AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 13499, 28 May 1907, Page 7

AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT

CRIMINAL SESSIONS. The criminal sessions of the Auckland Supreme Court opened yesterday morning before Mr. Justice Denniston, the calendar presented comprising some 30 cases. The Hon. J. A. Tol© appeared as Crown , Prosecutor. >- ■ GRAND JURY. The following grand jury was empanelled: —Messrs. R. S. Abel (foreman), H. D. Abbott, H. H. Abbott, H. H.R. Bloomfiold, J. Earle, J. C. Holland, J. D. Jones, W. J. Macklow, R. S. Martin, J. Neil, H. P. Oakden, G. N. Pierce, R. W. St. Clair, W. S. Whitley, A. Wiseman, and R. 0. Young. THE JUDGE'S CHARGE. In bis address to the jury His Honor said he regretted he was unable to congratulate the district on any improvement in either the number or tho quality of the cases comprising the calendar. There wore no less than 30 indictments to be considered, and of those six, or one-fifth, were of a sexual character, of which there were so many in the Auckland district. After observing that some of the cases possessed peculiar features and required some little attention, His Honor proceeded to outline the evidence in ] the 30 cases separately, directing the jurymen as to their duties in-the handling of the indictments brought before them. Referring to indecent assaults His Honor said that where the victim was under the ago of 16 years the question of consent was immaterial. Tho remark applied to similar offences in the calendar. Dealing with charges of manslaughter against two motormen, His Honor said tho cases consisted of alleged neglect to tako precautionary measures' while in control of machines. It would appear that the neglect was in driving the oars at such a speed as to deprive the men of full control necessary to avoid all danger. It had to be recollected that both men who were killed were advanced in years, one being 80, blind and deaf, and tho other 86 and decrepit. It was not necessary for actual negligence to take place, but the question ' was whether or not the speed at which the cars were being drivon constituted obvious neglect on the part of the motormen. In a civil action contributory negligence could be urged, but not so in a criminal proseoution, in which it was no defence to plead that the other party, failed to take proper precautions. This action was between the public and the motormen and not the Tramways Company. At tho same time the conduct of both parties had to bo looked at' to determine whether reasonable care had been taken by the motormen to prevent an accident. A motorman was under instructions, but he should not drive at' a speed which he knew to be unreasonable. While hr was the duty of the motorman to exercise every care and ho must bo held liable for acts of misconduct, he should not he made the scapegoat for a company. In ordes to convict the jury must be satisfied that » breach of all reasonable precautions to the knowledge of an intelligent motorman had been committed. TRUE BILLS. The jury returned true bills in the following cases:—Arthur Harris, . assault on a girl under 16 and abduction (Auckland); Alexander Augustus Jones, indecent assault (Taumarunui); Eveland Taylor, indecent assault (Mercury Bay); ; John Bennett, assault on a girl under 12 (Kawhia); George William Shortt, attempted arson (Pukekohe); Albert Johnston, alias Albert Jones, theft from a dwelling (Mercer)"; Charles Lewin, assault, causing actual bodily 'harm (Auckland); Ti Ahiabi Ti .Ahi, forgery (Huntly); John Solomon Taylor, mischief (Hamilton); Frederick William Lucas, perjury (Pukekohe); John Marjoribanks Steele, false pretences (Cambridge); John Con- j nor, assault, causing actual bodily harm (Auckland);.. ' and Richard Walton, horse stealing (Cambridge). Ano bill was returned in the case in which Charlotte Evans was charged with manslaughter, and the accused .was formally „discharged. "The grand jury has several cases yet to consider.

. „ ; THEFT OF DRAPERY. ' Frederick William Barker was brought up for sentence on a charge-of \ theft of ; drapery from the -shop of Mr. John Count. Mr. J. R. Lundou, who : ; appeared for prisoner, urged that he bo given the benefit . -of'-.the provisions of the First Offenders -Act. He was 34 years of age, and; up to the'present- bad borne a good character, there not being a breath of suspicion against him. His Honor: Have you proof of that? Counsel; replied; that he was speaking from instructions received. Latterly the prisoner had ■ given way to drink, and : had been under considerable anxiety owing to family troubles. 'Some family jewels were pawned by prisoner" in Christcnurch, and jpossibly it was. with the intention' of redeeming the jewels and relieving other difficulties that he was prompted to commit the thefts with which he was charged. When he was arrested he had '£5 enclosed in an envelope, which was being sent on to a Ohristchurch pawnbroker for the redemption of the jewels. Detective Hollis, who was called, stated that goods were stolen to the value of about £45, and prisoner was in receipt of £3 5s a week. ' ■':/ " .":''.■'" ;;'■'

His Honor remarked that the Probation Act was liable to abuse. The Act was not intended for full adults, in receipt of full wages, committing a; series of thefts from employers. By allowing such people probation it was simply placing a. premium on crime, and rendering an Act which he believed to be useful otherwise subject to abuse. He objected to giving probation in cases .of the kind. .The suggestion that prisoner had robbed his employer so that he could redeem family jewels was absurd, and no excuse for the crime committed. He sentenced prisoner to four months' imprisonment, remarking that he; had now lost his ' character, which was a substantial penalty to him. , A MAORI IN TROUBLE. A white-haired Maori named Ti Ahiahi Ti Ahi, charged with forgery at Huntly, treated the Court, through an interpreter, to a long explanation, chiefly describing the treatment ho had received while in gaol during the last eight weeks. He emphasised the fact that while in prison he was given no work to do, but had merely been asked to behave himself. . His Honor inquired if the accused admitted altering the* cheque, and an affirmative reply was received. A plea of guilty was then entered, and sentence deferred till today. -.- .'■■•:./"■ .■" ■'■■'-•' V " ■-■"■'

CAMBRIDGE TRADESMEN /;-:;.:; > VICTIMISED. .John Marjoribanks Steele, a young man of good address, pleaded guilty to four indictments charging him with obtaining, by means of false pretences, a number of articles, as well as money, ■ from tradespeople of Cambridge, in March last, consisting .of £4 19s from Robert Bell; a coat, vest, and £1 in money from John Rathbone; watch, chain, pendant, crescent ring, and 9s in money from Henry Vandyke; and a saddle and £2 in money from John Sharken. Prisoner, on being asked if he had anything to say, called Constable McNamara to say in what condition prisoner was at the time of the arrest. Witness said Steele was in a muddled condition, and walked about the cell all night. He was given a tonic. Prisoner, addressing the Court, stated that a.t the time he committed the offences he had been drinking heavily, & nd, being under the influence of liquor, he was not responsible for his actions. His Honor: If you were not responsible for your actions, why did you plead guilty? Do you say that you drew out the cheques, signed them intelligently and sensibly, deliberately bought goods, and presented the cheq Ues in payment, and you did not know what you were doing? Prisoner further pointed out that he had suffered an injury to his head, and had also had an attack of sunstroke, and -when he took spirits he was driven to commit offences of which ho would not think at any other time. He put forward these facts not in 'Exoneration but in extenuation, hoping thereby to receive more lenient treatment. . His Honor pointed out to prisoner that Ik octobe,r of 1906 he was imprisoned for 'wee months for theft, and immediately ; u Pon his release was for the second time 'sentenced to a term for a similar offence. Prisoner was warned that technically he same within the provisions of the Habitual Criminals Act, and if he was again convicted he would not only be liable but almost with certainty would be dealt with under that Act. A. term of 18 months' imprisonment on each charge, sentences to be conouscen t, was imposed. HORSE-STEALING. ~A n elderly man, Richard Walton, denied wee charges preferred against him of stealing, at Cambridge on May 20,' 1907, a ' mate the property of C. Adams, and of attempting to obtain £1 and £1 10s respec"jely from Robert Bell -,vd Leslie SaunÜBr a by means of false pretences. The ©vi-

donee tendered by the prosecution went in the direction of showing that the accused asked the informant's eon for a ;loan of the horso to ride to Cambridge, promising to return with it the same morning at twelve o'clock. He got the use of the horse and tried to borrow £1 on it from Robert Bell, and subsequently offered the horse to Leslie Saunders for 50s cash. , Colin Adams, the informant, stated that he learnt accused was trying to sell the pony, and approached him. Accused offered witness the pony for £2 and to give any trial he desired. He said he had bought it along the East Coast. Constable MoNamara then arrived and took up the investigations. "It's none of your business," said accused. " But it is my business," interposed the police officer; " I'm Constable McNamara." "Well, the pony is not for sale," added the accused. Putting his hand on accused's shoulder the constable said, " If the pony is not for sale, you are for gaol." Corroborative evidence was given by Constable McNamara. Accused told the jury that he had been drinking, but he had not intentionally endeavoured to sell the pony. "I would not have sold it for half the money in Cambridge," he declared with emphasis. The jury brought in a verdict of guilty. His Honor remarked that he could not treat prisoner as a first offender, but at the same time would not go into back history so far as his criminal record was concerned. Prisoner was sentenced to six months' imprisonment. ■''"'.' ' ' ■'■

A SERIOUS CHARGE. : Eveland Taylor, a middle-aged man, who was defended by Mr. J. R. Lundon, pleaded not guilty to a charge of indecent assault on a child. Several witnesses were called for the proseoution to give the facts on which the charge was based. Constable Browne stated that when accompanying the accused to Auckland the latter said that in future ho intended to load a good life; he would not allow the little girl to give such evidence as she did in the lower Court, that he would plead guilty and got a good lawyer to plead leniency for him. Accused had been much respected in the district and had always borne a good character. He was in constant employment as a carpenter. Replying to Mr. Tole witness said accused's character in regard to children was not good. '' ■ No evidence was called for the defence, but Mr. Lundon addressed the jury at considerable length. Mr. Tole and His Honor also traversed the facts of the case, and the jury, after a short retirement, found the accused guilty, a request being made that His Honor would take into consideration prisoner's previous good . character. Sentence was deferred till to-day. <\ The Court, will resume at ten o'clock this morning.