SUPREME COURT.

Marlborough Daily Times, Volume X, Issue 314, 26 April 1888, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. (Before His Honor Judge Richmond). Wednesday, £vril 25, ISBB. His Honor took his scat at 11.15. The following gentlemen were sworn iu as a Grand Jury:—J. T. Robinson, B. O. Waddy, G. S. Stenhouse, S. J. Fiuniss, j. Ewart, Jas. Hay, Duncan M'Callum, Thomas Redwood, Walter Litchfield, 11. Fraser, J. R. A. Greeusill, O. Purkiss, T. Horton, C. J. W. Griffiths, R. Parker, P. G. Dd10,,. W. Gillespie, Ohas. Eurp, C. J. Liggins, H. G. Kolias, J. Gauo, E. Paul, J. E. Hodson and E. Redwood. Mr J. E. Hudson was chosen foreman. ms honor’s charge.

His Honor, in addressing the Grand J ury, said the list this session was a very short one. There were only two charges on the calendar, one of which, as most of them were well aware, was a chargo of stabbing, and he had a few words to say in regard to that case. The presumption was always against a man who made uso of a deadly weapon, oven if the other man was the aggressor. Of course, whore a man’s life was in danger, he was justified in making use of a deadly weapon, but the presumption was always against a man who made use of a deadly weapon against an unarmed man, and struck at a vital part. It very often happened that both parties wt-re in the wrong, and deserved some punishment, but it was difficult to convince common jurors Unit

such was the case. Both were offenders against the peace, but the fact of both of them being in the wrong did not absolvo either. A great deal of evidence had been takenjin the case, and if the Grand Jury found that a prhun facie case had been made out for the prosecution, they would find a true bill, leaving it to the common jury to decide what was the cause, and whether or not there was justifiable provocation. Tiic other case was one of forgery, and it was one of a very unusual k'ud. It appeared from the evidence taken in the lower Court that accused was tlloged to have altered a receipt obtained for goods while carrying on a brewery, and that lie had handed it into the insurance agent after the brewery ligd been destroyed by fire, in support of his claim for the amount of insurance money. If the Jury were satisfied that the receipt had been forged, and that a material alteration had been made, that would render it forgery. It they were satisfied that the document had been altered or forgedf that the accused knew it, and that he made use of it knowing it to be forged, and that ho also made use of it with the intention of defrauding someone, then they should bring in a tine bill against the accused.

true bii.ls. The Grand Jury, after retiring for about twenty minutes, returned with true bills against 'William Ramsey, for forgery, and also against Andrew Ludwig Roman Itonov. iez, for si ebbing. The Grand Jury were then discharged. F.IKGERY. William T y wts charged with having on Use ’ .• i Marsh last, altered r.u ■ .countable r-„ . far monies, given to him by Megfsr. IF'.VIL Pi during and Co., with intent to del; . ad. Mr Yvb Sinclair, C >wu Prosecutor, conducted the ease for die Crown. Accused was unde-feud- .1. The following geutlena n were sworn in as a jti 'v: —David Herd, li.unas Smith Mnddoek, -Phil Lams Yb Hillmer, John Harris, Amir w Wa . 0:1, Nnthani* 1 Thomas Prichard, Uu.i.um O’Connell, James Law, Fraud- J Y..-J- . i : b .*>, Oliver Babb, Thomas i ouug.ae r and O ■■ age YV . Mills. Mr T. Younger was appoint d foreman. The Crow.i Prosecutor, in opening the case for the prosecution, said there were no less than ten counts in the iuJi ;tme: t. The reason for this was L.-cau.-.e there was some uncertainty as to wh .th .•:• acoust <1 had paid for the goods by oh'gu • or by cash, and in order to prevent any dtiiiouky arising, it via thought -vivi-able to and Ax more counts to the indivmjat ti.ai there woo’d otherwise haw lc-cn. The facts were very simple. It appiarcl that accused purchased the PLceuix lice-.very

nd p.ant, a.rl on tho UnL-. of February last, effected an inrurauc? on the plant in the Norwich Unio.. office for LIOO, and seven days later foo t or; r. policy of LSO on the stock. On the February the brewery was do troyed by fire. Accused’s next step was to try and get his insurance money, and he accordingly went to Mr Clarkson, the local agent of the Norwich Union Insurance Company, who told accused that he would have to produce the voucher’s for the goods. One of these was from Mo> -rs F. H. Pickering and Co., and accused went to that firm and asked for another receipt for LI Ids for hops and sugar supplied saying that tho original receipt had been burned in tho fire. Accused was charged with altering the Ll Ids to L2 Ids, and the date from the 17th .January to the 27th. Accused Look the receipt to Mr Clarkson, but the latter did not notice that, although tho amount was fur over L2, it did not bear a stamp. Constable Bhoary, however, found out some days afterwards that the receipt had been altered, and also that it did not bear a stamp. In tho lower Court, accused had aggravated his crime by attempting to put the blame on to Mr Dobb, and he had oven persisted in asking Mr Dobb whether he was not accountable for the alterations. It was clear that accused wanted to defraud the Insurance Company, and Mr Sinclair also pointed out that Mr Dobb’s character might have been ruined bad (he fraud not been detected in time, so there was an attempt to defraud Mr Dobb, as well as tho Norwich Union Insurance Company. William Clarkson, local agent of tho Norwich Union Fire Insurance Company, gave evidence as to tho accused effecting an insurance in his office for the plant and stock of the Phoenix Brewery. Constable Lloyd, of Picton, hero produced tho document relative to tho insurance of the brewery and plant, which witness found on searching accused’s parcel.

William Clarkson (continued) said that

accused paid the policy on tho Insurance. After the lire ho told accused that lie would have to lodge proofs of loss forms in support of tho claim, and he did so on tho Ist March, among thorn being tho one from Messrs F. H. Pickering and Co., for L2 Lis for hops and sugar. Witness passed the receipt, thinking it was a duplicate one, and that it did not require a stamp. To prisoner : I sent the valuation of tho plant, which I received, to Nelson. Am positive that you asked inn to send tho vouchors away at once. Ho could not produce a witness toconfi’.n wlnt he stated as to the accused having asked ldm to send tho vouchers quickly to Nelson.

Tho accused remarked that if Mr Griffiths’ sou were in Court, he eoukl to 1 ! a slightly different tale. Mr Sinclair (to witness) : What do you k iow about tlic valuation of the brewery plant when you insured it ? Witness: I heard that it only cost LlO.

His Honor said that he could not allow that evidence. They were not going to prove fraudulent intent at present. Gorge M. Dobb stated that there was an entry in the casli-hook (produced) for Ll 15s paid by prisoner for hops and sugar sold. Ho could not say whether prisoner gavo him a cheque for tho amount. Ho tried to trace it aft: rwards, but lie failed to find any clue to it. Witness gavo prisoner a receipt for the amount. On tho Saturday after the firo at tho Phoenix Breweiy, prisoner asked him for a receipt for the amount of goods obtained, as the original one had been burned. Tho receipt (produced) was not in the samo condition as when prisoner received it from witnoss. The amount was altered from Ll los to L'2 15s and the date from tho 17th to tho 27th.

Francis S. Hodson, a clerk in the employ of Messrs F. 11. Pickering 1 and Co, eaid that Mr Dobb had to account to him at night for ajl the cash passed through his hands during the day. Witness had made a search at tho bank the day after the entry, and found that tho only cheqao received on that date was one for L'2 ( J». Constable Sheary gave evidence as to seeing tho receipt in Mr GriiUtlis’ ollice. 110 noticed that it was for a sum exceeding two pounds, and that it did not bear a stamj). Ho also observed that the dates and figures had been altered. This was the case for the Crown. Accused called

Christopher J. W. Griffiths, r who said that lio was in the oiiico when prisonor came in to see Mr Clarkson about the insurance. Witness did not pay particular attention to the conversation which ensued. He did not hear Mr Clarkson say that it was a pity that ho (prisoner) did not come in sooner in tho day, as ho might have sent tho vouchers to Nelson by that day’s mail. To Mr Sinclair: I believe I heard prisoner ask Air Clarkson to send away tho vouchers as speedily ns possible.

In reply to his Honor, prisoner said he bail nut'iing to say. lie expected Mr 3M‘iSrub would bo present to plead for him, but why lie was not present ho (tho accused) could not tell. His Honor: Mr M‘Nub might have raised some law pobits, b.it you ought to be ablo to say sometiliug in defence of yourself. Prisoner : When I gave the bill to Mr Clarkson, it was, to tho best of my belief, in tho same state as when I got it from Mr Dobb.

His Honor : But tho receipt was in no one’s hands but your own iu tho interim. Ono curious point in tho case that only 12lbs of hops, costing 10s, wero claimed for. It is a curious thing that there was not more claimed for hops. His Honor, in summing up, said tho case was certainly a very singular one. There teas very little doubt but that the document had been forged by gomeono. Ho had every reason to beliove Mr Dobb’s evidence. None of tho other accounts for goods, which accused had handed in to Mr Clarkson, had bcon altered—at least as far as was known—and if tho prisoner had forged Pickering and Co.’s receipt, it was a most unaccountable crime, and it was committed at a very great risk. Tuero might bo other things in the claim which were not right, and It would giro the case a different aspect. Of course many men committed crimes with very small motives, but that could not bo a standpoint in the present case. Sometimes a man puts liimseJf within the grasp of the law for a very small matter indeed, sometimes tlioy havo no reason whatever for committing an offence. If tho jury were satisfied that the document had been forged, that it had bcon forged by tho accused; and that he hail done it with tho intention to defraud, then tlioy should convict him. Accused might have altered tho rccoipt for the pvvpoco of defrauding tho Insurance company, hut lie (.Judge Richmond) did no tb'nk that Mr Sinclair’s suggest ion as to accused's motive being to injuro Mr Dobb, wo d hold good. Tho jury retired at 2.2-3 p.m., aud ' i about ten minutes re., .nod with a verdict of “ Gu'lfy.” His Honor said that 'lio case was a remarkable one, and he would lore to Ink" time to consider tho verdict. Ho ordered

the prisoner to bo removed, and ‘o b brought up for sentence this morning at ton o’clock. stc mix a. Andrew Ludwig Roman Bonowicz, farmer, Old Ren wick Road, was charged with having, on .'list clay of January last, maliciously stabbed one Jorem'ah Touhy. Mr Sinclair, Crown Prosecutor, conducted the prosecution on be Rf of (he Crown. Mr M'Nab appeared , t the accused, who pleaded “Not Guilty

Thy fd'ovjk g jury wire e or3_in : Thomas Hu. * .Ji ;a v7o; - .cr, Robert Lidcilo, Albov i GUAM. Sdwv-d Purser, Frederick Cir-itt?, u.. ./oodhouse, Frank J. Boil, fa--.'.: /alter, Samuel Mahon, 7 H. lie wo and 11. S. Bush. Mr E. Pu:r;"e ..'as appointed foreman. The Crown Prosecutor, in opening the case for the Crown, said that there wero really two charges against accused, one of stabbing and one of inflicting grievous bodily harm. Accused admits using tho knife, but h« nays that at the time of the row ho was suffering from illuess, that he was not able to use his fi ts. and consequently had to resort to h:.*, knife. On his side, however, he (Mr Sinclair) would point out that accused could handlo the reins, and that ha could also tic them up. Me would also like to a k why, if accused was not getting fair play while Ryan and one or two others wero looking on, they did not stop tho men from fighting. That was ono of tho questions the defence would have to answer. On the application of Mr M‘Nab, all material witnesses in the case were ordered out of Court. Tho first witness called was Jeremiah

Touhy, who stated that he was staying at Fairhn.il in January last, and was working for prisoner, but that the latter would not pay him his wages. When he asked for them they had a row, and the outcome

was that accused stabbed witnoss. Witness used his boots (produced) on accused to the best of his ability. William Ryan, late lessee of the Fairhall Hotel, also gave evidence. When tho fight had gone on for a short time, witness went out to separate the men, and together with prisoner’s brother, Walter Ronowicz, attempted to take Touhy away. The latter then retired a few steps, but prisoner kept following him and stabbing at him with a knife. This happened after prisoner stabbed Touhy the first time. As soon as opportunity offered, witness took Touhy away. Mr M‘Nab: You took Touhy away because you considered him the more dangerous of the two?

Witness : Which would yon have taken away, Mr M‘Nab?—the one who possessed the knife ? (Great laughter).

To Mr M‘Nab : There was blood on prisoner’s beard. Touhy had never kicked prisoner when I took him off the first time. Touhy never told me before the fight that ho was going to thrash prisoner. Touhy hit Walter Ronowicz twice, and there was no stabbing beforo that. I don’t believe Ronowicz stabbed Touhy while his brother was holding him down.

To Mr Sinclair : Don’t think Touhy did anything more than was necessary to save his life. Touhy used his boots in order to keep prisoner from stabbing him.

Dr Muller said that if the wound had been a httlo deeper it would have been a fatal one. It had evidently been struck by a back handed blow. The shirt over the wound on the side was torn for about three inches. The would itself was a very slight one. When witness examined prisoner’s hand hi the lower court there did not appear to bo much wrong with it. Touhy was perfectly sober when witness first oxanrned the wound in his throat. To Mr M‘Nab : It is rather a nice point to say that tho blow was not intentionally d hooted for a fatal part of the throat.

In order to allow the doctors to leave, on the application of Mr M‘Nab, His Honor decided to hear their evidence at this stage. His Honor said that as they were witnesses for tho defence, it was rather an irregular proceeding, but he would overlook that circumstance on this occasion.

Dr Nahn gavo evidence as to examining prisoner’s hands after he (prisoner) had stabbed Touhy. He found them ulcerated and in a very bad state, and witness did not consider accused was in a fit state to defend himself.

To Mr Sinclair : Did not examine prisoner’s legs. If I hud shut prisoner’s fists it would have burst tho ulcers on the back of his hands. He might have ceen able to drive a team of horses. I. was not surprised to hear that prisoner had been able to stab Touhy, because he could have inflicted a severe wound by holding tho pocket knife slightly in his hand. Dr Scott, of Picton, who also examined prisoner’s hands, corroborated the evidence of lust witness.

At this stage (4.-10 p.m.) His Honor decided to adjourn tho Court until to-day at 10 a.in. Ho charged the jury not to hayo any communication regarding the case with any one, and not to speak to any one concerning the case, Accused was admitted to bail.