SUPREME COURT.—CRIMINAL SESSION.

Otago Witness, Issue 824, 13 September 1867, Page 5

SUPREME COURT.— CRIMINAL SESSION.

(Before His Honor, Mr Justice Chapman.) Friday, September Gtit. „ , His Honor ,took his seat at ten o'clock. 'CHARGE' OF STEALING A COW. ' George Lane (on bail) was indicted for having, on or about the Ist Fel ruiry, at the Abbotsford station, West Taiori, stolen a cow, of the value of Ho, the property of Alexander Thompson. ' The Crown Prosecutor (Mr B. C. Haggitt) conducted the case for the Crown;, and Mr James Smith appeared for the prisoner. The case, as stated, was this — The prosecutor is a shepherd, at East Taieri, and the prisoner is a cattJe dealer at Waipori. In February, 1865, the prisoner bought from his brother, William, a cow, which was then running on Healey's Abbotsford station, West Taieri. It was a yellow cow, with a white back, wide horns, and branded Wvß. The prosecutor saw the cow in LBGS. He did not sell her, or authorise her to, be sold ; but in the early part of this year, the prosecutor found her at Waipori, and took possession of her. The prisoner had sold the cow to Mr Cable, who sold to Mr Wrijrht, Unfortunately, Mr Wright had broken his leg, and could not attend the Court ; and another witness, Robert Blanc, was absent, as he had that morning broken a blood-vessel. From the fact that the cow was found in the possession of the prisoner, the presumption of law was against the prisoner, and he was bound to show how he obtained possession. — In his examination, the prosecutor said that he purchased the cow from his brother, who bought from another brother, who bought from William Brown, who had cattle running on Abbotsford station. After October, 1865, he went to the West Coast ; and while he was away the cow was lost. He did not see her again until the 15th January last, when he saw her at Waipori, and drove her t> Butler's stables. In consequence of something he heard from Constable Dunn, he laid an information against the prisoner, charging him with stealing the cow. — Mr Smith, before commencing his cross-examination of the prosecutor, asked that the jury might be allowed to lock at the cow ; and. they went outside the Court for that purpose. — In the course of a long cross-examination, the proserator said : I do not know that the cow has a laruje white patch on each of her hocks. Ido not know what color her tail is ; I never observed that the tail was altogether white. " Wvß" is the brand of William Brown, from whom the cow was bought. I know that at Waipori, the place of the brand was washed down, as is usual, when it is desired carefully to examine a brand. This cow's brand was found to be " WB." — By the Foreman : I never advertised the cow. I had been back from the West Coast more than 12 months before I found her at Waipori. John Healey believed that the cow outside the Court was one which he first saw about three years ago, on his father's station, and which belonged to the prosecutor. He had never examined her brand. The Crown Prosecutor said that Blanc was better, and he proposed to examine him. — Blanc, who looked very ill and weak, came into the box. — In reply to the Judge, it was stated that there was no

medical certificate as to the man's state, and that he had not been advised by a surgeon that he was fit to give evidence. For himself, Blanc said that he felt very weak, and felt blood, every now and then, in his chest. — The Judge said he did not think Blanc ought to be subjected to the risk of giving evidence. If there had been a medical certificate that the man had recently broken a blood-vessel, his deposition at Waipori could, under Jervis's Act, have been read. — The Crown Prosecutor said that he was not aware of Blanc's state until the sitting of the Court. The man's evidence appeared to be very short. — Mr Smith, in justice to his client, would have to cross-examine Blanc if he gave evidence ; and Ihe cross-examination would necessarily have to be a close one. — The Crown Prosecutor said that, under the circumstances, he would not examine Blanc. Robert Robinson, farmer, Waipori, said that the cow outside the Court " looked like" one that he saw last Christmas. Some bullocks broke away from his place, and he found them on the Black Rock leading range, and drove them in. A cow, with a calf, would not leave the mob, and went with the bullocks to Lane's slaughter-yard, Wainorl Lane killed three bullocks ; and he (Robinson) next morning drove away the remainder. When he had got them through the township, he first noticed that the cow and the calf were not with the bullocks. That cow was like, but larger and heavier than; the one outside the Court. Robert Cable, had had extensive dealings with the prisoned In January last, lie bought the prisoner's estate;' &c. There

were some cattle,, and thp prisoner mentioned two cows which were at Sliackl'eton's dairy. -He (Cable) at once appointed, .as, manager of the estate, with an 'interest in ,the business, a man called Wright, who was now lying in a hut in the Waitahuna ranges, with a broken leg. He had not seen Wright since the accident, but he had forwarded Wright's wife and child, and a quantity, of provisions, to the hut in the ranges. — By Mr Smith : I have known the prisoner, for five years, as a slaughter-man and cattle dealer. I have bought mobs of cattle, privately and at auction, from agents and dealers. I know that the prisoner has done the same. I believe it to be the ordinary practice, in selling such mobs, not to give detailed invoices, stating all the brands, &c. , but to give short invoices. Wright has told me that, of all the mobs he. has purchased, he could not show a list of the brands, except in a very few cases. I have always found the prisoner honest and very correct in all his dealings. Jacob Shackleton, dairyman and farmer, Waipori, saw the cow now outside the Court, running outside Lane's stockyard, Waipori, about Christmas last. James Shannon, a young man whom he had seen working about Lane's place, gave the cowinto his (Shackleton's) charge. He kept her about three months, and she calved. James Wright came and claimed the cow and calf as his ; and they were given up to him, with two other cows belonging to the prisoner. i John Dunn, mounted constable, Waipori : I knew the cow outside the Court, when she was at Shackleton's, when Wright had her, and while she has been under my charge. On the 16th July, I arresced the prisoner, on a warrant, for cattle stealing. On the next morning, while in the lock-up at West Taieri, he asked me, what cow it was he was arrested for ; and I replied, " The yellow cow that Shackleton had. " He asked, "Is it the one with the calf ?" and I said, " Yes." He said that he bought her at the Molyneux sale, two years ago. On the morning before the inquiry at Waipori, he asked me to allow him to see the' cow, in order that he might be able to instruct his lawyer. I showed him the cow ; and he said, " That is her, right enough." The Crown Prosecutor summed up. Mr Smith thought the jury would believe that the police and the Magistrate at Waipori must have been sadly in want of something to do, when they could work up such a case as the present : for a more flimsy one had scarcely ever been presented to a jury in this Court. There was not one tittle of evidence really proving the identity of this cow with the one which Alexander Thompson said he lost ; but, quite apart from failure to prove identity — which was enough to warrant an immediate acquittal — the prisoner still claimed this cow as his own property, lawfully acquired. Here was a man who had been carrying on a large business in cattle for years, put into the dock as a felon, because it was alleged that he had stolen a cow which was not found in his possession until between 18 and 20 months after she had been lost sight of by the prosecutor and everybody else about Healey's station. Why, in 18 months, a cow might have passed into and out of 40 different persons' possession, and have gone over the whole of the Province. This case onght to be | a caution to dealers, and ought to lead them to demand from agents who sold mobs of cattle, a detailed statement, in every instance, of every brand or other distinguishing mark, on every beast for which they took men's money. He felt sure that the jury would at once conclude that his client was entitled to be sent out of Court wholly free of suspicion. The Judge explained the law as to " recent possession" of stolen property; and he gave a summary of the evidence in the case. He presumed the jury would conclude that the cow outside the Court was found in the prisoner's possession. If so, two questions only could remain :—: — Was the identity of that cow as the one lost by Alexander Thompson, established? If the jury found that in the negative, there was an end of the case ; if in the affirmative, then — Takitg into consideration the occupation of the prisoner, and the nature of the property — was possession by the prisoner, after a lapse of 18 months, a recent possession, so that the prisoner should be called upon to answer for it. The jury, after absence from Court during a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes, found a verdict oi Not Guilty ; and Lane was discharged. Thompson subsequently applied' for an order that the cow. might be delivered 'to him. ' > , The Judge said that he could only make such an order-when there had been a conviction. To obtain possession of the cow, Thompson must adopt such, means as he might be advised, , STEALING PBOM A LIGHTER. Williamßrannigan (36), who hadpleaded I

Guilty to an indictment charging him with having, on the 17th July, 1866, stolen' front the lighter "Argus^'iu the p.irf of Dunedin, eight wincey robes, the property of Joseph Watson and others, was brought up for sentence. — In reply to the usual challenge, hesaid that he had already been three months in prison, and had worked all that time.

The Judge said that the crime of which the prisoner admitted that he had been guilty, involved a breach of trust, and was therefore somewhat higher than a common larceny. He (the Judge) took the plea of Guilty as some indication of repentance, and he accepted as true the uncontradicted statement of the prisoner as to his having been three months in Gaol, and having labored during that time. The sentence of the Court was — Eighteen calendar months' imprisonment, with hard labor.

Thomas M'Dowell was indicted for that he did, on the 16th July, 1866, " feloniously incite, move, and procure, aid, counsel, hire, and command," William Brannigan, the felony already mentioned " to do and commit."

The Cr^wn Prosecutor conducted the case ; and Mr James Smith appeared for the prisoner.

The Crown Prosecutor said that the case for the Crown was — In July, 1866, Messrs Joseph Watson and Co. , of High street, received by the Alhambra, from Melbourne, and the Argus lighter, from Port Chalmers, a case containing wincey robes. It was found, on opening the case, that a hole had been cut through the tin lining, large enough for a man

to pass his hand through it. Inquiry showed that eight robes had been taken out, and that, in fact, they had been stolen by William. Brannigan, who was enabled to I get to commit the robbery by the removal I of a board from the hatch of the Argus, although the hatch had been sealed down in the ordinary way by the Customs officer. Brannigan was employed on board the Argus, and the prisoner was master of her. Brannigan was not sure that the prisoner told him to go and get goods out of any of the cases in the hold ; but he was sure that, on the morning after the robbery, the prisoner said to him, "Tommy, what was in the case I" He answered, "Women's goods; and I've given them to your missus." The prisoner replied, "That's all right." If these things were proved, he (the Crown Prosecutor) thought the jury would have no difficulty in concluding that the prisoner was an accessory before the fact of the robbery. Mr J. F. Watson, of Messrs J. Watson and Sons ; Mr Hill, the Collector of Customs ; and Detective Thomson, were examined. William Brmnigan : I am a sailor, and at present I am a prisoner under sentence. In July, 1866, 1 was employed on board the Argus, of which the prisoner was the master. I had then been working on board her seven months, off and on. I recollect, in July, 1866, our loading from the Alhambra, at Port Chalmers. We canift up the same day, and lay that night alongside the new jetty. I think the hatches were sealed down on this occasion, as was usual before leaving Port Chalmers. One hatch was broken through, and I got into the hold. I took out of a case there some robes like those on the table, but I don't say distinctly that those are what I took. I think that the top of the case had been broken. I think that the case had a lining, but I'm not positive, for I was the worse for liquor. I can't say how mary robes 1 took, for I never counted them. What I took, I gave away — some to Mrs Doyle and some to the captain's wife ; three or four to each. I did not get anything for the robes. There was nobody on board the lighter but myself, when I went into the hold. I did not have any conversation with the prisoner before going into the hold — I did not say anything to him about it, for he was not there at all. He knew something about what I had done, but not till the next day, or the day afterwsrds, I tluuk. Then, he asked me if I had been down, and I said, " Yes." He did not say anything more to me at the time ; but about two days after, he asked me, what did Ido with what I got. I had said that they were women's things. 1 replied to him/ that I gave them to the missus — meaning, his wife. I forget now what he said after that ; he said something which I did not exactly hear, for he waa going up on dock: at the time. The prisoner's wife was living • at the old Hospital at the time. I gave her one' robe there, and I gave her the others the- same night, on the wharf, close to the lighter. 1 I think she came on board j; but, whether she did or not, the prisoner was not ori board. ■ I don't know what made the- prisoner' ask me what th& things were ; I think' he must ■ijave noticed the case broke. He never asked me such a question before. ■ I don't feel at a'l like answering questions now, for I've been so much put about. The lighter was discharging when the captain asked me the question.

The Crown Prosecutor : What did theorisoner mean, when he asked you if you ciad been in the hold 7 Mr Smith objected to -the question. The Crown Prosecutor : What did you understand him to mean ? Brannigan : I can't tell what he meant. I don't recollect things. The Judj^e : There should be a limit to dealing with a witness such as this. At. present, you only show, at the most, knowledge after the fact. Can you carry the case further '? The Crown Prosecutor : Not unless your Honor -can make him answer my question. The Judge: I cannot make him answer. It is always very difficult to deal with a. witness who is under sentence. Brannigan's examination continued : The conversation was on the morning after we got to the wharf, and took place on the deck of the lighter, between nine and ten o'clock. The captain had slept at home that night ; I am. not certain whether I slept on board or not — I very often slept ashore. On this morning, I was working in the hold, and another man was working on the deck, at the* windlass. The Customs officer comes on hoard at nine o'clock in winter ; and I think that the captain came down about half- past eight on this morning. I don'i^ recollect that he went away again before we had the conversation I have mentioned. The hatch had then been taken oif, and the broken case was under the opening. I had not spoken to the captain that morning prior to the conversation I have mentioned. By being "in the hold," 1 mean that there was a space of about 2ft. between the top of the goods and the combings ; and that I was standing on the goods. I can't recollect what the captain said first ; I think he saw the broken case, and that he asked me wnat was in it. I had got through, the hole in the hatch before this time ; I don't recollect now, whether the captain ever got into the hold that way. I don't recollect whether I ever saw him go down like that ; or whether I have said that I had seen him. Once, a long while before, Avhen we were lying; in the bay at the Port, we all had to gothrough the hole to shift cargo. Weweren't loaded like. I'm not certain whether the hatches had been sealed clown this time. We had left off work,, and it was raining hard ; if we had took off the hatches, we should have got all the goods wet, and we wanted to trim cargo. The hatch was mended after that ; but it . got broke again, by a bale of wool coming on it, a few days afore this other time. I don't recollect seeing the captain get into the hole through the broken hatch, except that once when Are went to shift cargo. I told Detective Farrell that there was one plank of the hatch that was slightly nailed, and could be easily started ; that hatch was often broken. I might have told Farrell that "that was the way the captain and me always got into the hold." I don't say 1 did not tell' him so. I don't recollect one half of what I said : I'm in such a state I can't recollect. What makes me so ? Perhaps, if you was like me, and had to work 18 months' hard labor, you'd be in the sr,me' state, and wouldn't recollect. — (A laugh.) I don't say whether, if I said what yon have asked me, it was true or false : but' I'm not in the habit of telling lies. The' captain had always to take the marks on the cases. I cannot tell whether the case I took the robes from was broken or not when it came on board from the Alhambra ; the break was at the side ; I' should not know the case again, if it was beforeme this minute. The fact of the matter is, . this thing would never have happened, if I'd not been the worse for liquor, and I can't recollect what time of night it was when I got into the hold, The Crown Prosecutor : Was' it the first time you had done this kind of thing 1 Mr Smith : Is that meant to discredit! the witness ? The Judge : It is common to attempt to discredit a witness when he tells against otherwise good evidence ; but I don't know' why it should be done in this case.: The Crown' Prosecutor : Very well, your Honor. I cannot carry the thing further. ■ ' " ' - The, Judge : Then, gentlemen of the jury, the evidence only goes to thfc — If there is any guilty knowledge on, the part of the prisoner, it is khowledge.after the ' fact ; and that is not sufficient to support, the indictment. You must acouit the prisoned. k ■' ' A verdict of Not- Guilty was taken ; and M'Dowell was discharged, The Judge : Are you going on with the • indictment against Doyle ? ' •The Crown Prosecutor: Yes, yourHonor.' ' , The- Judge : Even- upon Brannigan's,' statement as it- is on the depositions', I don't ' see what evidence there 'is that Doyle- knew the goods to have been stolen. ■ { • - ' The Crown Prosecutor r She knew Brannigan and how he was employed;

and she must have known that he could not have properly obtained possession of such dresses.

The Judge : Very well, if you like to go to the jury with that case, I will take it to-morrow.