AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 14458, 26 August 1910, Page 7

AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT

CRIMINAL SESSION.

A YOUTHFUL BURGLAR.

The criminal session 6l the Supreme Court via." continued yesterday, before His Honor the Chief Justice, Sir Robert Stout. The Hon. J. A. Tole, K.C., prosecuted on behalf of the Crown. * •

Thomas Poulton, a youth of respectable appearance, pleaded not guilty .to breaking and entering a dwelling at Mount Albert, and stealing therefrom a considerable amount of jewellery. The prisoner conducted his own defence.

It was shown that Mr. William Astley, his sister, and another lady went to church on the evening of Sunday, June 12, the house being left in the charge of Miss Hannah Astley. It was discovered later in the evening that someone had entered the house unheard, and had stolen several articles of jewellery and some money. Entry had apparently, been effected by means of a window. Jewellery worth £20, and £5 in money, was taken from a jewel-box belonging no Miss Ellen Astley. Miss Porter, housekeeper for Mr. Astley, also lost £9 worth of jewellery, and a sovereign. Several of the articles were produced in Court, and were identified by the witnesses as their property. Some time after the robbery the prisoner was seen by Detectives Cox and Sweeney sitting on the steps of the Grey statue examining something. The detectives apprehended him, and found on him most of the missing jewellery, which was now produced. ' ,

The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and the prisoner was remanded for sentence until Saturday next. His Honor remarked that this offence was not the prisoner's first.

A SNEAK THIEF. Several charges of theft were brought against William John Parker, who was . ouierwise known as George Morris, and vViiiiam Saunderson. The prisoner was stated to have gone to a second-hand dealer with a pair of trousers. The dealer was suspicious, and remarked that the trousers must' be too long for him. The prisoner explained that the trousers belonged to his mate. He got 5s for them, and gave his name as J. Harris. The day previously he had sold a brief bag in tne same shop, remarking that it was the 'last of his kit. The bag was opened with difficulty, and all that was in it was a price ticket,, showing that the bag was a new one. The trousers belonged to Sir. Griffen, proprietor of the Waratab Dining Rooms, from whose bedroom they had been taken. No owner had been found for the bag. A verdict of guilty was returned after a short deliberation* Th<* prisoner was remanded for sentence until Saturday. The same prisoner was then charged | along with another, Miles Sinnott, for whom Mr. Lundon appeared, with theft of an overcoat and watch from'a boardinghouse. The coat and watch had been left hanging in the bedroom of a boarder one morning, and were gone by noon. The coat was said to have been disposed of by the prisoners in a second-hand shop, but the watch, which was worth seven guineas, had not been traced. Sinnott gave evidence on his own behalf. He denied having had anything to do with the theft, and said lie had never seen Parker in his life before until he met him in Mount Eden gaol, when they had both been arrested on this charge. He was not with Parker when the latter sold the coat. The jury found Sinnott not guilty, and he was discharged. Parker- was found guilty. " You will come up for sentence on Saturday," His Honor said, ''and it will be better for you if you tell the police where you put the watch." The Court adjourned until 10 a.m. today.

' CIVIL SESSION.

SUCCESSFUL INSURANCE CLAIM. The case of Harris Dorsen, draper, of Karangahape Road v. the Australian Alliance Company, a claim for £576 10s, alleged to be due .under a fire insurance policy, dragged on through a third day, before His Honor Mr. Justice Edwards, arid a common jury of 12. The defendant company did not. deny that there had been a fire, and that the damage claimed for had been done, but it alleged that the policy had been obtained by means of a misrepresentation, and was 1 therefore void. The alleged misrepresentation was contained in the plaintiff's negative answer to a question in his proposal for insurance, "Has this risk been proposed for, or declined by, any other office?" The defendant company called evidence to show that the risk had been declined both by the United and Ocean offices, but the -plaintiff denied this. Yesterday the last of the plaintiff's evidence in refutation of the company's allegation . was called, and counsel addressed the jury at considerable length. Mr. Cotter appeared for the plaintiff, and" Mr. Earl for the defendant, • company. His Honor, in summing up, pointed out the improbability of the insurance witnesses manufacturing a story to injure the plaintiff, and going so far as to force documents in sunnort of their case. The jury retired at 5.25 p.m., and returned a couple of hours later, with a verdict in favour of the plaintiff. Judgment was entered for plaintiff for the full amount, with costs on the highest scale, and two extra days to counsel.