SUPREME COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20022, 12 February 1927, Page 7

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTING. Friday, February h. The criminal sittings of the Supreme Court were continued before Air Justice Reed. SHAREBROKER’S LAPSE. Howard Beecham Pattrick appeared on a charge of theft to which ho had pleaded guilty. The case had been adjourned so that the matter of restitution could be '-”ie into. Mr A. C. Stephens, who appeared for accused, said that Pattrick had handed his partner a cheque making complete restitution. He did not know, however, whether complete restitution had been made to others concerned. The Crown Prosecutor (Mr F. B. Adams) said he understood that the remainder of the money was in the hands of Mr J. S. Sinclair (counsel for the complainants), and ho was sure that if the money was not in Mr Sinclar’s hands it would bo paid immediately. Mr Stephens said he understood that the probation officer had i-ecommended that accused should be admitted li probation. Accused had had a god war record, and was suffering from a disability. It was a most unusual thing that complete restitution should be made. Accused had forfeited his seat on the Stock Exchange, and had thus lost his means of livelihood. The fact that he had got £6OO from his relatives showed that there were still some people who trusted him. Counsel asked his Honor to take a lenient view of the case and grant probation. His Honor said that the case had given him a pood deal of anxious thought. Accused was almost in the same position as a solicitor was to his client. As the probation officer had recommended probation, and considering that restitution ’--d been made, his Honor said he would grant probation though he doubted whether ho was right in doing so. Accused would be admitted to two years’ probation. Costs (£lO ss) were allowed to complainants, TWO YEARS’ HARD LABOUR. Albert Harris, wh had been found guilty of receiving a quantity of skins, a rug, and a manicure set, which had been stolen from Messrs Turner Bros., appeared for sentence. Mr C. J. L. White, who represented accused, said he had had the privilege of perusing the report which the police has supplied at the request of his Honor in order to show whether Harris belonged to a gang of thieves or not. The report, Mr White stated, was to the effect that the police believed prisoner to be the brains and head piece of a gang, with whose operations three crimes had been associated. The statement, ho said, was grossly unfair and was based on hearsay. The fact that no goods had been found at Harris’s homo was said by (he police to bo due to the fact that accused was too cunning to have stolen goods in his possession. It could just as strongly be argued that Harris was an innocent man. His Honor intimated that he did not propose to take into consideration the fact that Harris was suspected of other offences. He had formed a pretty strong opinion about the case, and he could not lose sight of the fact that the principal witness against prisoner had stated that Harris had waited for him at 2 o’clock with other men who had been mentioned. If this were untrue why were these men not called? Mr White suggested that the men might be non-existent. His Honour: They were interviewed by the police. Mr White said that the only crime Harris had committed previously was the paltry theft of a bicycle while under the influence of drink. Learned counsel read a letter from the secretary of the Waterside Workers’ Union stating that accused was a good worker, but was inclined to indulge in too much drink at times. His Honor said that in spite of the jury taking a lenient view of the case it was perfectly obvious that Harris was guilty. He appeared to have token the leadership, which proved to his Honor that he was one of the main offenders. There were no mitigating circumstances. Prisoner would be sentenced to two years’ imprisonment with hard labour POSTAL OFFICER’S THEFT. When the case in which William Albert Ritchie, a postal officer, was to appear .for sentence on a charge of theft was called the Crown Prosecutor said that accused had not responded to his bail, but a warrant to arrest him had been prepared Mr Adams could not see, however, any authority permitting the signing of the warrant under the particular circumstances of the case. He had been told that there was a warrant out for Ritchie’s arrest from the lower court. The charge was against a slightly mental youth of 17, and involved the sum of only £l. It was unfortunate that the case had ever had to be sent to the Supreme Court. His Honor was satisfied that the warrant from the lower court was sufficient, and the case was allowed to stand oxer. OIVIL SITTING. CLAIM FOR INVESTMENTS. The Trustees Executors and Agency Co. (Ltd.), and H. S. H. Whitcombe, as trustees in the will of the late Todd Smith, proceeded against Elizabeth Erskine Smith claiming investments to a total value of £3090, which represented moneys paid the defendant for the purpose of investment, in her capacity as a trustee in her late husband’s estate, by her co-trustee, David Cooke. Mr C. ,T. Payne appeared for the plaintiffs and Mr j. S. Sinclair for the defendants. . Peter Orr Smellie, trustee clerk of the plaintiff company, _ said that as a result of investigations he made bo was satisfied that the investment claimed represented capital moneys of the late J. Todd Smith’s estate. He had applied to Air Solomon for the money, but ho had refused to hand it over until an order of the court was made. , “As far as the defence is is no defence,” said Air Sinclair. It is merely a formal business.” , , Saul Solomon, manager of Mrs load Smith’s estate, said ho did not feel justified in handing the money over without the authority of the court. An order was made for, the payment ot the money to the plaintiff, the costs of both sides to be paid out of the deceased husband’s estate. SMART AND SMART v. RAMSAY. In the case in which £550 was claimed for general damages in respect of injuries suffered by Arthur George Ivan Smart, one of the plaintiffs, owing to the negligence of the son of Alexander Ramsay, the defendant, and in which the jury had returned a verdict for plaintiff, granting £9l 12s damages, Mr H. E. Barrowclough. for the plaintiffs, moved for judgment, and Mr J. S. Sinclair, for the defendant, applied for a non-suit. ~ „ „ Air Sinclair submitted that the evidence on which the jury had awarded damages was not sufficient. ... His Honor: It was plainly a compromise VG Mr C Sinclair said that the plaintiffs contended that while the boy was sft in front of the lorry, defendant’s son should not have continued to drive on, hut he considered that on those grounds the jury was not justified in returning such a ver'diet. The hoy should have known not to strike the bullock which kicked him thus throwing him in front of the lorry. Counsel considered that through the striking of the animal Smart was guilty of contrihutary negligence. He was really the primary cause of the accident. _ Dr Fergus had said in evidence that the injuries might have been caused by the kick from t o animal, and the hov had stated that be did not know where he was kicked Counsel, therefore, anplied for a nomsint at the conclusion of the plaintiff s evidence. Air Barrowclongh contended that Ramsay had the last opportunity of avoiding the accident. Etc fault, lay. not in h.s failing to stop, hut m having the lor.y m IliT^IIonor: The difficulty is that many of these verdicts are given out of sympathy. They arc given because somebody is hurt. Air BiTowcloiisrh said that the boy Smart had linen pushed along by the .orry to which his Honor replied that a leaded loiry throe and a-half tons m weight would be more likoH run ovor tho ko>. Mr Barrmvr ugh said that (he hov had boon pushed o.dy a short distance. There was evidence to show that the lorry caused the damage. , , His Honor said that he had every sympathy wilh the plaintiffs, hut he had never doubted that there was no evidence on which damage, could be awarded, lie could have stop 1 the case, hut he thought it wa= always adv'=nb’e to M such cases go to the jury. Plaintiff, would ho nonsuited.