AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIX, Issue 14924, 23 February 1912, Page 5

AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT

A CASE BREAKS DOWNv

TE KUITI FORGERY CHARGE

, AN UNRELIABLE WITNESS.

The criminal sessions of the Supreme Court were continued yesterday before Mr. Justice Edwards and Mr. Justice Chapman, the first-named judge flitting in the Supreme Court room and the latter in the Arbitration Court room. The Hon. J. A. Vole, K.G., Crown solicitor, and Mr. Selwyn Mays, assistant Crown solicitor, conducted the prosecutions. A middle-aged man named John Carr, of To Kuiti, was charged before Mr. Justice Chapman with the forgery on August 14 last, of a document, purporting to be a full dischargo of a debt. Mr. Selwyn Mays conducted the prosecution, and Mr. J. R. Reed (instructed by Mr. J. P. Sharpies), appeared for the accused. A painter named William Jones stated that lie was engaged by accused to work on a job. The terms agreed upon were 10s a day, half to be paid weekly, and the balance at the conclusion of the contract. Accused paid him various sums weekly, ranging from £1 to £1 15s, and totalling £9 15s. He considered that there was a sum of £11 5s still due to him at the completion of the contract. He applied to Carr several limes for the payment of this sum, and not getting any satisfaction he sued accused for the amount. The words " wages in full," which appealed on a receipt that ho gave accused, were not written there by witness

y In cross-examination by Mr. Reed, witch ness swore that ho made daily entries in o his notebook of the hours that ho worked, e The notebook, which was produced, contained entries regarding other matters. Mr. Reed pointed out that one of these entries was written with a pen and the other with a pencil. The latter .'_ entry concerned a statement which witv ness alleged had been made to him by a :- person who admitted that he was trying s to poison his housekeeper. 8 Mr. Reed: Why did you change there ;" from a. pen to a pencil? ,_ Witness said that the second matter a was not a material one. a Mr. Reed: So you changed from pen to Y pencil because you considered that the > poisoning of a housekeeper is not a material matter? e 3 Witness Yes. r Mr. Reed: Why did you not render an - account? 5 Witness: My solicitor told me not to 2 send an account, but to sue without sendr ' ing it. f Mr. Reed : There is an entry in your - book stating that your head was very 5 bad, and that you were afraid that it 3 would drive you mad. * Witness: Yes, there may be. I had 3 two tumours on my head and I have since i had them lanced. ! At the conclusion of the eross-cxamina- ' tion, which elicited several extraordinary j statements, Mr. Mays said that in view of the way it', which the evidence had developed it was obvious that the Crown would not be justified in proceeding further with the case. He considered that k the evidence just brought out in cross- ' examination, should have been brought ' out in the lower Court, in which case . there would have probably been no committal, and the country would have been saved a great deal of expense. The now state of affairs had been quite unknown to the Crown. '* His Honor said lie agreed with Mr. , Mays, that the Crown would not be justi- ' fied in going any further with the case, as it was obvious that the evidence could not be relied upon. The jury, at the judge's direction, returned a verdict of not guilty, and accused was discharged. BREACH OF BANKRUPTCY ACT. Francis Berryman Kelty was charged before Mr. Justice Chapman with having failed to keep proper books of account for three years prior to his bankruptcy. The accused, who was represented by Mr. Richmond, pleaded guilty. Mr. Richmond said the failure to keep books was entirely due to Kelty's ignorance of accountancy. He had kept books, but in the absence of a proper system the result was unsatisfactory. His total liabilities amounted to £806. The nominal assets, which had been set down at £494, realised £216. Just before tho bankruptcy his premises were destroyed by fire. The cost price of the stock destroyed or damaged was £316. Kelty was offered £111 in settlement of his claim by the insurance company, which did not acknowledge liability for tho value of all the goods. Having no support from his creditors, and no cash resources, he was unable to face litigation, and he accepted tho offer. His drawings for little less than a year had amounted to about £240, which, included living and travelling expenses. The prisoner was a hard-working temperate man, and was now in employment. He was willing to allow his creditors to take all earnings in excess of £2 a week, His Honor said this was a matter that could be dealt with upon an application for discharge. Mr. Mays said the conclusion the official assignee had come to was that the prisoner on finding himself in a financial i tangle had followed the line of least resistance. His Honor said the judges had laid it down in such cases that probation could not be granted without having the effect of practically repealing the Act. He 1 deferred sentence until to-morrow morn- < ing. ___________^. WAKATERE SHOOTING CASE. ' The charge against the 17-year-old lad Arthur Walding>, arising out of the shoot- ' ing case on the steamer Wakatere, at. ' Thames, on January 7", was heard by. Mr.' ' Justice Edwards. The accused'was charged ; (1) ' with causing actual bodily harm' under circumstances that would have; , amounted to manslaughter had death ensued, and (2) with assault causing actual I [ bodily harm. The accused, who was do-' ' : fended by Mr. R A. Singer, pleaded not. 1 guilty. Mr. Tolo conducted the/ prosecu- ; tion. i The evidence for the prosecution was, similar to that given in the lower Court i at Thames, and already published in the! Herald. It was stated that the . injured! boy Rowlands was still too* ill to leave i tho hospital.. The evidence showed that, tho, accused had suffered considerably ] from grief after the affair. { The.accused, who stated that he was on c friendly terms with Rowlands, said that: ] just before the accident ho went to his i » cabin to get. a clothes brush to lend to Rowlands. When he opened the drawer v he saw the revolver (belonging to another c boy named Palmer). He todk it out to i l show to Rowlands, and holding it towards I A the latter he pulled the trigger, not know- I ing that it was loaded. The weapon was 1 given to him unloaded, but he did not t load it. He could not say who loaded it. 1 The jury returned a verdict of guilty ■ on the first count. The foreman (Mr. G. s T. Niccol) stated that the jury regretted c to have to find the boy guilty as they considered the affair to be purely ac- a cidental. " c

His Honor: It was not purely accidental. It was negligent. The Foreman : Yes, it was carelessness. His Honor: No one can regret the affair more than I do. Do you think, Mr. Foreman, that I should let the boy off on payment of the costs?

The Foreman : Yes, Your Honor. I think so. Other boys have done the same. His Honor : Other boys must not do the same. In answer to His Honor, Mr. Singer said that the boy's father, who had a family of 11, would bo unable to do anything in regard to the costs. He was certain that tho boy would do all that he could in the future for the injured boy. His Honor ordered tho boy (who wept on hearing the verdict) to come up for sentence when called upon, and ordered him to pay the costs amounting to £30 15s, no action for collection to be taken without an order of the Court. A VERY MEAN THEFT. Two young men named George Crowther and Daniel Joseph Lane, pleaded not guilty to a charge of assaulting and robbing another young man named Larsen, of a sum of five shillings. Tho case was heard before Mr. Justice Edwards. Mr. Tole appeared for the Crown. The evidence showed that on February 7 the two accused and Larsen were discharged from gaol. Larsen had a swag, which he sold at a second-hand shop for a few shillings. Hb gave the two accused two shillings each. They afterwards went round town and called at some hotels. Subsequently Larsen was robbed of his remaining money. Both accused were found guilty, and were each sentenced to two years' imprisonment. His Honor, in passing sentence, commented on the prevalence of this kind of offence, and remarked : " Auckland must be made safe; Auckland must be safe at all times." He also commented on the particularly contemptible character of the robbery in this case. CHARGES OF ASSAULT. A young man of respectable appearance and attire, named John White, alias Ambrose Gamage, was charged before Mr. Justice Edwards, with indecently assaulting a girl of 10 years of age in a moving picture hall at Newton, on Boxing Day. Tho accused pleaded not guilty. Mr. Tole conducted the case. Tho accused, who did not give evidence, made an address to the jury, in which he denied the charge. The jury returned a verdict of guilty with a recommendation to mercy on the ground that they could not believe that accused knew what he was doing at the time. His Honor, who said that such offences were too common in the Auckland district, passed a sentence of one year's imprisonment. A man named Frank Vincent, who described himself as an Italian, was charged with indecently assaulting three boys in Auckland on different occasions. He pleaded not guilty. Mr. Tole conducted the prosecution. The case was proceeding -when the Court adjourned until 10 a.m. to-day.