SUPREME COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 150, 9 May 1862, Page 5

SUPREME COURT.

■ Thursday, May 8, 18G2. (Before His Honor Judge Gresson.) ■ His Honor Judge Gresson took his s;at on the Bench at 11 o'clock. , After the usual proclamation had been made by the crier of the court, the following gentlemen were empannelled on the Grand Jury : A. "W. Morris, merchant, Dunedin, (foreman) J. T. J. Boyd, gentleman, Dunedin John Jones, merchant, Dunedin Arthur John Burns; J.P., Mossjriel, E. Taieri James Itattray, merchant, Dunedin It. S. Cantrell, gentleman, Dunedin W. W. Tickle, merchant, Dunedin Thomas Norton, ship agent, Dunedin G. S. Wilson, merchant, Dunedin 11. Kirkpatrick. merchant, Dunedin FraiikOrbell,'floekowner, Dunedin Alexander Carriuk, merchant, Dunedin John Cargill, merchant, Dunedin Charles Thomas Ick, merchant, Dunedin • Wm, Shand, gentleman, Dunedin ( jlr Henry Driver, who answered to his name, ■was excused, ho not being a British subject.)

His Honor the Judge then delivered the following address to the Grand Jury : —

.■Me; Foreman . and Gentlemen of the .Grand JtrhY— I. am surprised and gratified at the great' improvement which has taken- place in your city since my last visit. The number and character of youv "public:' building.?, the "gaiety and variety of your shops, the 'construction and repair of streets and jetties—all bear most satisfactory testimony to the power of British energy, when-stimulated by paying-e-old fields. • But, gentlemen,- there is another side of the picture to which it is my duty to direct your attention —viz., to' Jhe great increase of crime, caused ;by the'rapid influx of a large mining population. little more than three months have elapsed since the last gaol delivery, and yet the calendar before me exhibits 41 offences, comprising burglaries, robberies under arms, shooting, stabbing, and other assaults with felonious intent, forgery, embezzlement, sheepstealing, and larceny. There is nothing: wonderful in this. It is .the natural consequence of the enormous addition -which the population of the Province has received from the Australian colonies. Indeed, I believe that strangers visiting the gold-fields, so far from finding the population lawless or disorderly, are usually surprised at the spirit of industry and order which appears to prevail there. My object, therefore, gentlemen, in calling your attention to the increase of crimo is not" to censure or discourage, but to remind you thai; prosperity like yours has its duties and responsibilities as well as it advantages—in short, -to impress upon you the importance now, at the commencement of your career^ of establishing your institutions upon broad and enduring foundations. Your Court Houses, Gaols, Lunatic Asylums, Hospitals, &c, must be designed rather with a view to the future than the present necessities of the Province, otherwise their fate -will be similar to that of your present Gaol; they will no sooner have been finished than it will be found necessary either to alter or condemn them. 1 might refer to your admirable police force, as an illustration of the wisdom and economy of constructing your permanent institutions upon a liberal scale. Had the I fores been organised in a niggardly or economical spirit, faLely so called, the result would have been to I diminish its prestige, spirit, and power, and by cur--tailing its efficiency as an engine for the prevention of crime, ultimately to add largely to the expenses of the country, amongst the heavy items of which, will always be found the machinery provided by.the Government for the prosecution and punishment of crime. If wo reflect upon the cost of our criminal population, it will appear obvious that a gaol, which admits of proper classification and efficient discipline—which is provided not merely with the appliances requisite for health and cleanliness, but has also its school-room, its chapel, and its library, as well as ample yards for work and exercise—will, if properly conducted, in a very few years save to the country, by the ameliorating effect of its system upon the inmates, the extra cost incurred in carrying out a complete design. AVithout classification, the effect of imprisonment upon the young and comparativeiy inexperienced in crime, is to expose them to the contaminating influence of old and hardened offenders, whose babits they readily falls,, into--upon leaving prison, and are thus induced to commit fresh crimes, resulting in frequent recommittals. Gentlemen, 1 should lie sorry to rest the case • solely on the ground of economy.. A Government may be actuated by higher aims and a nobler ambition I than merely to save money, even though it be the I public money. I have, brought the subject before you in the hope that you will agree with me that, in your present state of extraordinary "prosperity, with a full exchequer, and a prospect of a vast increase of income and population, you may reasonably assume for your Province the honorable position of establishiug'model institutions for New Zealand.' Gentlemen, I will not detain you longer from your arduous duties. I believe that it is unnecessary forme to comment upon the ca6P3 that arc to be brought before you farther than to ask you to bear in mind that it is not necessary that you should be convinced of the cuilt of the prisoner, but that you may find a trne bill if twelve of vonr number shallbe of opinion that" a case "of primdfacic guilt has been made out satisfactorily. Should any doubt or difficulty occur to you, gentlemen, I shall be happy to assist you." At the conclusion of His Honor's charge, the grand jury retired to their room. , . Edward Russell, brought up charged with larceny, was discharged, the grand jury having ignored the bill,

LARCENY. Thomas Woods was indited for stealing a pocketbook, the property of Kbenezcr Wysej on the 22nd Febiuary last. . . ■ Prisoner pleaded not guilty. "In this case" owing to the absence of the principal ..withes'i, the owner of J;e 'pvku; book, wli'i it ay-licared-nain ship'captain, tho Judge directed the j.ny to-find a verdict of acquittal. • The prisoner was vhea nrraished on a ko"mu I indictment, for stealing-nt the Koyal Goorge UutcV.'on the 21st February, £VJ', .the property of John dunpboll. Prisoner pleaded not guilty. Mr.- Howorth prosecuted on behalf of the Crown ; the prisoner was undefended. It"appeared"that the-prosecutor; was staying atr tbe Royal • George ' Hotel on the ni^ht of the 2Ut i'ebruary; and on retiring to bed' placed his trowsers containing 18 sovereigns, one half-sovereign, and' 10 or I'Js.in silvcrundcr liis hiiad. On awaking between one and two o'clock the next morning, he found his trowsars had been taken from his pillow, and were thrown on the floor, and the whole of ihumoney gone. On discovering his, loss tho prosecutor wont down stairs with the intention of proceeding to tho detective ofrice. He found the jard door of the house latched, but not locked. He then proceeded to the detective ofiice and gave information ; and also stated that he could identify some of the money, he having marked soir.e of the pieces. The prosecutor had not seen the piisoncr that day, but had seen him often about town previously.

John Green, barman at the Royal George, deposed to having seen the prisoner at the house on the day of the night on which the robbery took place. ■. Frederick Hitehens, detective officer, deposed to the prosecutor having given information .of his'loss at about 5 o'clock a.m. on the 22nd February^ and his having stated lie had marked some of the money! Joseph. Tuekwell, detective officer, deposed that he arrested the 'prisoner .on the 22nd February; and on searching him"found two sovereigns upon him, one. of ' which (produced in Court) was marked, and was identified by the prosecutor. He (witness) had been some yearsa detective in Victoria, but had not known prisoner charged with any offence. .; ... / . The prisoner, who conducted his defence with con-' siderable coolness and ability, addressed the jury at some length. He pointed out the total want oftevidence of his\ haying-been either at the Royal George Hotel or in- the company of the prosecutor'on thedav or night in question, and referred also to the "slight mark.of identification, sworn to.by.the prosecutor, a niarkhis Honor the Judge had some difliciilty in distinguishing on inspection. •... :'. ■ ■ :;...;. HisHonorbrieily summed up, and the jury found a verdict of not guilty. ..-■ ■ . ,c ; His; Honor, in discharging the pi'isoner, expressed his" opinion that he had had a very narrow, escape, and cautioned him to be'careful for the future. - ... .STEALING -FKOSt A DWELUM. .■■ --■ Emily. Raffles was indicted for stealing, a gold watch and eliainj ■value:;.£2p, the property.; of-John :Alex. Ilossj at Waitahuna, on the 13th March. ■ •_ , ■ Mr. ; Howorth . conducted the . prosecution; Mr. Preudergiist defended the prisoner. . ~. . . : .' ~. '■ After the Crown Prosecutor had stated the case, the,, following evidence was produced on behalf of the prosecution :— ....■■•. • John Alexander Ross, deposed : I am the keeper of au Hotel at' Waitahuna. I remenibei:' the lath March, my -watch was taken out of my bed-room, 1 had seen it safe in my bed-room about 3 o'clock. I lnissecTit about a quarter of ah'.Tipur-after. I was at the,bar during the interval. My .bed-room is .about twenty feet from the bar. There is a back entrance to the Hotel. "., The prisoner "was the only person who came in>on 'that day by the back door, and she came in within the fifteen minutes. ■ She walked straight to the bar. She remained but a short time,,bought a glass of sherry and .went-away. She went out by the front'door another way. She, could enter my.bed-room in passing to the front door without my seeing her. I missed the watch immediately after she lert." 'I followed and accused her.of stealing the watch. She said, "what watch do. you mean/ Isaid, "mygold watch." She denied having taken it, and. offered to strip herself to be searched." I asked her to give me up my watch. There was a chain attached' to the watch. I then sent for her husband." I sent for the police.'," I did not accom: ' pany the police to the woman's tent., The watch and chain produced "are mine. I next saw them in the hands.of the" police. . They are worth' more than £20. ./Cross-examined by Mr. Prendergasfc.—l firstopened the door about two hours before I missed the watch.' When I opened the- door I did .not'.;see the prisoner. 1 did not ask her to take brandy with me", "'nor- did 7 I drink ■"*'anything with ber that day. ' I was never on terms of familiarity with her. I knew the prisoner and her husband. 1 never drunk with the wife alone. When'l went in to her tent I did not drag her to the bed by the skirts of her dress. 1 never heard of her dressbeing torn. I positively swear that I never asked her to He yrith me ontliatdny." I did not go into the tent at all. I stood at. the, door. My house is "made, of iron, ex-cepting-the frame. I have known the prisoner and her husband three or four months. I. can't tell how many times I have drunk with them at my house.

Police Sergeant Sheridan deposed : I went to the prisoner's tent on tho 13th March. . On entering her tent I asked her for the watch she had stolen. She replied she did not understand me. and she knew nothing whatever about it. I said I must arrest her, and I then searched her tent in her presence. I found the watch and chain produced to-day concealed in the floor of the tent, near the fire place. There was no one besides the prisoner and myself present. On taking them out of the hole, the prisoner exclaimed, " J!v poor husband, George, knows nothing of it," or fo that effect.

Mr. Prendergast then rose to address the jury, an:l as it appeared that there was only the c\ idence of one person for the prosecution, Mr. Prendergast was proceeding to comment v pon a statement to be made by the prisoner, when Mr. Howorth objected, and the Court ruler! that, the prisoner's statement not being on- oath, the counsel for the defence' could not be allowed to comment upon it. Mr. Prendergast then sat down.

The prisoner then stated that she had cooked for Mr. l'osd for five months. On the day in question he came to her tent to see about his dinner, while there he attempted to take liberties with her. He wasverv drunk, and threw the watch v pon the floor, and she put ashes over it, saying she would not let him have it again for his indecent conduct. That in the struggle her dress was torn. His Honor summed up the evidence, and the jury found the prisoner guilty. The Court rose at 4 p.m., and adjourned to 10 o'clock this morning.