SUPREME COURT, HOKITIKA,

Grey River Argus, Volume XIV, Issue 1762, 28 March 1874, Page 2

SUPREME COURT, HOKITIKA,

Thursday, March 26. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Richmoad.) [from our special reporter.] conspiracy. The Hayes prisoners were brought up for sentence. • Mr Pitt moved an arrest of judgment on the ground that the indictment was faulty. ■ This was over-ruled by the Judge, and the prisoners were then called upon to say if they had anything to state why sentence should not be passed upon them; :■ ; • ; . ; The prisoner James Hayes, aged 33, said that he had nothing more to say than that he had a wife and family, arid he hoped his Honor would consider this. The Judge said he was sorry to hear that this was the case. It was unfortunately the" casa that the punishment, of the guilty often involved others. He thought that this offence was not regarded by many persons in the community in its proper light. This was a breach of mercantile honor, and the crime was no less than if prisoner had taken goods from the* store of one of his creditors. The whole community was, moreover, injured by his offence. If such frauds went unV punished up-country storekeepers would not be trusted, or only at greatly increased charges to cover the increased risk, which would have the effect of increasing prices, and therefore the cost of living for every man in the cquntry districts. On this account it was his duty to express \n the- sentence the danger to the public which the crime created, as well as the absolute gravity of the crime itself. It was very ditfiqult in such cases to arrive at a conviqtion. He considered thaf; the ! fapts. which had, been put before the jury in this case fully warranted the verdict to whig'i they had com,e. He had reflected upon the matter since the verdict was. returned, and was of opinion that he ought hot %o award punishment to, the prisoner, other thatv as if he was an ordinary thief. The sentence was two years' imprisonment 1 with hard, labor, Juhh Hayes, who stated his age to be 35, was then called upon, but had nothingto Siiy. ■ .: The Judge then said that he was enabld , to make a wide distinction between thepuuishmeut of this prisoner and that which he had just awarded to his brother. The jury had recommended John Hayes to mercy, on the ground; no doubt, that he was acting under the influence of his brother. This extenuated his crime in a measure, but was no excuse. ; The love for a brother was a natural one, and one of the highest of sentiments, but it became degraded when it was allowed to overpower the love of truth. Confederacies to uphold one another by fraud and lying must inevitably end iv misery, as being against the God . of justice and truth. Considering that he (John Hayes} was not the main author of the conspiracy, of participation in which he hatl been found guilty, his sentenge would be much lighter than that passed upon his brother. The sentence was that he be imprisoned for six calendar months with hard labor. ' The prisoners were then removed. The i ' Crown Prosecutor intimated the desire of the Crown, in consequeuce of (he conclusion whioh had been arrived at'

in the above trial, to abandon the prosecution of the charge of larceny as a bailie, and which a true bill had been found against the prisoner James Hayes. His Honor stated that he thought the Crown would be exercising a very wise discretion in taking this course. This .concluded the criminal bjusinejs^of^^^ the session. ' - "" ''"'"*"'"'" "' 1: civil cases. .'* !<'■'" V Montgomery v. Ashton.— An action for; damages for assault and trespassr w; Tho-* ;i * : damages were laid at LSO/ '■ ' ; ,- Mr Guinness appeared for the plaintiff,. _„ and Mr Button and Mr Perkins for the defendant. -. Mr Guinness addressed the jury, and , stated the leading features of the case. Alexander Montgomery ; 1 am a contractor, and the owner of a tramway cbhstrncted by myself between the Stillwater and the Arnold. I had .permission from the Commissioner of Native Reserves to make the tramwayy which is 62 chains in length, and through the Native '<■ Rese'rVei ' The protection which I had from> ? Mr; » r •■■ Mackay J have lost. Mr Cooper, laid the line. '.On the ;sth June, 1872, T was .' on the tramway at agate I had erected. The detetidant ; came ' aloii£ the'line,'in/company with Mr Moss. • They were on f [ '• horseback. Mr Moss refused to pay, and I'refused, to allow him to pass. ABhton. , came up with, a heavy whip. Ashton, forced tiis way past me. I did; not see Mr Ashton on his, return, but I did on several occasions afterwards. (This wit-. : ness gave his evidence in such muttering,,., tones as to preclude the possibility of .re-THi , ;i porting a tithe of what he was supposed.; .7 to have said). The witness was cross-examined at con- -■.'•? siderable length by Mr Button. . • A large amount of evidence was taken, and the case lasted throughout the whole day. At six o'clock the Court adjourned j until 10 a.m. on Friday. i . '