SUPREME COURT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CV, Issue 12479, 19 April 1901, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL BUSINESS. ' Thuesday, April 18. His Honor Mr Justice Denniston held a sitting yesterday. Before the commencement of the civil business several prisoners were brought up for sentence. THEFT OF A BICYCLE. Thomas Jervois Ryan had been committen for. sentence by the Magistrate on a charge of having stolen bicycles from Hobbs's Buildings. The Inspector of Police said the accused was a chronic drunkard. In answer to the question as to whether he had anything tc- say, the accused said he knew the sentence. His Honor said that the accused had, a bad and he would be sentenced to six months' imprisonment. HORSE STEALING. Bertie Tofts, committed for sentence on a charge of stealing horses and a saddle and,bridle, said he had nothing to say why sentience should not be pronounced. The Inspector, of Police said the accused had bsen a Burnham boy, and had a bad record. He was twenty-three years of age, and had been in gaol in Wellington for stealing horses. His Honor sentenced the accused to eighteen months' imprisonment, with hard labour, on.each of the two charges", the 'sentences to run concurrently. 'breaking, entering and theft.' Victor Simmons and William Matheson, Burnham boys, of sixteen and fourteen years respectively, were brought up for sentence on charges of breaking and entering the railway station at Burnham, and stealing several articles therefrom. The Inspector of Police said the lads had very bad records. They had been the originators of a plot to burn the Burnham School. Their •influence in the school was a very bad one. His Honor, in pronouncing sentence, said it was a very unfortunate and sad thing to see those boys there. One was a young man. He was relucta*nt to' send boys to gaol as long as there was a prospect of their being improved. There was nothing to be gained by sending them back to school, and, it would be better for themselves that they should receive a substantial term of imprisonment. It might lead them to see what a, career of crime meant. The accused would be sentenced each to twelve months' imprisonment with hard labour. Addressing the boys, his Honor said he hoped that the discipline might lead them to realise that a career of crime was one -that would entail suffering. If at the end of the sentence they ca.me out still with criminal desires, they would probably spend the greater portion of their lives under restraint. He desired to impress that fact upon their cminds in passing sentence of twelve months, which was the most sub'stantial one he had ever passed on boys of their ago. CIVIL SITTING. Coates v. Vincent. —This was,, a claim •for £663 12s <'foiv>us6 of ltod.'' Mr Eindlay appeared for the .plaintiff, and Mr "Stringer for defendant. - Mr Stringer said there were proposals of settlement, and he would ask that the case should be further adjourned. His Honor granted the application sine die. Copeland v. ElmsMe.—This was a claim for £554 13s 6d, and interest for breach of agreement. This was also, adjourned sine die. -,,'.'.'.- Kelly' v. Joyce.—ln this- case 'plaintiff claimed £310,6s on but the; part tiea-idesirdng.ian-adjournment--"the case'^vaif ■a'n6\ved-'tb , 'stah-d ; ''bVe^^till ! 'meifc :,; siMn^.- > '-" Lake v. Alliance Assurance Company.— Plaintiff in this case claimed £2OO on an insurance policy. Mr Byrne appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr for the [defendant. On the. application of Mr Cowlishaw an adjournment of the case was granted' till next sittings. Halls v. Walker.—ln this case the plaintiff claimed £125 fiom the defendant for alleged assault. Mr Byinc appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Slater for the defendant. Mr 'Byrne siid increase was "not yelTready ToV h'n HohOr, ana he would apply for an adjournment. His Honor'allowed the case to stand down,till next sittings. ■ IN DIVORCE. SATCIIELI. V. SATCHELL. This was a, wife's petition, in which Rebecca Satchell sought to obtain a divorce from-her husband, Percy H. Satchell, on the grounds of desertion. <; Mr Byrne appeared for the petitioner. The petitioner gave evidence to the efiect that site had been married to the respondent on June 29, 1892, at a suburb of Sydney, New South Wales. The day after marriage they left for Auckland, where the respondent obtained employment, ' Witness hud possessed £2OO, but she had to draw, on that to keep the house. Shortly after marriage the respondent began to ill-treat_ her and frequently struck' her. He several times threatened to"shoot'her, and at last lus conduct compelled her to leave him. Prior to this he.. Lad,: obtained, £l3O from.her, wnich'was all. that was left .of -the, £2OO, by false pretences. Witness left the respondent in February, 1894, her second child being then unborn. , She had not seen him since November, 1894, when she had asked him to support the children and he ■ had refused. One" of the children had died Jane Ball, mother - of petitioner, deposed that she had not known the 'respondent until after the marriage. The respondent (had been violent and .unkind to petitioner an witness's presence, and just a day after peti-: tioner's confinement. ' . His Honor asked if the respondent bad been domiciled in New Zealand. Mr -Byrne said the petitioner was born m New Zealand, and the respondent was com, ing from -England to New Zealand, and had stopped at Sydney en route His Honor said he would hold that the respondent had been. temporarily domiciled ki New Zealand. It was a bad case, and a decree nisi would be granted, with costs against the respondent, the petitioner to have the custody of the child. • LAW NOTICES—THIS (DAY. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Denniston.) IN CHAMBERS, 11 a.nv •Re Christina Marshall, deceased -Motion on petition for leave to carry on, Mr Joynt. Gito*on and another v. Tyree and Tyree. —Summons for directions re accounts. Mr Harris. ' _ .', , ' Supreme Court Act and re New Brixton Hotel.—Motion to relieve 'from forfeiture. Mr Bruges. . ■ Same-Ifor attendance of witnesses. Mr Co'wlishaw. Manning v. Petherbridge.—Summons for discovery. Mr'Cowlishaw. Trustee Act and re John Sinclair, d'eam' .petition to appoint trustee as sole executor and trustee. Mr Loughrey. . Law Practitioners Act and re M. b. for admission! as a barrister. Mr Wynn-Wi-liams. Companies Act and re the Westporfc Coal Company.—Motion on petition for direc- ! tions. Mr Cowlisliaw. PROBATE.

Motions for probate.—Mary M. Jenkins, deceased (Mr Wynn-Williams); Margaret. E. Revell, deceased (Mr- Cotterill); Elizabeth Spencer, deceased (Mr Thomas); Dinah Hornsey, deceased (Mr Malley) ; Mary Ann Bryan., deceased (Mr Widdowson); William Hibbert, deceased (Mr Rolleston); Diedrich Dohrmann, deceased (Mr Rippenberger); Thomas Joyce, deceased (Mr Helmore); Alexander'D. Ross, deseased (Mr Cowlishaw) ; iuatilda C Allan, deceased (Mr Harris), and Georgina Mellish, deceased (Mr Harper). Re Mary J. Smith, deceased.—Motion for letters o'f administration'. Mr Harma-a. IN DIVORCE. Burnip v. Burnip.—Motiotni for directions, Mr Hill. Smith r. Smith.—Motion for directions. Mr M'Connel.