THE TRIAL OF E. C. WILKINSON.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume II, Issue 112, 11 May 1881, Page 2

THE TRIAL OF E. C. WILKINSON.

(from a correspondent.)

New Plymouth, Monday Night.

The Grand Jury found five indictments for embezzlement, and the first case was heard on Saturday. Mr. R. C. Hughes appeared for the, Crown, and Mr. O. Samuels for the prisoner. The evidence showed that the prisoner, as Receiver of Land Revenue, had received, on behalf of the Government, large sums of money, as much as having been paid by him into the bank at Hawera for sales of land on immediate payment, whilst he had received between .£4OO and £500 for land disposed of on deferred payment. With a trifling exception, the prisoner appeared to have accounted for all the money received by him for land on immediate payment, but the money for land on deferred payment was not accounted for. Mr. Holdsworth, of the Treasury Department, and Mr. White. Bank Agent, showed that the deferred payment moneys had not been paid into the bank, and the persons who had made the payments produced the receipts of the money by the prisoner. Counsel on both sides addressed the jury, and the judge, in a very able address, summed up, and the jury retired to consider their verdict soon after 9 p.m. The jury camo into court after being in consultation some time, and again retired, his Honor informing them that, as the following day was Sunday, he would send for them just before midnight. About half-past eleven the jury came into court, when his Honor informed them that the following day being Sunday, he could not take their verdict, and as there were other indictments found, although they had not been in deliberation twelve hours, he would take the responsibility on himself of discharging them, and they were discharged without giving any verdict. Mr. Hughes applied for a new trial, on which his Honor made an order, but without naming a day. On Monday morning, at 10 a.m., the court proceeded with a second indictment against Wilkinson. The trial lasted all day, and both counsel addressed the jury before the evening adjournment. On the court resuming at 7.30 p.m., his Honor delivered a most telling address, and the jury retired to consider their verdict. After a short absence, the jury returned into court with a

verdict of " Guilty," but with a recommendation to mercy, the prisoner being a 3 r oung man. The judge, however, informed them that the prisoner appeared to be 25 years of age, and that he did not feel hardly justified in giving effect to the recommendation, as it was not the function of the court to exercise the prerogative of mercy ; but should any application be made to the authorities for a mitigation of the severity of the sentence, his Honor would not stand in the way of the case being favorably considered; and sentenced the prisoner to five years' penal servitude, upon the understanding that the prisoner would not be prosecuted upon other indictments.