SUPREME COURT

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIX, Issue 193, 17 July 1939, Page 6

SUPREME COURT

QUARTERLY SESSION OPENS NO SERIOUS CRIME. “I must congratulate the district on tlie absence of crime of a serious nature so far as this calendar is concerned. None of the eases which you are asked to consider are of a very grave character. There is an entire absence of any cases involving violence, which is a very gratifying feature.” This observation was made by His Honour Mr. Justice Blair in the course of his charge to the Grand Jury when the quarterly session of the .supreme Court opened at Palmerston North today. the Grand Jury members were empanelled as follow: —Messrs P. S. Larcoinb (foreman), T. L. Arnott, L. K. Andrews, R. H. Billons, W. A. Boniface, G. A. Brown, E. B. Chapman, F. A. Cousins, li. L. Cuuninghaiiie, J. Davidson, E. J. Fannin, K. S. Glendinning, A. E. Kers'.ake, W. S. Long, F. G. Major, K. McDonald, N. A. Nash, G. D. Battle, W. Pcnberthy, D. Watson and J. H. Runnicles.

There were, said His Honour, two charges of alleged theft, one concerning two totalisator tickets at Feilding. The case against accused was that the day after the races lie endeavoured to cash two Co winning tickets. When first questioned, he said he had bought the tickets. Next he said they had been found by bis boy and that he had intended to cash them and look for the owner. The other case of alleged theft, said His Honour, concerned a cycle which had been missed from outside a picture theatre, but had later been found altered and painted, in the possession of accused, who said he had purchased it, but on a date prior to that when it was first reported lost. Continuing. His Honour said that another ease concerned two charges against a youth. Then there was an indictment of some eighteen counts against the principal of an auctioneering company in Palmerston North and his employee. It was alleged that the two had conspired to make a practice of purposely returning, in the account sales notes to produce growers, understatements of the amounts realised. The first count was a general charge of conspiracy against both accused in rendering false account sales notes. Then there were charges under the Auctioneers’ Act, and charges of the theft of various small sums through failure to account for them. Some of these were alternative. It was an important case from the point of view of clients of an auctioneering firm. True hills were returned in all cases, these being against Sydnev Herbert Hume, alleged theft- of totalisator tickets; Ivan Parkinson, an alleged serious offence and unlawful supplying of noxious articles; Charles James Harrod, alleged theft and receiving of a cycle; and John Richards and Arthur Haines, alleged conspiracy, failure to account, and theft.