SUPREME COURT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XX, Issue 1130, 9 September 1863, Page 4

SUPREME COURT.

SATURDAY, September 5, 1863. (Before His Honor Mr. Justice Gresson and a Common Jury.) BEGINA V. EICHABDS, FOB BUBGIABY. Mr. Duncan appeared for the Crown; Mr. Slater defended the prisoner. The prisoner pleaded Not Guilty. Mr. Duncan having opened the case, called J. Hurse, Sergeant of Police at Kaiapoi: On tho 28th of August, about half-past 10, he went to the house of Robert Harper. One of the sashes of a window of the house was burst in and was lying on the floor of the room. The sash had been fastened in its place by nails, and some were forced out and some bent. Apprehended the prisoner some time after in a paddock at <he back of thehouse. He told prisoner the charge and cautioned him. He received from Robert Harper the articles produced— one pistol, one knife, one brush; and on the Sunday following he received another pistol from Harper. Prisoner said, after leaving Harper's house he made use of a threat towards Robert Harper. Prisoner also said he had done wrong, and began to cry. Cross-examined: Prisoner was drunk, but knew what he was doing. When he received information of the burglary he was about 700 yards from the house. Whoever came for him must have crossed the river. It was about 10.10 at night when he was sent for as he looked at the clock in the station. The nails fastening the window were about three-inch nails. It must have taken some little force to have knocked it in. There was no wind that night to do it. Robert Harper said he was a labourer at Kaiapoi. On Friday, the 28th August last, he left his house about six o'clock in the morning; the back door was bolted and the front one was locked. The windows were fastened in with nails. . He returned about 9.30, he knew the time, as he heard it strike nine when he was at his brother's house. When he approached his house he saw a light inside, and on looking m, saw a man standing by a table in the front room, turning out papers from his desk. Just as he got to the verandah the light disappeared; on his speaking, the man ran out of the house by the back door, and tried to conceal himself under the rence. When he came up he saw it was the prisoner; he had a shingle hammer in his hand. Prisoner said, " Are you a friend." Witness said, " What do you mean in my house?" Prisoner replied, "I am lost; Ido not know where I am." Prisoner rave up the hammer, and went with him into the house. The first things he missed were two pistols, and he asked the prisoner for them, who deniod having them, as he had half-a-dozen friends with him who had taken them away. Witness said prisoner must find them. Prisoner threatened him with a saw in his hand; they had a scuffle, and fell. He secured prisoner till assistance came. They allowed prisoner to get up, and he then took a pistol from his pocket and appeared to be cocking it. Another scuffle took place, during which he dropped the pistol, and his (witness'} brother picked it up. Upon asking him for the other pistol, prisoner gave up the knife and brush produced, and upon getting up wanted to fight. Witness ultimately gave prisonor into custody. Cross-examined by Mr. Slater; The desk was not locked. He could not say if there were any valuables in it. The prisoner was not so drunk but that he knew what he was doing.

James Harper, brother of last witness: He resides at Kaiapoi, a short distance from his brother's house. About 10 o'clock on the night of tho 28th August ha heard a cooey, and he ran to see what was the matter. He found his brother sitting upon the prisoner, and he said the prisoner had been in his house and taken a pair of pistols. He said he would go for the policeman. Prisoner said he would give up everything if his brother would let him get up. One of the pistols m court he picked up where the struggle took place. At this stage of the proceedings His Honor the Judge said the case was a very clear one, as the prisoner was detected in the very act, and the evidence was so strong as to tho time the burglary was committed that any effort of the counsel in that direction would be of little avail.

TKe jury, without leaving the box, returned a verdict of guilty. His Honor, in passing sentence, said, the prisoner had been convicted on the clearest evidence of a crime he was happy to say was somewhat rare in the province. He was

resolved to pass such a sentence as would mark his determination to put down such crimes as that of which the prisoner had been found guilty. The sentence of the Court was that he be imprisoned and kept to hard labor for the term of two years. REGINA V. FIIEW, FOE FELONY. Mr. Duncan for the Crown, Mr. Harston for the prisoner. Sergeant-Major Pender said: On the 4th of July, accompanied by Mr. Wood, he went to the house of the prisoner with a search-warrant. He told prisoner he came to search for certain articles mentioned in the searchwarrant, and he asked the prisoner if he had them. Prisoner said he had no such articles in the house. Witness found in a box half a gross of small ovals, 28 large ovals, 12 brass octagons, 2 brass pan pieces, 29 brass OG pattern buckles, a quantity of plated staples and nails, fine cord and prepared silk lashes, some needles and awl blades, 10 collar needles, some pieces of collar check, 6 awl hafts, 6 punches, 2 strips English bridle leather, 3 balls of 1 ball whipcord, some thread, 5 parcels of nails, 4 gross of pocket buckles, 1 piece of brace webbing, 1 small parcel leather, 6 bridles, 2 breechings; and stuck in the wall of the house was an edge-tool. Several of these articles were identified by Mr. Wood, in the presence of the prisoner. He arrested the prisoner. He produced the articles he found in the box.

Cross-examined: The prisoner said he had no such articles in the house. Prosecutor identified the edge-tool particularly; there was also a needle which he identified, as it was marked by his son having burnt it in the fire. Several of the papers in which the goods were wrapped were marked and written upon by the prosecutor, who identified them. When the first piece of paper was found, prisoner said he had brought it from Mr. Woods' shop to stuff the holes in the roof. The whole of the articles in the box he said he brought from Belfast. As to the harness, he said ho had got the leather from the tan yard, and mentioned that there was a man who knew he had got it. Prisoner also said he had some of the bridle leather from Manning. He had kept a saddler's shop in Ireland. James Wood, saddler, Christchurch: Prisoner,was in his employ from about November, 1862, to July last. During the time prisoner was in his service he missed several articles. In July he went with Sergeant Pender to prisoner's residence. The thread produced was a particular kind, and was similar to some he purchased in Christchurcliy and he had never seen any like it during an experience of thirty years. The tool produced he could positively swear was his property, it had a split in the handle. The needle produced he also identified as his property. The whipcord produced he rolled himself upon a piece of Port Philip leather. The bridle leather, also the wuikers that were found in the prisoner's bedroom, were his» property, but they had been evidently made up since tftey were taken," He identified a portion of the winker by'the pattern, as he had cut them out himself. The punch produced he had had for twenty years. All the Port Philip leather used in the articles of harness produced was his property. A fortnight before the search he had given the policc information of his loss. He never gave the prisoner work; to do at home, nor had the prisoner ever offered him goods for sale.

Cross-examined: Had been a saddler thirty years'. Believed there were tools in .the shop belonging to the men. Could not say whether prisoner brought any when he came to work. When men have no tools they use those in the shop. He believed Mr. Angus imports Port Philip leather, and he has sold some to Mr. Buxton. Don't recollect asking prisoner to make horse-collars at his own house. Never remembered buying harness made up at home by journeymen saddlers. He had asked some journeymen to work at home, but not the prisoner. Eobert Haswell Wood, son of last witness: His brother James had gone to Geelong. Before!, he left, he saw him put the eye end of several a potatoe, and having made their points red hot, he bent them. Those produced were similar to those described. John Angus, saddler, Christchurch, knew the prisoner. The last Saturday in May the prisoner and his brother came to him to ask for employment ; at the same time prisoner asked if he would buy some harness, consisting of bridles, breechings, and other things, which he (prisoner) had made at home. Witness agreed to buy them if ho would send a list of the articles and the prices wanted, but he did not do so. On witness suggesting that Mr. Wood would sell for him, he said although he got the materials from Mr. Wood he was that sort of man that he woulrt not give the full price for them. Prisoner had purchased some brace webbing from him, but that produced was not the same. The pieces of whip-cord produced he believed he sold to Mr. Wood's son on his father's account. He believed that the articles produced are in use in the trade generally in New Zealand and elsewhere. The whip-cord sold to Mr. Wood's son did not differ from that ordinarily used by the trade in England, but. was not common fo New Zealand. He never saw any of the same kind of thread as that produced in a saddler's shop in his life. This closed the case for the Crown.

William Frew, the prisoner's brother, was called, and stated, in answer to Mr. Harston, that his brother was a

! saddler near Belfast. When he left Belfast there was an auction of his stock-in-trade, with the exception of some | harness mountings, plates, buckles, &e., which he brought to Canterbury with him; he helped to pack the things in question, which were put in a box. The paper produced was an account for Borne leather purchased by his brother from the tanners on the Lincoln road, Christchurch. His brother had some leather from Mr. Manning at Kaiapoi. The latter gave him a case of leather cuttings. Some of the leather was like that now produced, but it was more soiled. Had seen his brother use a needle similar to the one now produced. He put a quilting needle into the flame of a candle in order to bend it. The edge-tool produced was like the one which his brother brought from Ireland, and when he went to work with Mr. Wood he took some of his tools with him. In Ireland he had seen thread almost exactly similar to that produced. His brother brought some whip-cord with him, and he bought some exactly similar to it at a Bhop in Christchurch. The colored whip-lashes he had seen at Mr. Angus's establishment. Had also seen winkers similar to those now in court both in Ireland and New Zealand, but none of precisely the same pattern. His brother had cut out many such since he had been in Canterbury. They were made out of the leather purchased in the Lincoln road and out of the leather which was given to hhn by Mr. Manning. By Mr. Duncan: The things were packed in the box in which they were found in his brother's house. [Thia witness was severely cross-examined by the Crpwn Prosecutor. He persisted in his statement that the greater part of the goods produced in court were brought by the prisoner from Ireland.] John Manning was then sworn and stated: He was a saddler, at Kaiapoi. Had known the prisoner for about 11 or 15 months. Before he went to Kaiapoi he gave him some odd pieces of mixed leather, of a rough description. The winkers produced are made of colonial leather. The pieces he gave him were pieces of colonial leather. By Mr. Duncan: He gave him the leather when he left Christchurch for Kaiapoi, about 12 months ago. He could not say if the outsides of these winkers were made of colonial leather or not. He believed that the insides were. By Mr. Harston: He could detect no difference between the leather of which the three sets of winkers were made.

George Newell being sworn stated: He was a saddler, residing at Christchurch. He formerly worked with Mr. Woods. Prisoner formerly worked tnere also. He saw him take a small piece of brown paper from Mr. Woods' shop. He took it for the purpose of stopping a hole in his house. John Cockbum stated: He knew the prisoner by sight. I know Mr. Eskett, tho tanner, slightly. He had seen Erisoner in the tan-yard. He believed that he was giving im an order for leather. He did not recollect seeing prisoner pay Mr. Eskett any money. He knew that the prisoner got leather from Mr. Eskett. (This case was prolonged to a great length, in consequence of an assertion made by the witness, William Frew, to the effeot that he had purchased some whip-cord at a bookseller's shop in Casnel-streot, or the neighborhood. Messrs. Hughes, M'Hutcheson, and Calvert, who keep stores in that street, were called, and in reply to the Judge, positively denied that they had ever sold him any such article. Mr. Bonnington's assistant, and Mr. Younghusband were also interrogated, and gave an equally distinct denial to the statement.) Mr. Duncan addressed the jury for the Crown. It was evident that the prisoner's brother had been guilty of the most wilful and corrupt perjury. It was lamentable to see so much depravity in one so young. The lad was actuated, no doubt, by a wish to savg his brother, but he had, to attain this object, deliberately sworn to that which was plainly untrue. He (Mr. D.) should call upon the jury to banish his evidence from their minds, as it was perfectly valueless. [Mr. Duncan here drew the attention of the jury to tho evidence which had been laid before them as it bore more or less directly upon the cast?.] He thought that thoy could, as reasonable men, amve at no othor conclusion than that the prisoner was guilty of the crime which had been laid to his charge. The learned Judge summed up the evidence, reading over and commenting upon such portions of it as he deemed of consequence or which required elucidation. The jury, after retiring for about ten minutes, re-entered the Court with a verdict of " Guilty." The Judge observed that he fully concurred in the verdict. It was painful to see him In such a position, and still more painful to see that he had attempted to save himself by inducing his brother to utter such falsehoods as he had evidently done ,* for it was impossible that the youth could have pursued the course he had done without the sanction of the prisoner. The sentence would be imprisonment for twelve months with hard labor in the gaol at Lyttelton, to be computed from the Ist September, 1863. His Honor added that he had seriously considered the propriety of proceeding against the witness William

Frew, for peijuiy. He would, however, not pursue this course on the present occasion. MONDAY, September 7. /Before his Honor Mr. Justice Gresson, and a common Jury, of whom Thomas Kent was foreman.) REGINA V. GEORGE LUMLEY. —MUBDER. Jlr. Duncan prosecuted on behalf of the Crown, and jlr. Moorliouse, barrister, with Mr. Slater, defended the prisoner pleaded not guilty. The Crown Prosecutor intimated his intention of taking the (rial on the indictment in preference to the coroner's warrant; were he to proceed on the latter, the time of the court might be wasted in proving that the coroner's inquisition had been properly taken. The Court consented to this arrangement, with the understfmding that the finding of the jury on the indictment should be accepted as a finding upon the coroner's com-

mitment. Mr. Duncan then opened the case as follows May it please your Honor ana gentlemen of the jury, the charge you have heard preferred against the prisoner is the highest and most heinous known to the criminal law. It behoves you to pay particular attention to the evidence, so that you may be satisfied in your minds that it sustains the charge against the prisoner at the bar. I will ask your attention to the nature of the crime of murder as described in our law books. Murder is laid down, to be the taking away the life of another unlawfully, and in all cases of homicide the law assumes malice to exist until the contrary is shown. It will be my duty to show that the deceased, Cornelius O'Connor, came to his death by the unlawful act of the prisoner, and it will dovolve upon the prisoner, by his counsel, to prove to you clearly that no malice existed in the mind of the prisoner at the time of the commission of the crime. Now, gentlemen, the law recognises two kinds of malice, express and implied. Express malice is shewn by a party lying in wait to commit a murderous act, and implied malice is where, on a sudden struggle, arising from a quarrel, a deadly blow is struck, causing death. The learned counsel then briefly stated the facts of the case against the prisoner. On the 10th July last, the prisoner was at Mason's Hotel, at the Washdyke, Timaru. There were also there at the same time, the deceased, Cornelius O'Connor, a lad named Whittaker, a man named MacMahon, and the landlord of the house. At night, betwixt 10 and 11 o'clock, the parties retired to bed, the prisoner being placed in a room adjoining one occupied by Whittaker, and O'Connor taking the next apartment. There was no angry altercation between the accused and the deceased previous to retiring to their several bedrooms ; but soon afterwards Whittaker heard the prisoner approach deceased's bedroom, and some words passed between the two men as to £75. Deceased told Lumley to go to his own room, and the latter replied he could not get there, upon which deceased said he would shew him, and then took lumley by the shoulder, and tried to put him out. This was heard not only by Whittaker, but also by MacMahon. At that moment deceased was heard to cry out " he has a knife," and Whittaker saw Lumley take O'Connor by the shoulder and stab him in the belly. Two other stabs were also inflicted, and it would be shewn by evidence that not only the first stab in the abdomen, but one of tho other two, was sufficient to cause death, both being, mortal wounds, that in the abdomen especially so. MacMahon saw the knife in prisoner's hand,when close to the deceased's belly; and his evidence, together with that of the lad Whittaker, would fully convince Hie jury that the stabs from which O'Connor died had been inflicted by the hand of the prisoner. Such, in brief, was the case for the Crown; and it would be obvious that a murder had been committed by ; the unless it were shewn that he had received such an amount of provocation as to warrant the belief that when the blows were struck his passions were so roused as to render him incapable of distinguishing their { deadly character. Should the defendant's counsel fail to show that amount of provocation, and if it were not established to the satisfe&ion of the jury that the prisoner, when he stabbed O'Connor, was incapable of perceiving the mortal nature of the assault, or that he was actuated by revengeful feelings towards the deceased, then, however painful, it might be, the juiy in the discharge of their duty, were bound to find the prisoner guilty of the awful crime of murder. He would not detain them longer, but proceed to call evidence. Henry Pridham Blanchard, being sworn said: lama surveyor. I produce a plan of the accommodation-house of Mr. Mason, at Timaru. Wm. Horton Bevel, being sworn said: I am Inspector of Police, at Timaru. On the 11th of July I received from Mr. Magon a knife, sealed it up in paper, which I now produce. About a fortnight after, I also received a parcel of clothes, consisting of three shirts and a pair of drawers, which I produce. • """ , Cross-examined: On the 11th July, from information I received, I called upon Dr. Butler. From what I heard from him I went to the Washdyke. On the way I called upon the Eesident Magistrate of Timaru, Mr.Woollcombe, and we both proceeded to the Washdyke, to Mason's accommodation-house. Mr. Woollcombe, in my presence, took the statement, on oath, of the deceased, Cornelius O'Connor. The declaration remained in my custody until produced in the Resident Magistrate's Court. I was present the whole of the time the declaration was taken. The i deceased said he was dying. A discussion took place as to whether the dying declaration should be produced, and it , appeared that the counsel for the Crown did not think proper to put in the declaration, and the counsel for the prisoner declined to call for it, as by doing so he would have given the Crown Prosecutor the right of reply. George W. Mason, hotel-keeper at the Washdyke: On the 11th of July last the prisoner came to my house between 3 and 4 o'clock in the afternoon, about 6 o clock a man named MacMahon, and shortly after the deceased came in. The lad Whittaker is my servant. The three men sat in the kitchen the whole of the evening. O'Connor and MacMahon remained in my house that night. The prisoner did not remain all night. I shewed the three men to their bedrooms. MacMahon went to bedhrst in a room marked No. 1 on the plan produced. Whittaker went to bed before any of the strangers, and he slept in room No. 2. I shewed O'Connor to a bed made up on a sofa in the sitting-room. I shewed the prisoner to his room marked No. 3, and closed the door after me. I lett a light with him. I then considered all were gone to bed, and the house was quiet. I saw the deceased in the sola bed; the clothes were over him but the light was burning, and I took the light away. I shut the door of the room in which deceased was sleeping. I partially undressed myself in my bedroom (No. 4) when I loud rap at the back door of the kitchen, which I bolted previous to retiring. I heard a loud cry « For Gods sake landlord, turn out, here's a man stabbed. I unmediately pulled on my trousers and ran to the'back door ox the kitchen. When I got there I saw the man MacMahon. I went to MacMahon's room and found the deceased lying upon the bed. I examined him and saw his bowels protruding through a wound in the abdomen, as much, as would fill a small hand basin, and blood was flowing from the wound. I then sent for Dr. Butler. I and examined the deceased further, imd found two other wounds upon his person; one just below the false nb on the left side, the other wound was between the third and fourth ribs on the same side. The drawers and flannel shirt produced were upon the prisoner. O Connor never rose from the bed, and died on the following Sunday, about 9 o'clock, 34 hours after I first saw him. I.took P oß **!™ l of the clothes of the deceased, and gave to Mr. Eevel. On the Saturday I received the knife now pro duced from MacMahon. I sealed it up m his presence as he was going away, and handed it to Mr. Bevel. About half an hour had elapsed after the strangers went to bed when I heard the rap at the kitchen door. Cross-examined by Mr. Moorhouse: !fiie bar had not been closed when I shewed the strangers to bed. There is a trap door between the bar and the sitting-room. It was ?l3 before the men went to bed. I did not serve grog in the sitting-room. I gave the prisoner a nobblerinthe kitchen. I will not swear the I found some cuts upontiie shirts ® olT^ 0 and wounds upon the body of deceased. On second shirts there are two cuts, an left side. I dis- ■ skin has two cuts near each other on the left Bid covered the holes in the garment* sooner I off the deceased. I discovered the cut in the the first time to-day in court. I the how before, but not so minutely. The clothes were in 23ft o—- «■— delivered their presentment as follows s— Court fas Um and will m = gliy 1 publicipiaiwgd asenoiw trftfic in the neighcourt etf 'J c fXlhmfiSthSne exclude the sounds in the street, wholly of important trials.. The absent*lof all[proper dation for the Grand Jury, the call of the subjects those who are mi inconvenience Court, to an amount of discomiort tem wholly uncalled for, in the ?^ th £^ d wf b Sor some which the public funds of the P ro ™ d Jury) that proper years past. It also a PP ea ™j® 7 he conduct of the ordinoffices are imperatively needed for the of the

heard in the Judge's chambers, but which ought to be heard in open court; and this applies to the large amount of business which will come under the cognizance of the Couit under the laws of bankruptcy. "The Qrand Jury have not inspected the gaol, because its state is well known to them personally; but they present that they learn, with great regret, that another j ear has elagpsed without any steps having been taken for building a proper gaol, notwithstanding that funds have been votedby the Provincial Council for that purpose. The lunatics are about to be removed to an asylum, and some few of the prisoners have been removed to temporary gaols in Christchurch; but notwithstanding this relief, the state of the gaol at the present rate of increase in the number of prisoners, which is stated by the gaoler to be on an average, four a month, will very shortly be worse than before. " The Grand Juiy have inspected the lunatic asylum, and regret to state that it is wanting in light, ventilation, and cheerfulness; the three requisites most necessary in such a building. Theroofiscovereawith iron, and the building cannot fail to be hot and uncomfortable in the highest degree. The Grand Jury have heard that the building is only intended to be a temporary one, and it is not within their province to inquire whether the expenditure of so large a sum as they understand this building to have cost, was necessary for a temporary purpose; butthey think that amueh more cheerful and suitable building might have been erected for a less outlay, and which might have been designed to form part of a permanent building." His Honor the Judge said : I concur with the remarks as to the alteration of the Court House. There is considerable detriment accruing to the business of the court from the anomalous position in which we are placed from Vant of proper accommodation, not only in the case with reference to the trial of prisoners, but there was much business which it wouldbe preferable todo in open court, which is now compelled to he done in chambers, and to make the proper arrangements would entail a great expense in moving the necessary fittings from the Town Hall. In the room occupied as chambers there is no proper place for the records, or for the papers of the clerks, and not even a sufficient supply of air for them, and the noises around the chambers are so great as seriously to interrupt the business. I think the time has now arrived, when the exigencies of the case demands that a Court House should be erected exclusively for the business of the court, and I will make a representation to the Government upon the subject.] Thomas Henry MacMahon: I am a labourer. About five o'clock on the 10th July I wast at Mason's accommodation house. The prisoner was there, and a man named O'Connor. I saw a boy named Whittaker in the house. I. remained all night. Mr. Mason shewed me to bed about half-past ten o'clock, in a room off the sittingroom. Whittaker slept in the next room. After Mason j left' me, I went into Whittaker's room, with which mine communicated. I saw Whittaker in bed, and whilst I was talking to him I heard persons conversing in the room adjoining. I left the bed-room and went into the sittingroom, and saw the prisoner sitting upon the table, which was on the side nearest his own bea-room. O'Connor was lying upon his own sofa bed. Prisoner mentioned something about £76, and I saw him look over his shoulder towards O'Connor whilst he said so. There was a light upon the table towards the end nearest the sofa. Prisoner and the deceased had been talking together, but I did not take notice what they said. I heard O'Connor speak to the prisoner, hut I could not tell what he said. I saw O'Connor rise from his bed and advance round the tables towards the prisoner. Before he reached the prisoner I heard O'Connor say that prisoner was a b—y rogue, or words to that effect. Prisoner got off the table and advanced a few yards towards O'Connor. This took place before the words were used by O'Connor. Prisoner stood at the end of the table, and O'Connor came up and struck him with his hand or fist on one of his cheeks. It was not a severe blow. It was not very slight or very heavy as far as I can say. Prisoner did not stagger from it. O'Conner made a motion to strike again, but I cannot swear if he struck him or not. I saw him give a shove to the prisoner and tell him to go to his bed. I saw O'Connor get m to bed,and I then went to myown room, leaving the prisoner standing near the door. When I got into my room and had taken off my coat, I heard a loud noise in the sitting-room. I believe I heard the cry of murder. On hearing a second cry I sprang out of my room, and as I went along the passage I drew my 6heath knife and went towards the back door, where the noise appeared to be. When I got to the back door I heard a voice calling out murder again. ' I saw two men outside, two or three yards from the back door, standing front to front. At the first time I saw the men I have not the least doubt one was the prisoner, but I could not say who the other was at that time, beyond the fact that he had a white dress on. Prisoner seemed to have his left hand oyer the other man s right shoulder, and hia- right hand was hanging down by his side. I saw his right hand move as if he was jerking it behind him. I stamped my foot and said, " Oh, what's up here P" • Prisoner let the man go and looked towards me. I held the point of my knife towards him, and said " Now then, your knife or your life." I said that because I suspected he had a knife. The other man then passed quickly by my right into the sitting-room. I knew it to be O'Connor, as I recognized his voice when he said, on passing me, "I'm stabbed." The prisoner could have heard the words. The prisoner gave me his knife, and said spare my life." Immediately after giving up the knife, the prisoner picked up a tin dish that was close by and struck me on the side of the head, and he then ran away towards the road. I went into the sitting-room and passed through it to my own bed-room, ana in going returned my knife into its sheath. When Igot to my room I found O'Connor lying on my bed. He took up his shirt and I saw a stab under his left breast, and I also saw his bowels lying out upon his belly. On seeing these wounds I looked at the knife the prisoner gave me, and found it was covered with fresh blood. I closed the knife and went and rapped at the door communicating with the kitchen, and called to Mason to come out as there was a stabbed. Mason came out and I shewed him where O'Connor was lying. When O'Connor got out of his bed he seemed a little disturbed. I mean by disturbed that he was excited, and I judged this from the language he used. The prisoner never spoke during the tune, and did not appear to be angry. From the time of my going to bed to the time I heard the cry of murder, only two or th*ee minutes elapsed. The knife produced is the one I took from the prisoner, and the one I delivered to Mr. Mason. , Cross-examined Prisoner was not angry when O Connor struck him; he never moved. I did not see prisoner again till after I heard the cry of murder. I did not take notice whether Whittaker was in the room or not at this time. After O'Connor struck the prisoner I tola them to go to bed and not to make a noise. Prisoner spoke pretty loud when he mentioned the £75. I never expressed an opinion as to the blow serving prisoner right. I took a glass or two of liquor. I treated the prisoner that night, hut not more than anyoneolse, as five of the company bungled down for glasses. I believe I had fave glasses in the course of the evening. I had my grog in the kitchen. It was brought from the bar. Saw prisoner produce a knife to cut tobacco. I will not swear it was not Iving on the table afterwards. I cannot say what he did with it. If I had a blow upon the face similar to the one O'Connor gave the prisoner, I should not have been very anew. It might have heen three minutes after prisoner was pushed hy O'Connor and told to go to bed that I heard the cry of murder. I treated the prisoner, as he claimed acquaintance with me, saying he had seen me at the Waimate. I knew perfectly well what I was domg OII Bv the^Jury: I made use of the expression "Your knife or your life" because I suspected weapons to be in hand; but was not sure what. Prisoner and deceased were not in liquor; they were steady. , , . . Walter Whittaker being sworn stated: In July last he was servant to Mr. Mason, at the Washdyke. On Friday, the 10th. he was there, and the prisoner, aru ] MacMahon were there, also a man named Woodham. went to bed about 10 o'clockandsleptm room mttked Wo 2 on the plan now produced. Mr. Mason shewed MacMahon to Eed in a room next to mine. < OJJJ shewn to a bed in the sitting-room, and the prisoner was she™ to hb room. After this room. I then saw prisoner go out of his room to the s ting-room. There was alight there. Prisoner went in and sat upon the table. I heard the deceased, who was in bed, ask him why he had taken three cigars ? 0 Connor then called him a rogue and a thief, and asked him, why he wanted him to rob Mason. A few minutes after MacMahon left my room and went into the sitting-room. Prisoner said to him " He's struck me, and I m too old to return it." The deceased shortly after came to me, and asked me to tell prisoner to go to bed. This was m the prisoner s Wri * ? came out Ind said to him « Come George, are vSueofng to bed." He said " I'm going." 0 Connor also Llfpf him to go, and prisoner said " How can I get w2 d thSo b ot go?a?nE" Prisoner ran g£ ss£ ~r fi; f£L ELI at titehep 4» imd ■S3* SJS in thepSoner's hand. The knife produced I believe to

be the same. The knife onco belonged to me. I exchangfed it with Lumley for another about three days previous. The prisoner never said anything from the time he was caught by the collar till he stabbed O'Connor. The deceased had drawers and shirt on when he ran round the table. Those produced arc the same he wore. Cross-examined: I had not been in bed. I was sitting upon the bed undressing when MacMahon came in. I went into the sitting room when O'Connor asked Lumley to go to bod. I could not see everything that passejl in the sitting room from my room; but I could see prisoner sitting upon the corner of the table nearest the sofa. MacMahon was in his room. I never saw him move from that comer to any other part of the table; nor from the table at all. When I came out Lumley was standing inside MacMahon's bedroom door. Previous to this 1 heard Lumley say "he's struck me, and I'm too old to strike him back." I saw Lumley with, the knife in his hand just before he stabbed the deceased. I did not see it in his hand when he was dragged by the prisoner. The witness then described the manner in which the blow was given, by a thrust, drawing back his hand ■ immediately the stab was given. It was in the passage against the kitchen door that the deceased was standing when the stab was given. I was between the prisoner's room and the bar at the time. The candle remained upon the middle of the table in the sit-ting-room all the time. The sitting-room door was wide open when the stab was given. The kitchen door was shut. There was no light, in' the passage. I did not serve the company with any liquor. None of the three men Were the worse for liquor. I had but one glass of port wine during the day. The firewood is kept in the yard behind the house. There was an axe in the ystrd for splitting the wood, lying about six yards from the back door. Any one passing to the water-closet could easily see the axe. Never heard the prisoner threaten O'Connor, nor did O'Connor shake him when he was dragging him towards the bedroom. He could not have concealed the knife very well in his hand. O'Connor was never out of my sight till I saw the stab. O'Connor was the farthest from the sitting-room, and his face was towards me. The prisoner got hold of deceased, and they were scuffling for a moment before, the stab- Nothing was said by either during the scuffle, and they went out of the passage scuffling till they were out of my sight. The prisoner sent the knife very sharp when he made the stab.. The prisoner had no grog in the sitting-room. There was no glass upon the table. He-cxamincd by Mr. Duncan: There was no candle burning in the passage, but there was a reflection of light from the candle in the sitting-room. It was that light that enabled me to see the prisoner and deceased against the kitchen door at the time he was stabbed. I was standing in a direct line with the kitchen door between the prisoner's bedroom and the bar. Deceased never stopped when he ran round the table till he got to the door. O'Connor seemed vexed when he came into my room to ask me to get the prisoner to bed. The prisoner did not seem angry or excited. John Albert Young being sworn, stated: I keep an Accommodation-house at Arowhenua. On the 11th July last I saw the prisoner in my house about 7 o'clock in the morning, he said he had not intended to have come there but he had missed his track. He said he had been at Mason's on the previous night, and he had seen a man there who had struck him without provocation. He said to him " If you do that again you had better look out." The man struck him again, and he then ran a knife into him. During the day he left my house. I went to the Washdyke Creek that day, and from what I learned I went after the prisoner, and apprehended him at the Point Accommodation-house. This is about 8 miles from my house. I handed the prisoner over to Inspector Eevel. Cross-examined: The prisoner said he was sorry for stabbing the man, but it was no use saying anything, it was too late. He told me where the police would find him, and I found him at the place he mentioned. Edward Butler: I am a medical man residing at Timaru. I have been in practice about six years. On Friday night, the 13th of July last, I was sent for to the Washdyke Accommodation-house. I got there about 1 o'clock in the morning, or perhaps later. I saw a man. there named Cornelius O'Connor. He was in bed in\ MacMahon's room, which was situated in a corner oppo- ■ site the back door of the house. O'Connor had on a pair of drawers and flannel shirt. Those produced are the same. I examined him, and he seemed excited and frightened. I found a wound in the front of his belly about 3 inches below the navel, and 2 feet 7f inches of his bowels protruding. I found another wound on the left side about 1£ inch above the nipple. This wound was about 1 inch long, and the blood had congealed upon it.'. I endeavored to return the bowels with my fingers, as l; found the wound was large enough. I did not Bucceed,.in , returning thean because the deceased prevented me by pushing away my hand and saying he would not allow. me to meddle with him. The wounds might have been, inflicted by the knife produced. I did not at the iime perceive that the wound on the chest was serious, but thought the wound on the belly was very dangerous. I was with the deceased nearly three hours upon the first visit. I left, and returned the same day with Dr. Day. The deceased would not allow us to treat him, so we gave him chloroform, and we then returned the bowels. Iput two stiches in the wound and dressed it, and to keep all in its. place I passed a bandage round' his body, and in doing so I found another wound on the left side of his belly, and the bowel just protruding. I returned it and dressed the wound. We were with the deceased about two hours upon this occasion. The next day, just as we were starting to see him again, we received a message that O'Connor was dead. Since then Dr. Day has died. The wound upon the left side of the belly was dangerous to life. I made a post-mortem examination of the body of O'Connor the monday after his death. I first examined the wound on the belly near the navel: that wound had penetrated the peritoneum, and must have gone among J his bowels. The peritoneum was inflamed, but especially near the wound; none of the intestines were cut. There was no inflammation between the skin and the peritoneum, but there was a quantity of extravasated blood, the wound was sufficient to cause death. I next examined the wound to the left of the abdomen, and found the peritoneum punctured: in this instance there was the same inflammation andextravasatedbloodas in the other; this wound would have probably caused death: a small piece of the point of the lowest rib was cut and hanging loose, this would have have aggravated the danger of the wound. I next examined the wound in the chest, and as soon as I removed the skin from the chest, I found a piece of the upper edge of the third rib partly cut and broken off, and upon examining the lung I found a scratch half an inch long upon the surface. The wound was an inch and half deep, the knife or weapon used must have struck the rib and glanced off it into the lung. The large wound in the belly was about an inch and half deep, it had pierced the peritoneum, and the knife might have gone deeper without rupturing the intestines, the wound at its orifice was an inch and half long. I should judge that the wound was made by the knife produced from the edge and general form of it; the stab must have been made with a ripping or cutting motion. The large wound on the belly was the immediate cause of death. The other wounds were dangerous to life, and either might have proved fetal. Cross-examined: The splinter was loose from the bone of the rib, it was among the muscles, it was about half an inch in circumference an inch and half long and of anirregular shape. It was fromtheupper edge of the rib; the strength of the blow must have caused the piece of bone to splinter off, and the roundness of the knife-blade no doubt caused it to glance off. It would take less force with a heavier knife, the mere weight of a man's arm would not do it, a slight blow would simply cut into the bone and not fracture it. The lower Jpart of a rib is the thickest, the upper part comes to a sharp edge, the splinter had one flat side and it came to two sharp points. The introduction of a foreign body, such as sand or dust to the cavity of the abdomen would produce peritonitis. If there was tobacco upon the knife that would produce peritonitis. Re-examined: The bowels were quite free from any foreign particles when I returned them. By the Court: It would not produce peritonitis if the bowels were allowed to remain in contact with the drawers. This closed the case for the Crown. - Mr. Moorhouse, addressing the juiy for the defence, said: Gentlemen of the jury, when I undertook, with a friend, the defence of the unfortunate man at the bar I did so with a nervous anxiety and a full sense of the •heavy and, as I feel it, the awful responsibility that rests upon me. I have taken great pains to make myself master of all the details of the case previous to the trial; but after hearing the evidence brought forward by the Crown, I must confess that my anxiety for the fate of the prisoner is very considerably lessened. After hearing that evidence it would be extremely idle to say that thepnsoner had notkilled O'Connor; but I do say that that kilhngand wounding did not constitute murder. Murder means tho wilful killing with malice aforethought; and such malice, as you have heard from the Crown Prosecutor, is either express or implied. And express malice requires the strongest and most direct evidence to show that an evil animus existed in the mind of the pnsoner some time before the act. If there is any room for the entertainment of the slightest amount of suspicion upon that point, then you will not be justified in consigning the unfortunate man to his grave. With a degree ot readiness that fixed itself upon my attention, the witness MacMahon resp ded to an opportunity of fixing the pnsoner with a. previous acquaintance. After denying treating the prisoner with grog he pricked up and said pnsoner clamed acquaintance with him, as he hadseen him at theWaimate, and he then treated him. Why cotrid he not have remembered that at an earlier period of his evidence, as he had remembered other remarkable facts associated with it ? It is painful to urge anything against the veracity of a man upon such a senous inquiry; but there is a considerable amount of suspicion upon this witness evidence

also from the fact which we have upon his own confession that he had had five glasses of grog that evening and had been drinking tho day before; and you will understand that the term drinking means a debauch. And after this, and his admission that he had drunk five glasses of grog, he pretended to state facts with the greatest accuracy, which, if he saw it at all must have been under the influence of liquor. A serious mistake is made by the witness Mason, as to taking away the deceased's candle, and however that might appear to a' truthful observer, it might, if uncontradicted, have formed a connecting link in a chain of circumstances, resulting in the death of an innocent man, It is from one part of a man's evidence, that vou can draw conclusions, he would make similar mistakes in another. lam in the miserable position of an advocate for a stranger in the country, and I have no witnesses whom I can call upon as to character or otherwise. I might have availed myself of the dying declaration of the deceased, but for reasons perfectly admissible the Crown has thought proper to withold it, and as the Judge has not insisted upon its production, it would be highly indecdroiis for me to make any remarks, but I will say that I imagined the Crown might have voluntarily given the prisoner: the benefit of anything that might have been in hiß favor in the dying declaration. Before Igo further I will impress upon you that it is no part of your duty to give expression to popular opinion as to the unmanliness of using the knife, neither to echo the sentiments of the outer prize-ring, but to decide according to law, and without the slightest reference to the probabilities of the ulterior consequences of your verdict. This is my statement of the case. My client arrives at a public house, and there met the deceased, who became exceedingly abusive to him, calling him a thief and a rogue. Now, I put it to you, would such language be called complimentary ? Would it not be accepted as a frightful insult ? Undoubtedly it would; and if we address it to ourselves, we may imagine what effect it would have upon such a nervous individual as the prisoner at tho bar. Who can tell the agony of paroxysms of fear, combined with resentment, that agitated his mind, and there is no doubt that it did reside in his mind at the time, and under the frenzy, in the heat of resentment, when reason may be supposed to have been overpowered by terror, and having the knife upon his person, the prisoner committed the assault which ended in the death of O'Connor. There was more than one motive for this, there was a blow, a push, and a dragging by the neck. Doubtless if my learned friend had had the right of reply he would have made a great deal of the fact of my client running round the table, and insisted upon the determined cruelty shewn by the prisoner in this pursuit. My client did run after the deceased, but he was in terror of his life. Then, as to tho knife, the boy stated it was only produced just before the stab was inflicted, and you may remember how I labored to get this fact out of the boy. The prisoner followed the deceased because he was frightened out of his wits, and in terror of O'Connor's violence, and it was owing to a defect in his organization that he was unable to resist the attack upon him. Who can say what amount of terror was relatively existing in his. mind ? What amount of heat of temper was raised, which- would save him from a conviction for murder ? We have a right to assume that it was so, and that the provocation he had received was a great trial to him. He' had been struck, pushed, and grappled with in the passage, and not till he had submitted to all this, and not with malice, aforethought, but forsaken of reason, did he use the weapon, which may, or may not have caused death. The only real evidence as to the first time the knife was seen, was given by the boy Whittaker, and he proved that the prisoner had it in his hand when deceased ran away, and, he followed the deceased closely, to make his escape, as he entertained the fear that deceased was going out to get some weapon. Before the assault prisoner complained like a girl, that he was too old a man to return the blow given him by O'Connor, and when challenged by MacMachon, he said " Take the kniife, but spare my life." There is no doutbt he was in a frenzy of fear then and anticipated an assault being made upon him. There was a temporary suspension of reason. He goes out of the house, and finds his way to the Hurunui, and tells Young about it, whose evidence you have heard; (The learned counsel then cited the doctrine laid down by Chief Justice Tyndal in the case of the King v. Hayward, and the opinion of Lord Tenterden, as to what constituted the crime of murder. Ithas been held byalearnedJudgethatpullinga man'snose would be an offence if resented by death, owy amounting to manslaughter, but though I should not like to bo a party to initiate such an idea as this, that an English Judge had sanctioned crime on so slight a provocation, you must see the wide distinction between such a case of assault and the one before you. The deceased not only called him a rogue and a thief, but struck him; and these opprobious epithets were added to the assault committed upon him. Not more than three minutes elapsed, before had been allowed for his passion to cbolor his Semper tci subside, he did the injury—the bare contemplation of which, now makes him shudder—which caused 0 Connor's death* It is part of your duty to survey the prisoner in the \ctock, and examine his face apart from the sadly anxious look which pervades it, and say if there is anything calculated to repulse that greatest of physiognomists, even a little child; there is no sullen ferocious character about him; he is simply a nervous, timid njan. Physiognomically speaking, his organisation is physically susceptible of injury, morally of fear. Now, gentlemen, I must conclude this address, as I have expericftfced greatdifficulty in continuing from great nervous excitement. I ask you to believe what I do myself, that if the prisoner lives a century of lives he will not feel sufficiently contrite and regretful for the sacrifice of life he has made. "I feel great confidence in leaving the prisoner's fate in the hands of an TSngliah jury, and that the learned judge will give an impartial direction, and Jthat you will, clear of all fear or favor, return a righteous verdict.

The Judge, in summing up the evidence to the jury, said: I am quite sure, from the attention you have given to the case, that you adequately feel the position in which you are placed —the most awful position in which human beings can be placed—that of being the arbiters of the life or death of a fellow man. His counsel has, with great judgment and sound discretion, admitted to you that this trial must either result in a verdict of murder or manslaughter against his client. You must distinctly understand that the act committed is an unlawful one; and, admitting it was done without malice, you will have to acquit the prisoner of the aggravated charge of murder, and find him guilty of manslaughter. Even if you take the most favorable view of the case it must amount to manslaughter as the act was an unlawful one, and had resulted in the sacrifice of a human creature; now the point is, whether that act was done with malice or not, and upon that I will give you some explanations for your direction. Malice does not necessarily mean ill will against any one in particular, as when an injury is the result of a wicked and malignant mind against mankind in general: for instance, whore a man possesses a horse of a vicious character and rides him.' into ' a crowd and the horse kicks some one so as to cause death the man is guilty of murder, although the man may be ignorant who the person may be that was killed; but the law assumes such a man to be an enemy to his species generally. If you find that the prisoner had no inahce against the individual, still you may arrive at the conclusion, that the act is of such a ferocious nature as to lead to the supposition, that the prisoner is of such a malignant character as the one I have described. It is also necessary to pay particular attention to the nature of the weapon used, if it was calculated to produce death; but it was very difficult to define the nature of such weapons, and very nice distinctions have been drawn as to the fineness of the line between murder and manslaughter. The questions for you to consider are, first, whether the death of o ? Connor was the act of a man under the influende of bad and malignant feeelings, or second, whether the act was not the result of a man under passion or under a nervous fear from fright, as the counsel for the prosecution put it. It was an important part of the evidence that O'Connor was most active in the violence, and he certainly had Committed two assaults; on the other hand, was there time for the prisoner's blood to cool ? It- would appear from the evidence, that this was so; you will also remember, that when the witness, MacMahon, took the knife from the prisoner, he at the same time took up a dish and struck him. Now, it will be for you to say whether that act was the result of frenzy bordering on despair, or ot malignant feeling, I also must call your attention to the statement made by the witness, Whittaker, as to t e cigars; and whether it was possible that OConnors charging the prisoner with that fact was sufficient to instigate him to wish to put the deceased out of the way in some manner. It is my duty to point out to you these circumstances; but I am far from wishing to influence you in anyway. It would appear that after the two Assaults O'Connor became for the first time aware that the prisoner had a weapon in his hand; and this is a mos important part of the evidence. The prisoner then p - sued the deceased to the kitchen door, where he inflicted the wound that was the cause of 0 Connoi s death. It for you to consider whether the prisoners blood was ing from the blows he had received from 0 Connor, or whether he had time to cool. Apart from the general question, no mere words will justify a homicide; but words coupled with blows ma,y do so. You con havono doubt upon your minds but that one oftho wounds cause death. Then you will have to decide whether the prisoner was actuated by malignant and uncontrolled feehngs against his fellow men in general; or whether he entertSned malice against the deceased as an individual~if so you will find him guilty of murder; but, on the other hand, if you think that from any cause dunng the. two or three minutes that elapsed from the time he received the blow from O'Connor his blood was sp boihng that he had no time to cool; or if you have any doubt u P° n y°ur minds, then you are bound to acquit him ot murder and find h™ guilty of manslaughter.' The jury, after an absence of about half an hour, re-

turned with a verdict of not guilty of murder, but guilty of manslaughter. The prisoner was here asked by the judge whether he wished to say anything before sentence was passed, and making no reply, his Honor said: George Lumley, you have sent a fellow creature, with very slight provocation, suddenly into the presence of his Maker. The law, more merciful than you nave been, has given you the benefit of the doubts that have arisen in your case and has found you guilty of manslaughter only instead of the dreadful crime of murder, for which you would have been consigned to an untimely death. You must ever feel thankful that your life has not been forfeited to the outraged laws of your country. I trust and hope that you will live to repent of the crime you have committed, and that you will, while in prison, seriously reflect, and when your sentence is completed convince all people by your behaviour that you have repented in earnest. The sentence of the Court is that you be imprisoned with hard labor for a term of three years, commencing from the Ist September. TUESDAY—SEPT. 8. REGINA V. JOHN THOMPSON.—SHEEP STEALING. Mr. Harston appeared as counsel for the prisoner. On the 6th of June, four sheep, the property of James Jeffrey, of Kaiapoi, were feloniously taken by the prisoner. James Jeffrey, being sworn, said : I remember the 6th of June; it was a Saturday. I had bought 100 sheep from Joseph Anderson—either 100 or 101—on Friday, the sth. I took delivery at Saltwater Creek. They were wethers. I killed ten at the Creek. I went to Kaiapoi on the Friday evening, leaving the surviving sheep in Mr. Cameron's stockyard. I went back on Saturday morning, took the mutton away, and left Joseph Anderson to bring the remainder of the sheep down. On Saturday, about 2 p.m., I went along the North road to meet him. I met him at Harrison's bush with the sheep, about 2J- miles north of Kaiapoi, drove them to the Island, and put them into the paddock. I missed these four sheep on Monday when I counted the flock. I went to prisoner's house at Woodend, near Hinge's hotel. I asked prisoner if he had seen any strayed sheep. Prisoner said " Yes —three." I asked prisoner to show me them, and he sent his son to point them out. I returned to prisoner's house where I observed a sheep's pluck hanging up, and he said that is the pluck of the fourth sheep. The prisoner did not say anything of the fourth sheep when I was in the house before. This was the second time. I told him he had done wrong, and said he would have to pay for it. Prisoner said he. would not pay for it. T said it would be worse for him if he did not. I then went to Woodend and sent George Buckman with a horse and cart for the three sheep, but he returned without them. I did not afterwards return to the prisoner's house. When in the prisoner's house, before I knew he had killed the fourth sheep, I promised to pay him for finding the three sheep. I saw nothing but the pluck of the sheep. I then returned to the house and asked for the skin of the sheep. He pointed to the loft and said it was there.

Cross-examined bj Mr. Harston: I killed the 10 sheep at Saltwater Creek, because I wanted thom for market on Saturday. They came from Mr. Douglas's, 15 or 16 miles off. I received the information about prisoner on monday in Kaiapoi. I went to prisoner's house twice; the first time prisoner was lifting the floor of one room. Mrs. Thompson asked me to look at the carcase of the sheep which was hanging in the bed-room. I declined going. I was not shown the pluck the first time. Prisoner soon went with me to show me the sheep. Prisoner's house is 4or 5 yards from the road. Prisoner's wife said, they had meat in the house, and they did not want this sheep as they had killed it to save it from dying. The skin was hanging on a rafter over the door. I cannot say what land the prisoner lias, there is a small paddock close to the house.

By the Court: I did not examine the skin particularly. Edwin Silk: I remember Monday the Bth of June. I received one sheep skin. This is the skin produced. Caroline Hessey: Joseph Hessey is my husband, he is a bushman, works at Wooaend bush. I remember Saturday the 6th of June, I saw a sheep held by prisoner, he was leading it towards his own house, I thought it one of his own, as he had two of his own. I recollect the following sunday morning, I did not see prisoner, I saw his wife, I went to look at the sheep in a hen-house, it happened to be dying, it was panting very slowly. I saw the sheep hanging on monday, it was hanging against the back door. I did not see prisoner then, saw him later in the day, the prisoner's wife and son were'present, I saw the sheep's, pluck hanging, I saw the skin also hanging up across the rafter. I was not present when Mr. Jeffrey came. Henry Oram: I remember the 6th June. I was at Woodend that day. I met Mr. Joseph Anderson with a drove of •sheep. - I went on towards Woodend when I had passed him. I know the prisoner. I saw him on my return from Woodend the same day. ■ He was coming up his garden at the back of his house. He had a sheep between his legs. Ho was holding it, a female was by his side. I thought it was Thompson's wife and some children. He went to the back of the house with it. I saw him stand and look about. I was about three or four phninH off. The sheep did not seem lame or torn. I saw no dogs about. I could not tell which way the sheep could have come. The drove was about half-a-mile from the prisoner's house. Cross-examined: I don't know the size of garden: I saw no boy on horseback. (This concluded the case for the Crown.) , , . , v Mr. Harston : Gentlemen of the jury, in order to show that the prisoner is guilty of felony, you must be convinced there was a felonious intent. Mr. Harston then went over the evidence of all the different witnesses, showing that prisoner had done what he did openly, and with a view to preserve the sheep, and that Mr. Jeffrey even did not think it was felony, for he asked the prisoner for payment. Gentlemen, you must be satisfied that there was a bad motive before you can convict. Now it is evident that the prisoner did not conduct himself like a guilty man. There was not the slightest attempt at concealment, and news travelled. I think I can satisfy you that there was no felonious intention. James Thompson: lam son of Joseph Thompson. I was returning from Kaiapoi about sundown. I saw several other boys near Pankhurst's new house, they were running after a sheep. I went after it, and came upon another sheep laying down. I sent my little brother to my father to come and help me to take it home. The sheep was bad. It could not walk. Another sheep ran over to the head of our garden ,and two others were caught by us in Woodend bush. We took the three up and put them in the paddock among the tares. We put the sick sheep on the green, on Saturday we put it into the hen-house and thought it would be better and warmer. On sunday it did not get better and looked dying. On monday I was out in the morning, and when I returned at 10 a.m. the sheep was hanging up near the back door, the pluck in front and the wlrin over a joist. Father was lowering the kitchen floor for rats. On monday afternoon I recollect Mr. Jeffrey /■nming to the house, I was then with my father, my mo. ther and sister were knitting in the bed room, I was shovelling with my father. Mr. Jeffrey came up and asked my father if he had seen any sheep running about. My father said "yes, there were three in the paddock and there was one hanging up. He then said where is the skin, and father pointed it out. Mr. Jeffrey asked for the three sheep, and father sent me as he was sweating. On our return he told my father that those were his sheep, and said to my father " I suppose you are going to pay for the sheep." Father said "No, he thought it best to kill the sheep and save the carcase for the drover. Jeffrey said, " You've done wrong." My mother said "If he has done wrong, blame me for it." And my mother then said, the meat would go bad if we kept it, as we had meat in the house. We had not used any of the mutton. Jeflrey then went away, and returned with four more. Came in, pulled down the skin, and spread it outside on the ground, and said, " Aye, this will do, throw it on the horse, and rode away. On the first time of Jeffrey's coming, my mother said to him, " You had better salt the sheep we do not want it, we kept it for the owner." By the Court: The tethered sheep could be seen from the road. When my father came down, I told him I could not get it to walk. It was on Fuller's land, byagully a chain or two from the road. I said, " Father we had better take it home, as it could not walk." We did not tie it s lees before going into the hen-house. We let it lay down. Father asked the boys, whose sheep they were. The boys said they did not know. . Margaret Thomson, daughter of the prisoner: Recollected seeing four sheep in the paddock. One i ? vas , bad. Afterwards saw one hanging up dead in the nouse. Mr. Jeffrey called at the house and saw it. His Honor, in summing up, said the jury had to decide whether the prisoner stole the sheep or any of them; there is no question that he did take the sheep, but you have to determine whether he took them intending to appropriate them them to his own use. (His Honor quoted the law on the subject.) For instance, if I saw an article . drop out of a cart, lam clearly a thief if I keep it whilst there are means of finding the owner. If you beheve the evidence of Mr. Jeffrey, you will have great difficulty in acquitting the prisoner of felony. But if you believe the evidence of the children you will see he had no felonious intent. Verdict, "Not Guilty" The prisoner was acquitted with a caution. BBGINA V. MADDEN. —PEBJUEY. Charles Madden was brought up on a charge of perjury. It seems' that the prisoner agreed to.dnve some bullocks to Akaroa for Thomas Hughes, for the sum of £3, He afterwards summoned Hughes before the Court ■at Lyttelton for £13 balance alleged to be due on an agreement for £2 a head driving money. After hearing the evidence the jury gave a verdict of Guilty; ana tne prisoner was sentenced to one year's imprisonment. This closed the criminal cases.

PROVINCIAL COUNCIL.—TUESDAY, SEPT. 8. The House assembled at five o'clock. Present: The Speaker, Messrs. Westenra, Ollivier, Clark, Bowe, Haylock, Wilson, Stoddart, Simms, Beswick, Shand, Hawkes, Birch, Toswill, Wilkin, Horabrook, Buckley, Peacock, Moorhouse, Turnbull, and White. Mr. Hawkes moved for a return of sums paid during the last year as compensation for damage done to powder in Government magazine, and all outstanding claims; and, contingent on the reply, to move that his Hohor the Superintendent be respectfully requested to place a sufficient sum on the estimates to provide a safe and sufficient magazine. The reason he asked for that return was that when powder arrived in the harbor it was taken charge of by the Government, and they placed it in a hole in th» hill which was called a powder magazine. This place was very wet, from a spring trickling water therein, and tha powder was damaged. The Government had erected another magazine on the other side of the slaughter-hous* at Naval Point. There was no approach except by boats, and importers experienced great difficulty in getting their powder when required, and the site was open to the Bame objection as the other. The situation was very damp, and quite unfitted for the purpose. The PuoviNciiA.il Secretary said, there were some outstanding claims for powder which had been damaged and the return should be furnished. A new magaaine was being built as quickly as possible, The motion was agreed to. KANGITATA ACCOMMODATION HOUBB. Mr. Wilson moved for all correspondence relative to the installing of Bowen in the place of Word in this accommodation house; and he stated that both the parties with their wives and families now occupied the house, which was in a wretched state as regarded accommodation for travellers. The Provincial Secretary said, the matter was in the hands of the Provincial Solicitor, who wonld give his eavly attention to it. He also laid the correspondence asked for upon the table. , . CHRISTCHURCH CITY COUNCIL BILL. Mr. Ollivier in moving the second reading and committal of this Bill said, it was rendered necessary by tho removal of the ratepayers roll from the office of the clerk during the time it should havo been deposited there for inspection. The bill proposed to legalize that roll upon which the election of members for the City Council depended. The Bill was read a second time. Tho House then went into committee upon the Bill, and it was passedand reported to the House. HOSPITAL BILL. Mr. Ollivieb in moving for leave to introduce this bill, staled that it merely altered the qualification of directors. The motion was agreed to. STAGE CARRIAGES BILL. The Provincial Secretary moved the third wading of this bill, which was read accordingly and passed. CHRISTCnURCH CITY COUNCIL. Bill No. 2 was withdrawn by Mr. Ollivier, as he thought it would require further consideration before he could submit it to the House. The House then went into Committee of Supply. INTER-COLONIAL STEAM BONUS. The Provincial Secretaby moved that a sum of £3000 be voted to his Honor the Superintendent as a steam bonus to a steamer to ply between Melbourne and Lyttelton. The sum named was finally settled with the contractors if the House expressed their opinion favorably upon the matter. The Government were not prepared to recommend the continuance of the vote beyond the present year. The service was to be monthly. The steamer would wait at Melbourne for two or three days after the time it was supposed that the English mail would be in. It was not a mail Bervice, but a trading service, and the steamer would bring on the mail direct if it was waiting to come down. There was no stipulation binding the steamer to rates of freight on cargo, and the bonus was necessary to encourage the steamer to trade with us at all. The Speaker said they had had experience enough to know that it was quite unnecessary to vote such a sum for the purpose proposed. If it was intended that the steamer should bring the mails regularly, then he should vote for it, but if it was a mercantile question they could dispense J witfi it, as there were plenty of men, of energy and capital \ who could establish such a service as was proposed by that vote, and as it was thought necessary to curtail the esti--mates, they could not begin at a better point. Mr. Ollivier spoke in favor of the vote, and thought thatdirectcommunication with Melbourne was a means of introducing trade and capital to the colony, and it had hitherto been attended with considerable benefit to this province. It was premature at present to interfere, and the vote should remain another year, and they would see that it was of great commercial advantage to the colony. Dr. Turnbull said the Provincial Secretary had failed to prove that the vote was necessary, and if he had looked over the customs returns he would have seen that the benefits were not so great to the colony as imagined. Mr. Peacock opposed the vote. He did not see why the Government should oppose merchants in the matter, who could no doubt make as good arrangements for Buch a service as those proposed. Mr. Beswick opposed the vote, as by giving a bonus to a steamer it would do an injury to trade, as that steamer would be enabled to run another off the line. If they subsidised the coastal service between this port and Otago it was quite sufficient. Mr. Buckley said it was of great importance that they should have a direct service between Melbourne and Lyttelton. According to the contract, the steamer was to leave on the 16th of every month, and there was a penalty of half the bonus attached to the non-performance of the contract. He stated that the last mail was brought down by the very steamer to which the bonus was proposed to be given, and he assured the House that the steamer woiud bring goods to Canterbury for the same freight as to Otago, ana she was not likely to continue doing so unless some allowance was made. The Speaker reminded the House that they were not at all to depend upon the steamer to bring the mail, and the time had gone by for such a state of things to exist, and if the House voted the bonus, it would be a great waste of public money. The Chairman then put the vote, which was refused. COASTAL STBAM BONUS.

The Pbovhtciai Secbetaby, on moving for • vote of £1,000 for this purpose, stated that the boat would go once a fortnight from Port to Dunedin, Timaru, and Akaroa. This steamer could not bring the English mail from the circumstance that it occupied considerable space and the boat was only used for cargo. Mr. WlLKllf hoped the committee would not fetter this service* or they would be in the disagreeable position of having the steamer coming up with the news that th® English mail had arrived at Dunedin. Hie Spbakhb hoped the vote would pass, but m twelve months he trusted they could treat it as they had don* the last. The vote then passed. WASTE lANDB. The sum of £743 12s, required for this department, was passed, after a discussion upon a point raised by the Speaker, as to the increase of the salary of the clerk to the Board, in the course of which the Pbovhtciai Secbetaby pointed out the irregularity of the proceedings of the committee, if they increased sums placed upon the estimates, and he cited the portion of the Constitution Act bearing upon the subject, which shewed that it wai the privilege of the Superintendent to do so. BUBVEYB. The sum of £25,000 was voted under this head after some discussion upon the amount set down for forage expenses. GEOLOGICAL BUBVBY. £1500 was passed, the Pbovincial Sbcbbtabt explaining that there was a year unexpired of the contract entered into with Mr. Haast. Mr. Tosswii.il protested against the Government entering into similar contracts in future. The prisoner, who. stated that his age was 24, declined te make any statement. PUBLIC WOBKB PEBMASEITT STAFF. The vote of £3000 was objected to, and after some complimentary allusions had passed between Mr. VIEB and the PbovibtClAli Sbcbbtaby the sum of £850 for the salary of Provincial Engineer was struck out, as also a sum <s|iß(K)for an architectural draughtsman. The House thmrGßUmpd, and adjourned till this day (Wednesday) at the usual hour of business.