-four hours' imprisonment.—Patrick O'Leary and Jane Whittaker were each fined 20s, or forty-eight hours.— Rose Moore and George Cummock were convicted and discharged.—Annie Pilet was Bent to gaol for a month. Prohibition Orders.—On their own application, prohibition orders were granted against Henry William Fleet, George Cummock, and John Stewart. Theft.—Jessie Williams alias Jeannie Armishaw was charged with theft, about the 24th inst., of a watch and chain, a table bell, and a bunch of keys, of the value of 30s, the property of Arthur Armishaw.—Accused pleaded guilty.—Detective M'Grath explained that the woman stole the things from her mother-in-law's house, where she lived, and pledged the watch for 2s 6d, and the bunch of keys for 6d. She was addicted to drink, and no doubt stole the articles for the purpose of procuring drink. There were two previous convictions against her for theft, and on each occasion she was convicted and discharged. She was married, but her husband was in the North Island. She had a baby four months old, the grandmother having expressed her willingness to take charge of the infant.—A representative from the Salvation Army being in'court, Mr Solomon said: The Bench are not disposed to send this woman to gaol if thoy can help it. If we convict, and order her to come up for sentence when called upon, will the Army take care of her?— The lady representative replied in the affirmative. —Accused was then convicted, and ordered to come up for sentence when called upon, on the understanding that she went to the Salvation Army Home.