SUPREME COURT.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume 14, Issue 1152, 13 May 1870, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

TtTESDIY, MIV Id. > .[fiefore : His donor Justice Johnston'.] The Court was opened this morning for ./the trial of criminal and civil eases. The; following gentlemen were empannelled to serve, on the Grand Jury : — Messrs. Robjohns, Edward Pulford, G. E. &. 'Richardson, W. Eoutledge, James Wood| j. A. Smith, Edmund Sutton, F. JSutton, J. Tori-, H. Troutbeck, J. H. Ydntier; John Wilkinson, C: J. Wisliarfc, J. Stuart, W» Jamieson, J. M. Wood, S. Begg, A. Kennedy, D. Balharry, Joseph Rhodes, and H. S. Tiffen (foreman).. Mr. Wilson applied to have , Hampton, charged, in conjunction with Floyd, with Horse stealing, admitted as Queen's evidence. His Honor considered that this was a proper course to pursue, and ordered accordingly. . His Honor, in addressing the Grand Jury, said that he was not aware of any topic which required special notice from him. He could not yet congratulate them j upon the prosperity of the country, but ! thought there was now reasonable hope of peace and prosperity. The great duty of providing for the future falls upon the present generation. At home, amongst the most important questions are, what shall' be done with the criminal classes, and the best means to promote education; so should it be here. The calendar is about a usual one. First, ;I tkera ia one charge of arson. The prisoner, who appears to have been in a state of mind and body produced by indulgence in. liquors, is charged with setting fire to aMadriwhare. The place, though only a thatched whare, must be considered a dwelling-house. It was: a place used by fellow subjects for that purpose. Next, there is a case of indecent assault, which had been better settled elsewhere. The assault was not successful, although it was alleged thatj after using obscene language* the., accused kissed complainanti This in itself is not an indecent assault, 'it is only a common^ assault. Even if the woman's story is to be believed, she seems to be one who could give and take j she made complaint, not to her husband, but to another man, in a manner which shows her not to be very particular as to the language she uses. You may probably think it proper to examine as to the trustworthiness of the woman. There are two men, Hampton and Floyd, charged with horse stealing. The chief evidence is the confession made by each ; the statement of one prisoner against the other, I have thought it advisable to allow Hampton to give evidence before you. This is a perfectly legitimate course, although, substantially, juries cannot convict on the uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice. Then, a native i 3 charged with breaking into and stealing from a dwelling-house. Next, is a case of larceny, described by the people hero as having been committed by "a constabulary." Are we in a part of the world where English is spoken? It appears that the prosecutor throws down his coat and waistcoat. The prisoner takes it away ; the -money is gone, and this man (prisoner) had an opportunity of taking it. The prosecutor is found asleep, with two bottles of brandy for a pillow, aud a sum of money is taken from him ; but when he has slept out his debauch he does not say : he has been deprived of any money. This is presumptive evidence. There is another case against a constable of the Armed Constabulary. He gave an ordeiupn the Paymaster of the force for a sum of money, which, prima facie, is good. Before time for payment, however, something takes place, and the man refuses to sign discharge. The Paymaster, in consequence, will not pay the order. It amounts to the same thing as if a person gave a cheque, and stopped payment of it at the Bank before presentation. Thif 3 leaves the debt still standiug. lam not aware that this offence comes under any penal statute ; if not, the fault lies with the person who gave credit. Things are done in. this country which would not be thought of in the old country. It appears most desirable that some means should be adopted to reduce the commission of such crimes to a minimum. Either the orders should hot hA recognised at all, or the Paymaster should be bound to pay them in theorder they may be presented.: The country has no doubt be^n put to a great expense, but I don't think the. prosecution will be able to get a conviction in this case. . Bills of Indictment. The foreman of the Grand. Jury here announced that no bill had been found in the Queen' against Tuppcr, and a true bill against Thomas Floyd for horse-stealing. Morse Stealing. Thomas Floyd and John Hampton were charged with this offence. Hampton was admitted as Queen's evidence. • The following, jury was sworn : — W. T. Knight, Thomas Hawkins, J. M'Leod, G. Merritt, H. Macpherson, P. Maroney, Leonard Roper, Thomas Miller, H. Eudinan, Daniel Laird", and Peter Pownell. Mr. Wilson, in stating the case to the jury, said he thought he should be able to produce conclusive evidence of the prisoners's guilt.; - : It had been found necessary to call Hampton as a witness — he being an accomplice. His evidence would not be sufficient to convict, but he should endeavour to .corroborate it by that of other witnesses. John Hampton, sworn, deposed : — I am' a, soldier, and belong to the 18 th Eegt. I khow the prisoner. I remember the 18th of last November. I saw prisoner on that day. About dark I went to the Spit to^sell a shirt. Coming home by the Immigration Barracks, I saw Floyd, who lived there, sitting on the door step. I asked him. to buy the shirt. He said ho had no money. He asked me to desert, saying that there wa3 plenty of work up country, and a mani could earn ss. or 6a. a day for doing next to nothing. He said he would take me. He had a horse. I told him two could not ride on one horse. He said he could soon settle that, but he must take me to the lower end of the town. We went to Lopdell's stable, and found it locked. He said d— n the fellows, I thought the door would be open. He got off his horse and told me to hold it. He got a stone and knocked off the staple. He. took out a grey mare, saddle, and two, bridles, and then put the saddle and one bridle on the horse, leaving the other on the" ground, saying it would give them the trouble to pick it up. In the confusion my smock was left behind. We went up and down the town about twice. We watered the horses opposite Sullivan's hotel. He said we will go up to Judy Plug's. We went to the door. I there saw a man named Hutton, one of the Armed. Constabulary. I called out to Floyd "by name/ asking him which way •we should go. He made no answer but galloped x>ff. I followed. .We went past Meanee, and crossed a river opposite a pa. After .crossing the. river, he got off the grey mare, and drove her back across the - river j' .saying she wo'uld'find her way home. [-} -''' ";•■ ' ' By -the Court : He never, in course of .conversation,;: said how he ..had got the hors6. ;;"Vpien I was arrested my suspicions were ardused, \ t was atrested'about :1& o'clock the following day, on the road to M f Xeniie's mill.

The prisoner asked this witness several questions, but elicited nothing contradictory to his evidence already given. By theCourb': Prisoner never, said anything wiiicli would lead me to believe he was going to steal a horse for me. James Lopdell deposed to losing the property, and to the stable being broken open, and, with Sergt. Carkeek, starting in search of the prisoners, overtaking, and capturing Hampton. Sergt. Carkeek, A.C., sworn, deposed : — I started in company with Lopdell after the prisdriei's. We first came , upon Hampton. I left him in Charge of Ldpdell,,and went in search of Floyd. I met him a little farther on the road, walking towards Napier. 1 made a prisoner of him, and brought him into Napier. Wyndham Hutton was then called, but did not appear. Sergt. Carkeek said that Hutton was at Taupo, and was going on to explain that their regulations did not bind them to attend any Court — His Honor : We don't care about your regulations here, they are binding on you ; but if they happen to interfere witu the law, the law would over-ride them. The prisoner, when called upon for his defence, said : — Is it likely I should steal a horse when I have got one of my own ? Had I known the horse was stolen, and been in my right senses, I should not have ridden it through the town. I was going back when arrested. His Honor, in summing up the evidence for the jury, said, the principal witness was more or less implicated as an accomplice. It was an inveterate practice not to convict on such, evidence unless corroborated. In this case there was very little corroboration. It was not even proved that these two people were together. The jury, after a short deliberation, returned a verdict of Not Guilty, and the prisoner was dischai'ged. His Honor remarked that had Hutton been present, the case would probably have terminated differently. Burglary. A native, named Te Teira a To Ao, pleaded guilty to having broken into a building within the curtilage of the dwel-ling-house of G. Eymer, at Meanee, and stolen certain property. His Honor called Mr. Harnliil, who interpreted the charge to the prisoner, how he had rendered the term curtilage, and explained that the building to come under that category must communicate with the dwelling-house, either by a door directly opening into it, or by a passage, both roofed and the sides covered in. This was explained to the prisoner, and-resulted in his only pleading guilty to a charge of larceny. The prisoner, on being asked what he had to say, said : — I was drunk, and did not know what I was doing. I have never stolen before. Inspector Scully stated he had previously apprehended the j>risoner afc Mohaka, on a charge of horse-stealing but from circumstances was not able to substantiate tho case. His Honor, in passing sentence, told the prisoner that he did not think it was his ,sr.st offence, but if his story were true, he ''must be careful when he came out of prison to keep out of the way of temptation. It was not simply taking, but breaking into. He should pass a light sentence ; but if ever he came before this Court, or any other, on another charge, this charge would be remembered, and ho be more severely dealt with. Sentenced to six months' imprisonment with hard labour. Theft. Patrick M'Lachlan was arraigned on a charge of stealing the sum of £23, from Edward Eabbit, both men of the Armed Constabulary. Mr. Wilson appeared for jßhe prosecution, and Mr. Stedman defended the prisoner. Edward Eabbit, being sworn, said : On the 22nd December last, I was in a cook house. I was drunk. The prisoner was there. We had .some words, and I took off my coat and waistcoat to fight him, and threw both on the table. There was £23 in my waistcoat pocket. The prisoner took my clothes out of tho cookiiouse. I was too drunk to follow. I got the clothes back, but not the money. I told him there was money in the clothes. Milton and Humphries were there. By Mr. Stedman : I got some of the money from Government and some from the men for work done. lam a tailor. It was all in £1 notes. By his Honor : I counted £24 in Horsfall's store, between 5 and G in the morning. I spent seven or eight " bob." Wo got two months pay. Francis Humphries, A.C. : I know the prisoner. I recollect the 22nd December, 1869. I know Eabbit. I saw him going into the cook-house. Saw him and prisoner going to fight. They were stripped. Prisoner took up Eabbit's tunic and waistcoat. Eabbit said tho clothes were his. Prisoner said, " Never heed." Eabbit said, as prisoner was going out, " There is my money in those clothes." M'Lachlan went towards the^ door. I then went out. I saw the prisoner the same day. He, Eabbit, and I wex-e in the guard-room. By Mr. Stedman : Eabbit was very drunk. His Honor : Is it a rule for the Constabulary to get drunk on pay-day. Witness : Yes. His Honor : This must be a stupid system, giving men lumps of money every now and then, with no means of spending it except in drink. By Air. Wilson : I don't know how much the prisoner was paid. Every man was paid two months pay. Corporal Hallet, in place of Sergeant Heene, was called, the latter not being present. Corporal Hallett : I know prisoner and Eabbit. On the 23rd December last, in consequence of information received, I went and found prisoner drunk in Capt. M'Donnell's tent. Sergeant Heene and I searched him. We found a£l note and a. roll containing six £1 notes. We took them from him, also two bottles brandy from under his head. The prisoner never told me what pay he had received. For October aud November pay there was £1 Os. lOd. due to prisoner. I know this, as I saw the books. I have the books here. Ido not keep them. [His Honor ruled that the books were inadmissable as evidence.] I saw prisoner on the morning of the 24th, looking about as if for something he had lost. He never reported the loss of the £7 to any one that I am aware of. Mr. Wilson summed up the evidence for the prosecution. He argued that the evidence was plain that liabbit was in possession of the mone}' ; tho money was traced to the possession of the prisoner. The clothes were brought back ; had he not abstracted the money, it would have been returned also. Mr. Stedman addressed the jury for the defence. He said that the case was simple ; M'Lachlan, Humphries, and Eabbit were all very drunk. Eabbit lost his money, but there was no evidence to show that the prisoner took it. On these j grounds he thought tho jury could not find him guilty. His Honor, in summing up, said it was a case entirely for the jury. There was

suspicion attaching to the prisoner, which might have been stronger had Sergeant Heene been there to give his evidence as to the amount of pay received by the prisoner; . The business was conducted in a most slipshod manner. The only tittle of evidence was that the prisoner took up the clothes. The prosecution does not show that he did not become legitimately possessed of the money found on him. It appeared to him that these cases had been got up in a manner to suit the convenience of the Armed Constabulary, they sending the men they could easiest sprire; The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty. . His Honor, addressing the prisoner, said the case had fallen' through on' account of the absence of Sergeant. Heene, It was a very suspicious case, and he had had a very narrow escape. Cases Adjourned. A second charge against Floyd, of stealing a saddle and bridle, was adjourned ; till the following day, for the production of further evidence; also, that of arson against Cochrane, the native witnesses not having put in an appearance, although in town the day previous. His Honor said he should be sorry for it to appear to the natives that our machinery was inadequate to attain the ends of justice. Wednesday, May 11. His Honor took his seat at 10 o'clock precisely. Mr. Wilson informed the Court that he had received a telegram stating that Huttou, the witness who was absent in Floyd's case, was in hospital. The Absent Witnesses. His Honor asked Mr. Wilson if the native witnesses against Cochrane, for arson, were in attendance. Mr. Wilson said they were not. His Honor : This is the most disgraceful case that has ever come under my noticei I believe if such a thing were to happen in the old country, and the polico shew themselves incompetent to act, a roar of indignation would be heard from one end of the country to the other. This is practically an admission that two halfsavage people can set all our machinery at defiance. This cannot bo accident ; they must have been bought off, otherwise curiosity, if nothing else, would have brought them here; If so> it is a most dangerous precedent. His Honor : Who committed the prisoner ? Mr. Wilson : Mr. Locke. His Honor said that Mr. Locke had apparently trusted to personal influence to bring them here, and gone away and left no one to do the work in his absence. The Grand Jury would meet again tomorrow morning. In tho meantime, he trusted that all those connected in auy way with the administration of justice would exert themselves to procure the attendance of tho witnesses, or show the reason of their absence. He did not know exactly who he could proceed against. Mr. Wilson seemed to be the proper person, but he was afraid he should not be able to do much with him, although apparently he was the only one on whom he had any hold. If the witnesses did not appear in the morning, he (his Honor) must consider what steps it would be necessary to take. He hoped that the state of affairs existing here would be published throughout the colony. Tho Grand Jury then retired. Larceny. The following wei'e then sworn in as a common jury : — Edward Mullen, William Milan, W. O. Brien, W. Elwiu, Thomas Ellingham, W. Arthur, Leonard Roper, Henry Howard, Benjamin Flanders, Thos. Miller, Patrick O'Connell, and Samuel Parsons. Thomas Floyd was indicted on a second charge against him of stealing a saddle and bridle. The evidence in this case was tho same as in the charge of horse stealing the day previous. His Honor, in summing up, took great pains to explain to the jury what constituted the difference between felony and trespass. He considered that if the prisoner took the horse for the purpose of getting up country, and did not take proper steps to return it, it amounted to' felony. It was not necessary that he intended to appropriate it altogether. The jury, after lengthened consideration, returned a verdict of Not Guilty. His Honor : No doubt the evident guilt of the principal witness helped j t ou to arrive at a verdict. Thursday, May 12. His Honor took his seat at 10 o'clock. The Grand Jury assembled again this morning. His Honor, in addressing them, said : — I understand from the Crown Solicitor and Prosecutor that ho has not been able to get the witnesses in the grave offence of arson. I shall not speculate upon whom the onus of this gross failure of justice should fall. It is a matter for great regret that in the number of years that the administration of justice has been carried on, the clue apportionment of the duties falling upon the officers entrusted with the carrying out of the system, should not have been made. This gross failure of justice is exceedingly to bo lamented. It is a sad thing to bo obliged to confess that our system, either through design or the impotence of officials, is unable. to attain tho ends of jus-> tice ; such appears to be the case. lam not sorry that you should have felt some little inconvenience, it may be the means of creating a public opinion on the matter. I have now the pleasure of discharging you ; I should have had more pleasure in doiug so if all the cases had come before you. One case besides the one in question, has broken down through the absence of a material witness. This terminated the criminal business of the sitting. CIVIL SITTINGS. Watt Brothers v. Buchanan ami Weston. Mr. Wilson appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Stedman for defendants. This was an action brought by plaintiffs for the recovery of the sum of £598 ss. <kl. This amount tho plaintiffs stated to be due on an open account. Beveral items Mere disputed . by the defendants, and a great deal of time was taken up in consequence. By a bill of sale dated the 16fch June, 18G9, the defendants admit owing at that time £617. The plaintiffs tvied to realise on the security, but were unable to do so, and the action was brought in consequence. Mr. Stedman applied to havo the case referred to arbitration. Mr. Wilson objected. His. Honor said he could not force it, but thought it would be the better course. Edmund Button and John Burton were called, the first to identify and prove the correctness of the accounts rendered, and the latter to prove the delivery of the goods charged for in those accounts. Mr. Watt was then sworn, and deposed : Our charge upon advances on account current are 10 per cent, on the account and 2| per cent, on the balance carried forward on the Ist of March in each year. Defendants have been dealing with us about three years. Advances were

made by payment of the orders of the defendants. In January, 1870, I saw Buchanan. He told mo the run was to bo sold to settle up partnership accounts. Mr. Sutton made out the approximate amount of account, £580. Mr. Buchanan made no objection afc the time. Mr. Buchanan : There is charge made for carriage in March; I know nothing about eight bales sent at that time. We sent 34 bales in December. I am not willing to pay the carriage. His Honor : You are willing to take credit for the wool, but not to pay for the carriage. Witness : Yes._ I will explain. Mr. Wilson : We shall have a speech, your Honor. Witness : That is more than you are able to make. His Honor.— Mr. Buchanan, if I hear any expression from' you" approaching that tone, I will send you to prison. Verdict by consent for £550, deducting from the amount claimed £48 ss. 4d. for items plaintifis were unable to prove. This was the only case for trial, and the Court then adjourned. Ifc will sit again in Bankruptcy, this day, at 10 o'clock.