SUMMARY JURISDICTION

New Zealand Times, Volume LXXI, Issue 4302, 11 March 1901, Page 2

SUMMARY JURISDICTION

ATTEMPT TO SUBORN WITNESSES. Mr Justice Cooper sat in criminal jurisdiction in the Supreme Court on ■.Saturday, and dealt with three prisoners who had pleaded guilty under the Indictable Offences Summary Jurisdiction Act of last session. Albert Huge Korth, for false pretences at Wellington, was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment with hard labour. There was a record of oouvielions against the prisoner for forgery in 1881 and 3884, forging and uttering in 1886, obtaining money under false pretences in 1892, and theft in 1894. In the case of Nahina Matu, an old Maori, who had stolen a gun, Mr Brown, who appeared for the prisoner, explained, that the weapon had been taken under a native custom as security for tbo repayment of £l. A sentence of one mouth’s imprisonment with hard labour was imposed. Thomas Cassidy came up for sentence for defeating the. course of justice. Mr Wilford, who appeared for the prisoner, said that tbo offence, in connection with which the latter was charged with having attempted to defeat the course of justice was one for which ho Was now serving a sentence. He was charged with laying to prevail upon two individuals to swear falsely foe a present of money in regard to a .charge of theft, for which he was now serving a sentence of one ' month’s imprisonment with bard labour.’

His Honor, in passing sentence, said r Prisoner at the bar, there arc two grounds on which I cannot admit yon to probation. Tho first is that you have already been convicted of an alienee, and the second is that even if yon bad not been, I consider that an offence of this description is one which requires punishment. There can bo very few more serious .offences io this community than those which affect the administration of justice. An attempt to corrupt a witness, or rather, to bribe a man to give false evidence, is one which, if it succeeded, would result not only in a crime against yourself, but also in a crime ■ against the other man. lam afraid that there is a. .great deal ton much laxity in this colony with reference to evidence given nn oath in Courts of justice, and I should not be doing my duty to the community if I passed over an offence of this descripl ion with a light sentence. I cannot fake into consideration the fact that you have a mother dependent on you. I wish I could. But 1 have to consider the offence that you have pleaded guilty to, and tho effect upon the public if a.Judge allowed a prisoner who committed an offence of this description to igd at largo without even a short term of imprison, mont. I think that this is one of those charges which go 1 o the very root of the administration of justice in this colony. I notice, that you pleaded guilty to, the whole charge. In one instance you not only offered the person whom you tried to suborn a payment, but yon also dietated to him tho false evidence you wished him to give. He was superior to the temptation you held out to him. In the second instance'you also offered money, but you die} not absolutely tell tho man what it whs you .wanted' him to .swear, although, you suggested to him that ho should give false evidence, in cider to assist you in your defence. I. shall not pass over 'this crime, lightly. You arc liable to two years’ imprisonment with hard labour. I shall not give you the full but I cannot , sentence you to loss than one year’s imprisonment with bard labour.