AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVI, Issue 14225, 23 November 1909, Page 7

AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT.

ASSAULTS UPON CHILDREN.

SENTENCE DEFERRED.

The criminal sittings of the Supreme Court were continued yesterday before His Honor Mr. Justice Cooper. The Hon. J. A. Tole, K.C., prosecuted for the Crown.

An elderly man named Richard John Yeoman, who had been already found guilty on two charges of having committed criminal assaults upon little girls, was again brought forward on two other charges of having committed criminal offences upon children. The accused' pleaded guilty to both charges.

Mr. Tole said, in view of the fact that accused had been- found guilty on two charges, and that he had pleaded guilty to two others, he. would ask for a stay of proceedings on the other charges.

His Honor said that he quite approved of the course suggested by Mr. Tole, firstly, because the prisoner had pleaded guilty to the two charges they were then dealing with: and. secondly, he would approve of any tiling, so long as it met the interests of justice, which would save poor little children from coming into Court, and going through the ordeal which they had had to. He thought the Attorney-General would grant Mr. Tole's application for a stay of proceedings in the other charges. The accused was remanded until Friday for sentence.

IN A CABBAGE BATCH. Walter Clues, alias William Bailey, and Joseph Phillips . were charged with having, at Otahuhu, on August 30, assaulted James Clark so as to cause him actual bodily harm. Both accused pleaded not guilty. Clues was defended by Mr. R. A. Singer, Phillips not being represented by counsel. The man Clark, who was assaulted, was going home one night about 11 o'clock, and as ho was passing a cabbage garden on the way he saw the accused cutting cabbages. There was a cart waiting on the road, apparently to put the cabbages in. Clark called out to the two men, telling them they had no business there, and it was alleged that they then assaulted him by striking him and knocking him down. After an absence of between three and four hours, the jury returned with a verdict of guilty against both prisoners of a joint assault. Each accused was sentenced to one month's imprisonment with hard labour, to commence from the beginning of the present sittings. THEFT FROM A TILL.. William Preston was charged with having stolen the sum of £2 from the dwelling of Josephine Harrod on or about September 10 last. He was also charged on a second count with theft. He pleaded not guilty, and was undefended. The accused, it was alleged, had gone into a confectioner's shop, kept by Miss Harrod, and taken the money from the till. Miss Harrod had left the money in the till, ftn.l gone out to the kitchen, which adjoins the shop. There was a glass partition between, and through this Miss Harrod saw tne accused lean over the counter, and apparently take money out of the till. She came in to the shop, bin the accused had run away, and Miss Harrod went for the police. The jury returned a verdict of guilty. His Honor, said he was afraid, although the accused was a young man, he had practically commenced a criminal career. He was sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment, with hard labour. CONCEALMENT OF BIRTH. Isabel Sinclair, who was recently before the lower Court, was charged with the concealment of the birth of her child. She pleaded guilty. Mrs. Hutchinson, who was present in Court, intimated her willingness to take the girl to the Door of Hope. His Honor said he proposed to deal with the girl in the same manner that he had done with Olive Yates, . and he could only repeat what he had said on Saturday. In a case of this kind, when there were charitable persons, who would look after a young girl, he thought it was better for the girl and for the community than the passing of any actual punishment. The girl had suffered severely for her misdoings,. aSd he did not propose to sentence her to a term of imprisonment. When quite young girls lapsed in' that way, it was usually from inexperience, and possibly from a lack of moral home training, ■ and he thought some means should be token by which the girl's future might be saved. The law did not .'look upon this class of offence as a minor one, but regarded it as very serious indeed. "I know Mrs. Hutchinson," added ,His Honor, "and her goodness, and the benefits of the Door of Hope, and (to accused), if yon repay the kindness that will be shown to you there, you will be able to regain your former position." The prisoner was ordered to come up for sentence when called upon, and to stay with Mrs. Hutchinson at the Door of Hope for 18 months. His Honor added that he wished it to be clearly understood that nothing he had said about home influence was to be taken as in any way imputing a want of feeling of .the father of the girl for his child. The girl had no. mother. I

SIX MONTHS' IMPRISONMENT. ' Harold Ross Anderson, who had pleaded guilty in the lower Court to three charges of false pretences, came up for sentence. He had obtained certain sums of money on representations that a considerable 6um was due to be paid to his credit in a bank.

In passing sentence, His Honor said that quite apart from the £50 which the prisoner had obtained by misrepresentation, he had obtained sums of £5 and £6 10s by valueless cheques on different dates. It was, difficult for His Honor to come to a conclusion that the prisoner had no criminal intent. He would not pass a long sentence, but he thought the probation officer, who' did not think the circumstances warranted his recommending the prisoner being admitted to probation, was'justified. The prisoner would be sentenced to six months' imprisonment with hard labour. COUNSEL AND CLIENT. A young man named Thomas Coulton was charged with having broken and entered a shop near Whangaroa and with having stolen therefrom about 301b weight of kauri gum. The accused entered a plea of not guilty, and asked that his case might stand down until the following day. , His Honor: Why? ' The accused said that he had written to a lawyer asking him to undertake the defence, and he had received no reply. Mr. J. R. Lundon said accused had written him a note asking him to go and see him with a view to his undertaking the defence. He received that note last week, but had not been able to see the accused until that morning. The accused had not a copy of the depositions, and he had not a penny in the world. His Honor said he supposed, the prisoner's having no. money would make no difference to his defence.

Mr. Lundon said he had defended so many penniless prisoners that one more or less made no difference.

"Constantly in this Court," he added, " there is a difficulty, where a prisoner has no money and no friends, in getting a copy of the depositions, and frequently counsel has to pay for one himself." His Honor: My own opinion is that the prisoner, whether he has money or not, should be provided with a copy of the depositions. In these days, when a number of copies can be typed at once on the same machine, it would cost the country nothing to do it. Mr. Lundon said that he had not looked through the depositions, and if the case could stand down until the next day he would see if there was a defence, and, if so, he would be prepared to undertake it, even though the man had no money. His Honor thought that the case could stand down until this morning. He also said that when in Wellington he would approach the Justice Department in regard to the depositions, and would, ask the other judges, to do *>«