THE SUPREME COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LI, Issue 15625, 3 June 1914, Page 4

THE SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SESSIONS, ALLEGATION OF FORGERY PROSECUTION FAILS. The criminal sittings of the Supreme Court were continued yesterday before His Honor Mr. Justice Stringer. The youth Norman Nixon, alias Horacs Cornish (Mr. •J. R. Lundon), who wna charged on Monday on four counts arising out of the alleged forgery of two cheques, was before the Court again yesterday when the case was brought to a conclusion,' Accused was charged with forging 3 document, purporting to bo a cheque, fop £10 68, at Te Aroha, on February 14, and with forging a similar documont for £5 15, on February 16, at Mercer. Ho was f ur ther charged that on March 2, at T« Aroha, he caused one William Charles Cooto to act upon the cheque for £10 63 as if it wero genuine, and that on Febnary 16 he obtained by false pretences, at Mercer, the sum of £5 14s 6d (rom Violet Louisa Pickett.

Counsel for the accused and the Hon. J. A. Tole, K.C., having addressed the jury the previous day, His Honor, on the resumption of tho case yesterday, proceeded to sum up. After explaining the nature of tho charges, His Honor called the attention of the jury to some peculiar features in the defence set up. Forgery was usually a rather simplo matter for a jury to deal with, and so it would have been in this .iso, but for tho remarkablo defence. Tho jury must dismiss from their minds any suggestion of ill-treatment of the accused by Costello. If the accused had not been paid, then he should have tho matter settled by a magistrate. The non-pay-ment of wages was no excuse for committing forgery. With regard to tho uttering of the cheques, the fact that there was 110 concealment oil the part of the accused was in his favour. Tlkj defenco set up was that Costello owed the accused £23, and Costello therefore wanted to get rid of the accused in some way. Tho jury had therefore to consider what that meant. The defenco involved allegations of forgery, conspiracy, and perjury on the part, of Costello and conspiracy on the part of Mulvey (apparently part-owner with Costello). It seemed rather absurd to 6uggest that Costello would commit two forgeries and perjury when he would not benefit financially. There was a good deal said about the handwriting on the cheques. Tfsese documents would bo handed to tho jury, together with specimens of handwriting o£ Costello and accused, and they could draw their own deductions. Tho chequo for £10 6a was in bettor handwriting than either that of Costello or accused. It was sufficient for tho defence to raise such a doubt in tho jury's mind that even though they were not prepared to say Costello and Mulvoy were guilty of the implied charges, yet thoy must give the accused the benefit of the doubt; But if they thought tho defence was unreasonable, then it wits their d'tity to return a of guilty. Tho jury retired, and after being out for some time returned with a verdict of not guilty on all counts. Accused was accordingly discharged.

" THEFT OF A CHEQUE. ! [ RECOMMENDATION TO MERCY. , 1 •' A middle-aged man named George , Roger Weeks was charged with the tjieft at Mercer on February 9 of a cheque for . £24856 d. and a sum of money amounting to £4 7s, the property of Walter | Michael Poland, and with receiving at j Auckland on February 10 a cheque for' . J £24 8s 6d knowing it to have been dis--i honestly obtained. Accused, who pleaded fv ; not guilty, was defended by Mr. J. R. I Lunaon. The Hon. J. A. Tole, K.C., outlined. > the case for the Crown, and then pro-' I oeeded to call evidence. I Walter Michael Poland, contractor, re*' siding at Tuakau,, said that he called at Free's store, Tuakau, on February 5 to' | pay some accounts owing. Ho tendered' a cheque for about £40 and received in j change a cheque for £24 8s 6d and about j£9 in cash. On February 9 ho went to | a sale at Mercer. That "day he paid an I account of £3. He met the accused at ! the hotel in Mercer, and they had drinks | together. Alter tea he bought' a bottle lof beer and went with the accused to- | wards the river bank. They sat down j and drank the beer between them and he knew no more until the next morning. When he awoke lie found the cheque and money had been taken. Accused was a stranger to witness. Immediately the loss was discovered ho gavo information to the police. Frank Lawry, settler, residing at Ellerslie, said he accidently me', accused on the morning of February 10. The latter said he had a cheque to cash, and, as ho said he , was not known, witness went _to the bank with him. Payment was withheld until the Pukekohe branch was communicated with. In the meantime Detective Quartermain told witness that the cheque was alleged to bo stolen, therefore, when accused came to him by ap- , poir.tment at one o'clock, Lawry said he would have nothing further to do with the transaction. Accused said the cheque was given to him by Poland in payment for some land. Evidence for the prosecution was also given by Henry Free, storekeeper, at Tuakau, Robert Henry Sharp, sawmill hand, Mercer, Detective Quartermain, and Robert Baxter, teller at the National Bank, Auckland. Accused, in giving evidence on his own behalf, said he had lived in the district for 25 years. He camo up to the Mercer Hotel about 8.30 p.m. _ oil February 9, but denied that he was drinking with Poland. The latter came into the hotel and joined tho company. Pol?™ was refused drink on account of his condition. Accused, on oath, denied stealing the cheque, and explained circumstances by which lie alleged it had oome into his possession. Mr. Lundon addressed the jury at considerable length. He denied tho charges on behalf of the accused. In summing up, His Honor said it was perfectly clear that tho chenue was stolen. When a person was found shortly after a theft in possession of the stolen property the onus was on him to say how he came bv it. Accused had no given a satisfactory statement. The jurv returned a verdict of guilty on both counts, with a recommendation to mercy. , Mr. Lundon. addressing the Court on accused's behalf, said that he had been locked up for four months. As tins w accused's first offence, he desired to asiv I for probation. Drink was tho cause o accused's downfall. .. , In imposing a sentence'of three mon imprisonment with hard labour, Mr. Ju tico Stringer said that if accused franklv admitted the theft in tho l instance his previous good cnaracKr would have been taken into acc °, - and lie would havo been given ano <- opportunity to redeem himself. ri r. " Hon would have been extended to » but as he chose to go into tho wi . box and not only commit perjury also try and fasten the crime on an _ ... man, ho had to sentence accused. . : considered he had given effect. w> recommendation of the jury by. imp ° , a light, sentence. |