AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVI, Issue 14219, 16 November 1909, Page 7

AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SESSIONS.

FOUR MURDER CHARGES.

TWO THROWN OUT.

The criminal sessions of the Auckland Supreme Court commenced, before Mr. justice Cooper, at 11 o'clock yesterday morning. The Hon. J. A. Tole, K.C., Crown solicitor, appeared for the prosecution in each case. The following gentlemen were empanelled as the grand jury:—Messrs. G. J. Garland (foreman) E. B. Alexander, T. B. Arthur, S. J. Best, W. B. C. . Brown, T. B. Clay, H. S. Dudley, D. W. Duthle, E. C. Firth, D. B. Gilfillan, J. H. Gunson, G. Hunt, J. Lawry, H. Maxfield, J. Roberts, W. Stericker, A. Tooman, T. F. Upfill, C. R. Williamson, A. C. Woolcott, J. B. West.

HIS HONOR'S CHARGE. His Honor, in charging the grand iurv, pointed out that included in the calendar were four charges of murder, one of committing an illegal operation, four of robbery with violence, six of indecent assault, six of assault causing actual bodily harm, two of perjury, four of forgery, nine of offences against property, and one of demanding money with intent to steal. In regard to the lcf6 grave charges, he thought they would have no difficulty in determining whether true bills or no bills should be presented. He regretted very much indeed to see that offences against children still existed. During recent years it had been the practice of Mr. Justice Edwards and himself to deal very severely with 6uch offenders when convicted, and the effect had been very marked. Dealing with the case of John Fisher Skipper, charged with cattle stealing at Whakatane, His Honor specially directed the grand jury to ascertain whether there was sufficient evidence of intent to justify the case being sent forward. As regards the charges of murder, His Honor pointed out that two of these cases were against young girls, both of whom were charged with infanticide. In the case of the girl Sinclaire the jury had to consider whether there was prima-facie evidence that the girl intentionally did away with the child. If they found thai there was no such prima-facie evidence they would throw out the bill on the charge of murder, but they must bring in a true bill on the charge of concealment of birth. With regard to the case against the girl Yates, the child was born alive, and the mother smothered it. The main question the jury had to consider was whether there was prima-facie evidence that the girl was in full possession of .her senses at the time. As regards the charges of murder against the man Allwood and the Maori Hohepa, it was plainly the duty of the grand jury to return true bills in each of these cases, the onus of > proof as to whether the accused were in full possession of their senses at the time - being thrown on the accused themselves.

TRUE BILLS. The grand jury returned a true bill in ' each of the following cases: — Edward Myers, alias Myer, theft from the person, Rotorua. Bernard Olsson, attempted assault, Te Awamutu. William Miles, alias Alfred German, breaking and entering by day with intent tcf I 'commit a crime, Auckland. i John Fisher Skipper, cattle-stealing, Whakatane. : Isabel Sinclaire, concealing the dead body of a child, Auckland. George Allwood,. murder, Dargaville. William Miles, alias Alfred German, theft from a vessel, Auckland. Hone Taotahi, illegal operation, Whangaroa. ■ v *' Tira Haare, illegal operation, Whangaroa. - , . • Olive Yates, concealment of birth, Auckland. William Duncan and Mark Craven Richards, assault causing actual bodily harm, Thames. Mark Craven Richards, assault with intent, Thames. - . Richard John Yeoman, indecent assault (nine charges), Auckland. .. r Hirini Pita, improper relations with a girl under the age of 16, Whangarei. Wharo Waiora, assault and causing actual bodily harm. Te Kuiti. - • ALLEGED ASSAULT. Two young men named William Duncan and Mark Craven Richards were charged with assaulting an elderly married couple named Duomovitcli at Neavesville, near Thames, so as to cause actual bodily harm. Mr. Prendergast defended. Accused denied the charge. At eight p.m. the further hearing of the case was adjourned until 10 o'clock this morning.. NO BILLS. "No bill" was returned in each of the following cases: —Olive Yates, murder, Auckland; Isabel Sinclaire, murder, Auckland. • The grand jury postponed consideration of the remaining cases until to-day. PRISONERS SENTENCED. NOT AN ORDINARY CRIMINAL. • Prior to the commencement of the sessions, seven prisoners, who had pleaded guilty to various charges in the lower Court, were brought up for sentence. Only five, however, were- dealt with, the remaining two, Harold Ross Anderson, for false pretences, and Wm. Cheesley, for theft from a vessel, being remanded in order that they might have an opportunity of considering the probation officer's report. The first prisoner sentenced was a young man named Norman M. Keals, who had pleaded guilty to charges of theft from a dwelling, and of breaking and entering with intent to commit a crime. Mr. J. R. Reed, appearing on his behalf, explained that Keals was not altogether in his right mind. After having been convicted on previous offences he was taken charge of by a highly religious family, and an attempt was made to convert him. The prisoner "became very excited, and adopted this method of running away. His Honor observed that Keals was no doubt more a fit subject for the asylum than for the gaol. He was not a criminal in the ordinary sense of the word, and in view of this fact His Honor, in passing sentence of one year's imprisonment, would order accused to be medically examined, and to be kept apart from the other prisoners as far as possible. EIGHTEEN MONTHS. •A young man named Charles 'Rolton, who had been convicted at the previous sessions for having had improper relations with a girl under 16 years of age, was sentenced to 18 months' hard labour. Sentence was deferred at last sessions, pending the decision of the Court of Appeal on a point of law. A FEMALE OFFENDER. Nora Harriett Minnie Bowyer, a girl of 17 years <of age, appeared for sentence on a charge of theft of a postal packet. Her counsel, Mr. Reed, was putting in a plea for mercy, when His Honor said he ,■ did not intend to send the girl to gaol.

He ; adopted this course, lie . said, more out of respect for her age and sex than for anything else, but he reminded her that this would be her last chance. The girl was admitted to probation for two years on the usual terms.

RINGLEADER AND ACCOMPLICE. William Scott and Ernest Hutchinson, two young men, had nothing to say in extenuation in respect of a charge of breaking and entering and theft, to which they had pleaded guilty. - Both, according to the record which His Honor read out, had been in trouble before, Scott twice for theft, and Hutchinson once for theft and several times for vagrancy. His Honor said Hutchinson was evidently the ringleader in the present case. As ringleader, Hutchinson was sentenced to three years' imprisonment, and Scott., as his accomplice, to two years' imprisonment.

CIVIL CASES. A CONTRACTING DISPUTE. After dealing with prisoners for sentence, Mr. Justice Edwards spent the remainder of the day.in chambers in hearing argument in civil cases pending. In the c;ise of John William Forrest v. the Ohinemuri Count}* Council, a claim for £1128 Is sd, for sen-ices rendered, Mr. J. R. Reed, appearing for the defendant, moved for a nonsuit on the claim in excess of £666, the amount paid into Court. Mr. F. Earl, for the plaintiff, claimed judgment for the full amount, less certain minor deductions. t Argument was . heard at considerable length. Mr. Reed contended that plaintiff was bound by the engineer's certificate, making deductions on the contract price, and that such certificate, whether right or wrong, was, under the contract, final and conclusive. Mr. Earl argued that there were no omissions from the contract, and. that as the engineer could not. create them he therefore had no jurisdiction to make deductions. His Honor reserved his decision. CLAIM AGAINST NATIONAL BANK. In the case of J. M. Lennox v. the National Bank, a- claim for £10.000 damages for alleged dishonouring of cheques and injury thereby caused to credit, Mr. F. Earl, for the defendant, moved on judge's summons that cause be shown why all proceedings should not be stayed on the ground that the plaintiff had become bankrupt and that the right of action, if any, was now vested in the official assignee. The question in this case, lie said, was whether the damages claimed by reason of the alleged breach of contract on the part of the bank were damages to the commercial reputation or to the personal reputation of the plaintiff. Mr. Tunks contended that even if the plaintiff was entitled to nominal damages only he was entitled to proceed with tho action. Mr. Earl contended that the damages claimed by the plaintiff were for injury to his business as a sharebroker, and that as such passed to the official asignee under the bankruptcy. Argument was not completed when shortly after five His Honor adjourned further consideration of the matter, counsel to complete their arguments in writing.