SUPREME COURT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXXVI, Issue 9492, 14 August 1891, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. Thursday, August 13. (Before bia Honor Mr Justice Denniatou.) MOSS* CASE. The case of A. E. Moss was resumed. Mr J. C. Martin appeared for the Crown, and Mr Stringer for the accused. The Foreman of the Jury, which had been locked up all night, said that the Jury could not agree. Ms Martin said that he should like a fresh trial at the present sittings—at once.. His Honor asked if Mr Martin wanted a fresh panel. Mr Martin said that he did not, all that he wanted* was an entirely fresh Jury. The Jury was then discharged. Hia Honor asked Mr Martin if he wished the new trial to proceed immediately. Mr Martin replied that he did. A fresh Jury was then empanelled. Mr Martin opened very briefly for the Crown, and called the evidence which was given at the previous trial. At the close of the evidence for the Crown, Mr Stringer called evidence for the defence. Learned counsel addressed the Jury. His Honor summed up. The Jury retired at half-past twelve o’clock, and, after a retirement of an hour and twenty minutes, returned with a verdict of "Not guilty,” on the ground of insanity. His Honor ordered the accused to be confined until the pleasure of the Colonial Secretary is known. After the evidence had been given his Honor held that there had been nothing but a row, and directed the Jury to return a verdict of "Not Guilty.” FALSE PRETENCES. George Bull, who had been previously convicted of falsely representing to George King that certain horses and farm implements were his unencumbered property, was brought up for sentence. Argument took place between Mr J. C. Martin, on behalf of the Crown, and Mr Wilding, for the accused, on a point raised by the effect, thah the sale of the stock and implements to.-Mr ,JohnKemp, which was alleged to have dep?ived the prisoner of his ownership to them, was invalid, and that, therefore, he was entitled to give, as he had, a bill of sale over them to George King and Co. Aftes hearing the argument hia. Honor sentenced the accused to be : placed .on probation for twelve months. BOBBERY WITH VIOLENCE. Joseph Meynell and William James were indicted for having, on June 12, assaulted Richard Brown, and robbed him of M 11a 6d, a watch, chain, and knife. Meynell pleaded "Not guilty,” James pleaded " Guilty.” Mr J. C. Martin conducted the case for the Crown. Mr Stringer appeared for the accused. The case for the Crown was that Brown, who is a ploughman residing at Flaxton, came to town on June 10. He began drinking, and, on the evening of June 12, met Meynell and James in the Central Hotel. They went with him to the Palace Hotel, and came away from it with him. Shortly afterwards he was knocked down and robbed in Madras street. Ho was too drunk at the time to remember anything except that he was knocked down in the presence of several men, but who these men were he could not say. He remembered, however, that he had £4s 12s 6d on him when he entered the Central Hotel, and only spent a shilling. He recovered consciousness in the lock-up, and found that he had been robbed. His watch and chain were found on James when the latter was arrested, and the contention of the Crown was that Meynell was also concerned in the robbery, as a boy named Hart saw , Meynell close to Brown when tho latter was knocked down by James. Two other men were present at the time, but the boy did not see them do anything to Brown. They all ran away, and Chief Detective O’Connor came up. Richard Brown, Augustus Peterson, Launcelot Hart, Lily Hooper, Daniel O’Donohue and Chief Detective O’Connor gave evidence for tho prosecution. Mr Stringer submitted that there was no evidence against Meynell. His Honor said that under the circumstances he was not satisfied that there was enough evidence of the robbery for the jury to convict upon. There was no evidence of anything but a row. He would direct the jury to return a verdict of not guilty.

The jury found the accused Meynell not guilty, and he was discharged. With respect to James, Mr Stringer asked his Honor to he as lenient as possible. The young man was in regular employment, and had borne a good character.

C. Field and Walter Hoddinot gave evidence to the effect that accused had borne a good character. Mr .Martin said that the accused aud other young men had got drunk together on the occasion of the robbery, but there was nothing to show that it had been deliberately planned. ' His Honor sentenced the accused to three months* imprisonment with hard labour, and asked the gaoler to see that he was kept separate from other prisoners. UTTERING COUNTERFEIT COIN.

George Syrett, a young man, pleaded "Not guilty” to an indictment charging him with having, on Juno 25, uttered a counterfeit coin to Oliver Bennington. Mr J. C. Martin conducted the case for the Crown. Mr Stringer appeared for the accused. The facts. disclosed by the evidence for the .prosecution ware:—That on the evening,of June 25, the accused went into Mr H. Bonnington’a shop, and purchased a stick of tobacco, laying down a penny, silvered over, to pay for it, aud receiving 2s 2d in change. Two days afterwards, Mr Bonnington’a son met him, and asked him why he had given a silvered penny for a half-crown. He said that ho did not recollect giving it. Oliver Bennington and Herbert Bonnington gave evidence for the prosecution. The latter stated, in reply to Mr Stringer, that he had not given the coin to the police with the view of having proceedings taken. He bad shown it to a constable as a curiosity, and the constable took it away. He had known the accused for a long time. He always boro a very good character, and was very good to his family. Elizabeth Syrett and Constable Hobson also gave evidence. The accused was sworn and stated that he had found the silvered penny in the street. He showed it to the people at hia home. When he jvent out on June 25 he had the coin, with a half-crown and three coppers, in his pocket. He gave it to Mr Bonnington by mistake. He had changed his clothes when young Mr Bonnington; asked him why ho had passed a counterfeit coin on him. When he went home lie looked at the clothes he had worn on the night when he passed the coin, and found that it was gone. To Mr Martin : He was about to go to Mr Bonnington when he was arrested. This concluded the evidence.

His Hbhof summed up. ! The - jury; without retiring, returned a verdict of “ Not guilty,” and tho accused was discharged. This concluded .the business of the session. *, , .

LAW NOTICES—THIS DAY. IN CHAMBERS. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Denniston.) Parmenter v. Hallefct. —Return to summons to remove case on appeal from R.M. Court, Timaru, into Supreme. Court. Mr White. Rc Lydia Britton, deceased.—Motion for letters of administration. Mr Beattie. . J?o 'Mark Thomas, deceased.—Motion for probate. J -Mr Bruges. Rc Edward Winter, deceased.—Motion for probate. Mr Izard. [Per Press Association.] WELLINGTON. August 13. In tho Supreme Court to-day an application for a rule nisi, calling upon the Chief Gaoler to show cause why Georgo Albert Tapper, a bankrupt, sentenced at Palmerston North to six months’ imprisonment for not keeping books, should not be released, was granted, and will be argued on Wednesday nest., DUNEDIN, August 13. Judge Williams delivered judgment in the will case, Kerr v. Keddie. It was sought to upset the will on the ground of undue influence. Judgment was for the defendant.