LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9150, 4 September 1888, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

SUPREME COURT.— Sittings. Monday. [Before His Honor Mr. Justice Gillies.] The quarterly criminal sittings of the Supreme Court, Northern Division, was opened this morning. His Honor took his seat on the bench at eleven o'clock. Grand Jury.—The following gentlemen were sworn of the Grand Jury : —Messrs. John M. Shera (foreman), Arthur H. Nathan, Alexander Wiseman, James M. Lennox, Fred. C. Sharlaad, Ernest Baird, Thomas T. Masefield, Alfred Nathan, William Johnson, Alfred Ashton, Richard Cameron, William Berry, Joseph L. Wilson, Alexander S. Russell, William P. Hunter, Edward Lewis, William Buchanan, Henry C. Choyce. The Judge's Charge.—His Honor then addressed the Grand Inquest. He was glad to be able to congratulate them on the exceptionally light calendar before them, there being only fourteen persons accused ; but the number of charges was considerable, there being some thirty indictments, but they were mainly made up of charges against two persons, against one of whom there are ten charges of embezzlement, and against the other eight charges of illegal pawning and larceny as a bailee. The charges against this man were that, having had watches given to him to repair, he pawned them. The charges came under the Pawnbrokers Act, and under the Larceny Act, and he probably would be indicted under the latter. There was only one case of offences against the person, that of unlawfully wounding, and there was one case of arson. Those were the two most serious charges with which they had to deal. The others were cases of larceny, and breaking and entering, and there was one case of burglary. The meaning of burglary was the breaking into or out of a dwelling house after nine o'clock at night. In regard to the other cases, the facts were plain, and it was not necessary for him to point out the law to them, and he should therefore allow them to go to their chamber to consider the indictments. He reminded them that it was not necessary that they should examine all the witnesses named on the back of the indictment, only sufficient to satisfy themselves whether or not there was a case to be tried. Larceny.Albert Johnson was indicted on a charge of having on the 19th of August feloniously entered the dwelling of Euphemia Maxwell, at Tauranga, and stolen a gold watch, gold chain, locket, and other jewellery, valued at £40. The prisoner, a youth about 17 years of age, pleaded guilty. He was then indicted on a charge of stealing £11 10s, the property of Arthur Henry Austin, and to this he also pleaded guilty. His Honor said he could not give him the benefit of the First Offenders Probation Act, as it was not, he regretted to say, his first offence, and he had no alternative therefore but to sentence him to twelve months' imprisonment for each offence, the sentences to run concurrently. Breaking and Entering.—Henry Darby was charged with having broken and entered, on the 19th of June, the countinghouse of Maurice Casey, and stolen half-a-crown and other silver coins. He pleaded guilty. He also pleaded guilty to two other indictments charging him with breaking and entering the same countinghouse, and stealing coins, on the 21st and 22nd of June. Mr. O'Meagher, who appeared for the prisoner (a youth of about 20 years) asked leave to call evidence as to previous good character on which to ground ah application to have the prisoner dealt with under the provisions of the First Offenders Probation Act. His Honor said in this case the Probation Officer did not recommend that he should be placed on probation. Mr. O'Meagher said His Honor had power under section 9 to place him on probation. He had witnesses present who would testify to his previous good character, and, besides, the lad was of weak intellect, and was of premature birth. Hi? Honor asked what that had to do with it ? He had no doubt about his power, but it would require very exceptional circumstances for him to go in the face of the recommendation of the Probation Officer, who had carefully inquired into the circumstances. Mr. Charles Henry Murray was called to give evidence as to prisoner's character. He was a stationer in Vincent-street, and knew prisoner for about two years. He had always been very respectable and good, and he should not have thought him capable of the crime of which he was convicted. Ho always looked upon him as a sober, industrious fellow, but rather dull of comprehension. Mr. O'Meagher then addressed the Court in mitigation of sentence. His Honor sentenced the prisoner to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for 12 calendar months for each offcence, the sentences to be concurrent. Illegally Pawning. — Etnanvel Oliver was indicted on a charge of having on the 10th of May unlawfully pawned a certain watch, the property of George McCartney, with intent wholly to deprive the said George McCartney of the use of the watcn. There was a second count, charging him with illegally pawning the watch, with intent temporarily to deprive the owner of the watch. The prisoner pleaded guilty to illegally pawning the watch, but not of intending to defraud. This was taken as a plea of not guilty. Mr. Madden, who appeared for the prisoner, owned by John Olsen, Ebenezer Swinerd, asked leave to confer with his client. This was allowed, and the prisoner then withdrew his plea, and pleaded guilty. He also pleaded guilty to six other charges regarding similar watches, Edward Healy, John Smart, Cecilia and James Besant, and he also pleaded guilty to a charge of larceny as a bailee of a watch, the property of Wm. Jas. Sayers. Mr. Madden addressed the Court in mitigation of sentence. He had hitherto borne a good character. He put in a certificate of character from Stewart Dawson and Company, and said the prisoner had a wife and two small children. He was two months in gaol, and during that time he volunteered to work with the hard labour men. He might remind His Honor of one circumstance: that was, while so employed a murderous attack was made on a warder named Rutherford, employed in superintending the erection of the newprison, by a prisoner named Brown ; the accused behaved with great bravery, for after Brown had knocked Rutherford down, the prisoner rushed in and intercepted a second blow, and thus, in all probability saved the warder's life. He proposed to call Captain Oakes as to character. The witness, however, was not present. His Honor, addressing the prisoner, said he had been convicted on his own confession of these eight charges. Although it was his first appearance here, the Probation Officer did not recommend that the Probation Act should apply to him, and he thought rightly so, for he (the prisoner) had been guilty of a long series of illegal and immoral acts, for the depositions showed that he had pawned 50 watches which had been left with him to repair, and put the owners off with excuses from time to time, and the repetition of these offences indicated established criminal character. The sentence of the Court was that he be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for two years for each offence, the sentences to run concurrently. Breaking and Entering.James Bloomfield, a man of about 55 years of age, pleaded not guilty to a charge of having, on the 3rd of March, feloniously broken and entered the dwelling-house of James Cartmill, in the suburbs of Auckland, with intent to. steal. Mr. Hudson Williamson prosecuted. The case for the prosecution was this : The house broken into was that occupied by the prosecutor, Cartmill, a gardener in the Domain. On the 3rd of March his wife left the house before twelve o'clock, after closing the windows and other entrances, and witness left the house about one o'clock, closing the back door by which he went out. On his return at three o'clock he found the back door open, and on going through the house he met the prisoner in one of the rooms, and asked him what he wanted there. He said he was a gardener who could find no work, and he wanted some money. He then decamped and had not been seen for some two months after, when he v as arrested. Mr. Cartmill found that the house had been disturbed, and two children's money boxes had been wrenched ope . Nothing was stolen. Mrs. Cartmill met the prisoner within about 200 yards of the house, and going towards it, when she was going away, and she subsequently identified the prisoner amongst a number of others as the man she had met on that occasion. A pane was broken in one of the rooms, and into the space a loose piece of glass was placed, but | this was broken away, ana an arm

could have easily been passed through, For the defence, Warder Michael Flannery was called, and deposed that _ when Mrs. Cartmill came to the Gaol to identify prisoner no man stepped forward from tha rank. She pointed out the prisoner. Prisoner addressed the jury, pointing out that it was a case of mistaken identity. The jury, after twenty minutes' deliberation, brought in a verdict of guilty. Prisoner, who protested that it was a wrong verdict, was sentenced. His Honor said if the jury had his history before them they would not have hesitated, for his record showed an unusual number of sentences for offences of this nature. He was sentenced to seven years' penal servitude. Burglary. — Wm. A. Crombie was arraigned on a charge of breaking out of and stealing from a dwelling. Tne prisoner was indicted under the name of Wm. Andrews Crombie, and a dispute abouc his name arose. Mr. Hudson Williamson, who appeared for the Crown, asked leave to amend by substituting the name Anderson for Andrews. Mr. Buckland, who appeared for the accused, admitted that the name was Wm. Anderson Crombie, but submitted that the indictment should give the true name of the accused. His Honor ruled that the Court had power to amend, and the indictment was altered accordingly. The prisoner was then arraigned under the name of William Anderson Crombie, with having on the 14th June, at about three o'clock in the morning, broken out of the dwelling-house of Mary Coyle, known as the Thistle Hotel, and stolen a bottle of rum and a bottle of whisky. He was also, on a second count, charged with the larceny of the bottles of rum and whisky. The case was a peculiar one. The evidence showed that the prisoner was in the Thistle Hotel up to ten o'clock on the night of the 13th June. Mrs. Coyle was, herself, in charge of the bar, and the barman was also present, and prisoner stood in the passage, at the opening in the side. The barman went away and she left the bar to put the money from the till in the safe, and on returning prisoner had disappeared. She supposed he had gone out of the front or side door, and in passing outshe looked at the cellar door and missed the key, but took no particular notice, thinking it might have dropped or been mislaid, and went to bed. At three o'clock in the morning of the 14th Constable Kelso, who was on duty in Queen-street, saw prisoner leave the vicinity of the front door of the Thistle Hotel at a quick pace. The constable approached him, but prisoner ran, and, dropping something, ran through Lorne-street, where the constable caught him, and found one bottle in his possession. He brought him back to where the other bottle had been dropped. Prisoner, in answer to the constable said he had got the bottles from a Customs officer, and did not wish to implicate him. When they returned to the hotel the front door was open, and Mrs. Coyle missed the bottle of rum and bottle of whisky. Something was heard to fall from prisoner, and Constable Kelso picked up a key, which proved to be that of the cellar. The bottles were placed on a shelf near the half-door opening, and could have been reached by a person rising on the ledge of the -door, and the theory of the prosecution was that this was how it was done, and that prisoner having abstracted the bottles went into the cellar. Mrs. Coyle, John Brown, barman, and the constable, were examined and cross-ex-amined. Mr. Buckland called no witnesses, but addressed the jury for the defence. The jury retired, and after an hour's deliberation, brought in a verdict of "Guilty of larceny, but not guilty of burglary." His Honor asked the Crown Prosecutor whether he was prepared to accept that verdict. Mr. Williamson replied that he felt justified in accepting the verdict of guilty of larceny, and enter a nolle prosequi in the charge of burglary. His Honor deferred sentence until next morning. Breaking and Entering.Edward Prentiss was indicted on a charge of entering a store at Rangiriri, and stealing £7. He pleaded guilty. The recommendation of Mr. Res ton, the Probation Officer, being favourable, the prisoner was ordered twelv* months' probation, and to pay the costs a the prosecution (£3O) in instalments of £5 10s per month. Mo True Bills.— Grand Jury returned no true bills in the indictments for forgery and uttering against John Henrickson. True Bills. —The Grand Jury brought in true bills against David Edward Porter, embezzlement (five charges); John Henrickson, false pretences (two charges); Harry Halmer, breaking and entering; Ann Mahoney, arson ; Noble and Steward, larceny from a dwelling ; and James McCabe, larceny from a store. The Grand Jury having finished their duties were thanked by His Honor and discharged. The Court adjourned until ten o'clock this morning. R.M. COURT.— (Before Dr. Giles, R.M.] Hill v. Herbert.—This was a claim for £2 10s lid, for goods supplied by the plaintiff to the defendant, who is providore of the s.s. Stormbird. Mr. Humphreys appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. W. J. Napier for defendant After hearing the evidence, His Worship nonsuited plaintiff, with costs £1 Is to the defendant. POLICE COURT.— [Before Colonel Haultain, J.P.] Drunkenness. — Alfred T. Patterson pleaded guilty to drunkenness whilst in charge of a horse and carriage. This was a first offence. Patterson said he had been out all night and had had nothing to eab when he took a glass of beer. The Bench imposed a fine of £1 and costs, with an alternative of fourteen days' imprisonment. Three first offenders were punished for drunkenness, one of them being a lad of fifteen, who was found helplessly drunk in Albert-street, on Saturday night. The Bench urged the boy to turn over a new leaf. Bridget Weston, who pleaded guilty of being a habitual drunkard, was sentenced to three months' imprisonment. Attempted Suicide.—Timothy O'Callaghan was charged with attempting to kill himself by taking a quantity of strychnine. Sergeant-Major Pratt said th® man had been at the Hospital up to the present time. He had been drinking heavily, and he (the Sergeant-Major) therefore asked for a remand for a week. The case was accordingly remanded till Monday next. Cases Remanded.—The following cases were remanded until Tuesday, there being only one Justice present Charles Porteous and John Munro, leaving horses unattended ; John T assaulting his wife.