AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLV, Issue 13839, 27 August 1908, Page 7

AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT.

A JURY DISAGREES.

NEW TRIAL ORDERED

The trial of Daniel Munro, alias Warren,.; upon a charge of being an incorrigible rogue, in that he habitually consorted with persons of ill-repute, and that he had been previously convicted as a rogue and a vagabond, and upon a further count of consorting, etc., was concluded before Mr. Justice Edwards at the Auckland Supreme Court yesterday. The Hon. J. A. Tole, K.C., Crown solicitor, prosecuted and Mr. J. R. London defended. The prisoner gave evidence at length. In reply to His Honor and Mr. Tole he admitted that since May 21 last, when ho was acquitted at the Supreme Court on a charge of abetting a man named Walker in forgery and uttering, he had habitually consorted with reputed thieves, etc. Neither counsel addressed the jury, and His Honor summed up. The jury retired at noon, and returned at 5.55 p.m. with the announcement that they were unable to agree. Mr. Tole applied for a second trial, which was granted, to take place during the present sittings. STRETCHING THE LAW. A tall, well-dressed man, named Warwick William Wood, was arraigned upon a charge of obtaining two suits of clothes from a tailor named William Young by false pretences and with intent to defraud. Mr. Lundon appeared for the prisoner, who pleaded not guilty. The case for the prosecution, as briefly outlined by Mr. Tole, was that on November 20 of last year the prisoner went to Mr. Young, and representing that he had secured a billet in the Stock Department ordered two suits of clothes. Mr. Young congratulated the prisoner on his success, and it. was arranged that he should call for them and'pay cash. The prisoner, however, did not call for the clothes, but instead rang Mr. Young up from the Albion Hotel and asked him to send them along. Mr. Young did so, and shortly afterwards went and saw accused, who said he could not pay, and told him to send the bill to Mr. Hackett. Subsequently Wood went down to Dunedin, where he was arrested and brought back. It would also be shown, said Mr. Tole, that not only had the accused never secured an appointment in the Agricultural Department, but that he had never even applied for one.

Mr. Lundon called accused's father, who said that the complainant approached him with reference to the matter, but never for a moment indicated that the suits had been obtained by means of false pretences.

The accused also denied any intention to defraud. He had had previous transactions with Mr. Young, and in November last called in at his shop for the purpose of ordering a suit. He was shown different materials, and liked two so much that he hesitated in his selection. Mr. Young then came in, and when witness explained the situation said there should be no difficulty about that, and suggested that he should order the two. Witness did so. He did not state that he had seemed an appointment with the Stock Department. Immediately upon receipt of the goods Mr. Young requested payment, explaining that he had to meet a bill himself. Witness, who had anticipated receiving a certain sum, requested three days' grace, which was granted, but his anticipations were not realised. Mr. Young then threatened to force the situation, and witness thinking that he was treating him badly, especially after having had previous transactions with him, determined to let him wait a while for his money. He could have settled the account shortly afterwards, but did not do so for the reason stated. W. E. Hackett, solicitor, also gave evidence. His Honor, in summing up, said he did not think it was sale to convict, and commented upon what lie termed a nasty aspect of the case, the bringing in of the .criminal law to enforce what was really a civil claim. The jury, without retiring, returned a verdict of not guilty, and Wood was thereupon discharged. The Court adjourned until 10.30 a.m. to-day.