Judicial.

Otago Witness, Issue 1416, 11 January 1879, Page 11

Judicial.

SUPREME COURT-CRIMINAL SESSIONS.

(Before His Honor Mr Justice Williams.) The usual quarterly (sessions of the Supreme Court were opened at 10 o'clock yeatf relay morning. THE GRAND JURY. Thefollowing were tho gentlemen sworn in asa Grand Ju y : — Mt ssrs J.imcs 13. Bradshaw (who was chosen foreman), James Jack, Joseph Braithwaite, Edward Gillow, Hector Brown, Charles M'Queen, J'endix Hallen^tein. John G'ondhiinsf, Fleming Laureneon, John O. Eva, Honry Noil', William Park, Evan Pro3ser, Andrew Thomson, Matin Marshall, Thomas O. Matheson, James Barron, Max Menderbhiusen, Thomas G. Young. Mr George Blyth was fined £2 2s for non-attend-ance. TIIE JUDGE'S CHARGE. IHm Honor, in charging iho tirunri Jury, said :— Mr Foreman and Gentlemen of the Grand Jury — The calendar on the present occasion presents no veiy unusual feature*. Theio are two cases of perjury. In this offence it ia necessary eithor that there should be more than one witness to prove the falsity of the matter sworn to by the accused, or if only one witness is produced, that his testimony should be strongly corroborated by circumstantial evidence There is & ease where the accused is charged undor the Fraudulent Debtors Act, with having, as a trader, obtained property on credit under the false pretence of cirrying ob business and dealingfin the ordinary way nf his t r ade. At the preliminary proceedings before the Maeistrate the Trustee in Bankruptcy of tho accused was examined, and gave evidence as to statements made by tho accuspd to him »s tnutoe. By an Act, however, ra°setl last session, thi3 evidence is no longer admissible against the accused, so you will have to consider tho case independently of it. The evidence is that the accused was a retail grocer, and that tho day bpforo he filed his declaration of insolvency he ordered and subsequently obta'notl from a merehviit, with whom ho lud bcou in the habit of dealing, certain b«gs of susrar whick ho did not p:iy for. If you think tint an order given by a retiil trader for goods of a kind dralt with in his trado to a wholoealo house with whom he had been in tho hibit of dealing amounts to a representation that tho goods were required for ordinary trade purposes, and if jou think that tho circumstance that the retail trader became bankrupt tho day aficr he gave tne ordor affords a roisonablc inference that tho ronrosentation was fiiloe, you will (iivl a true bill. There is a case where a woman is charged with the murder of her infant child. If you think that there is prima facie evident 1 1-« at the child died by reason of tho wilful act or omission, and that the n reused intended tn briiig about the death of the child by such act or omission, you should fnd a true bill for murder. If, however, you think tint although tho death was ciused by the accused, yet that the conduct of the accused amounted to culpable negligence only, you Phou'.d find a true bill for nuns' aughter Lastly, should you think thftf the evidonce does not establish prima facie a case of culpable negligence, but shows only that tho death resulted from accident, you should ignore tho bill altogether. The other ra«os call for no special comment. Gentlomen, if you will retire to your room the , bills will bo laid before you.

[ TRUE BILLS. True bills were found in the following cas<H :— James Miller, fraudulent bankruptcy; William White, forgery ; James Morgan, forgery ; Xli Coolen, hnusebteakiuir ; Wi-ltor Morley, Uroeny; Robert Angm, larceny; Denis Anglio, perjury; Margaret Barratt, alias Stephenson, Btea ing irum a dwelling ; Hymn Lyon Metz, forging and uttering aa acceptance to a bill of exchange also forgery; George Brown, for indecent assault ; Jane Reid, sor pcrj uy, luthoctso of Margaret tlio Grand Jury returned a verdict for manslaughter ouly. no bills In the cases of Reginav. Johnston and Rcginav. M'Noiton, charges of robbery, the bills were ignored. Tne Grand Jury were then discharged. (Before Common Juries.) FRAUDULENTLY OBTAINING. James Millet, a young man lately carrying on business as a grocer at Jlornington. was charged, uudor the fraudulent Debtors Act, with fraudulently obtaining goods from Francis Edward Little, on March 20th. Mr Adams defended. Evidence having been taken, His Honor pointed out that the contract between the prosecutor and prisoner was purely executory. The goods had been obtained by the pruouer after he had fled his declaration of insolvency, whereas the Act provided for the goods being obtained within four months before the tiling of nuch declaration. He did not see tho facts, as proved, could nipport the indictment. He directed the Jury to return a verdict of Not Guilty. This the Jury did. I'ORGING AND UTTERING. James Morgan was charged with forging 8 cheque for £3 on the 28th October last, and with uttoring the same with intent to defraud. Prisoner ploaded Guilty, Sentence was deferred till next day. William White was indicted on a ch^rjre of hiving forged a cheque for £i 17*, with intent to defraud, ou September 19th ; also with having dispose I of another forged cheque for M, knowing the same to bo forged. Prisoner pleaded Not Guilty. The Orown Solicitor (Mr Haggitt) prosecuted. Evidence having bsen adduced, Ihe Jury retired to consider their verdict, and at the expiration of a few minutes returned, the Foreman stating that the evidence was not strong enough to convict, and they had therefore decided to give the prisoner the benefit of the doubt. Hiß Honor : I quite agree with you. Prisoner was then discharged. H. Lyon Metz was charged with f>rging two cheques. He pleaded Guilty. Mr Adams, on prisons 'a behalf, priyed for the mercy of the Court— (l) because of the repeatability of his parents ; (2) because of the oriV-ner's youth ; and (3) because at the tinn ono of the vi eques was forged prisoner's father was supponed ti be lying on his death-bed, and prisoner had evexy rea on to believe that had his f >ther been Well he wvuUi have endorsed tin cheque. His Honor pointed out prisoner had firmed two cheques. Mr Adams could only plead the bhuo excused in both instances. His Honor sad he w uid p si s»ntei w he i.ext day. He was quite prepaicd to ta*o the ir.soner'a youth into consideration, but hi did not see that he could make any allowance for the fact that the pri« soner was respectably connected. The prisoner was accordingly remanded for sentence, LARCBN7. Walter Worley was indicted on a charge of stealing a silver watch, belonging to Eichaid Wheaver, at D.mtroon, on October 14th. Prisoner pleaded Not Guilty, and was undefended. It appeared ttut Wheaver w..<i stopping at Smith'a Hotel, Duatroon, at the time of the Duntroon races, and the watch was taken out cf his waistcoat pocket whilst he w*h lying asleep in his bedroom. The prisoner was known to frequent the place. Some time afterwards the prisoner took the witch to the establishment of Solomon David Nathan, pawnbroker, of Christchurch, who, seeing that its number corresponded with thai of a watch which had been reported to the police to have been stolen, at once gave the pris mer in charge. Prisoner then said he bought the wa'ch-for £4 from a man he did not know. Tho Jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty, and prisoner was discharged. LARCENY AH A BAILEB. Robert Angus was charged with stealing a horse, caddie, and bridle, belonging to James Morkano, hotelkeeper at Port Chalmers, on December 12th Prisone-, who pleaded Not Guilty, was undefended. It was stattd in evidence that on the day named the prisoner went to Mr Moikaie, who keeps a liverystable, and hired a horse, sa> ing that he was going to Blueskin and would return that evening. He failed to do so, however, and on the following day he was at tho White Horse Hotel, George sti'tet, endeavouring to dispose of the horse for £8 to a nvn named Alexander. The transaction was brought to an abrupt termination, one of Morkano'j gtooms appearing on the scene just in time to prevent the sale taking place. The Jury returned a verdict of Guilty, and the prisoner was remanded for sentence. PKRJCKY. Denis Angl.n did not answer to a charge of perjury. The Crown Solicitor : This man has been allowed out on bail, your Honor, in his own recognisance of £20 and ono surety of £10. He has not been seen for the last three weeks, and it is not at all likely that he will appear to take his trial. If he does not appear, therefore, 1 shall ask that his recognisances be cstieated. I may say tint the police were never consulted with regard to bail being allowed, and the amount of bail taken appears to me perfectly ridiculous, considering the nature of the charge. His Honor : Perfe tly ridiculous I am astounded that such a trifling bail has born accepted It is not likely the prisoner would appear when he could got off for £30. Tne Crown Solicitor : The last seen of him, I believe, was at Green island. The police have been looking for him, but have not found him. The prisoner's recognisance and the Bure.y were accordingly forfeited. The Court, at 4 p.m., a'ljourned till the following day, at 10 a m. SBNrENCKS Margaret Barntt (o7 years), stealing fiom a dwelling 1 . Mr Haggitt (Crown Prosecutor) said there was a previous summary conviction against her under the name of Margiret Birrattfor stealing sundry small goods, for which she received three cvendar months' imprisonment, aod up'n two convictions in th». Circuit Court, Lawrence, she received two years' imprieonineni Mr Caldwoll identified tho prisoner. His Honor, in passing senteuco, said : It appears, prisoner, you have been twice previously convicted beforo in the Colony, and that you have uudergono two sentences- one of three mouths, and another of two years. In considers! i' nqt your advanced age, I sh4l not pass such a sentence as I otherwise should, but, of course, I must treat you as an old offender. The sentence of tho Court is, that you be kept to penal servitude in the Colony of New Zealand for the term of four years. | Kobert Angus (30 yean) of age), larceny »B a bailee. Mr Haggitt said : There arc previous summary convictions against him, your Honor, undor various aliases. He received three calendar months' iinpri>onment as a rogue and vagabond, three other convictions a-o l ecordeu against him at the stsiion of tins District Court, Tokomainro, for similar offences to that upon which lie has now bnen convicted, and oihors <iro for obtniniu? money under false pretencss. Mr Caldttell identified the prisone r . His Honor: Tho S'n'enco of tho Court is, Untyou be kept to penal .servitude in tho Colony of Now Zoaland, for the ti rai of iivoyeais lijn.ru Lyon &<>l7.(M years of age), was br iwrht up for sentence on two clnrgoi of forgury. Nothi./g was known by tho authorities tf tho autccedeuts of the prisoner. Uis Honor : As this is your first offence, prisorer, I shall pass a comparatively light sentence At iho sauio time 1 must treat your case d fferenllv frtm the c»se which commonly occur <, of a haif-educatid man under the influence of drink for {in:; acheque for a few pounds. Your offence is considerably more serious. However, as it in your flr«t offence, I shall inflict, as I have said, a comparatively lenient sentence. 'I he sentence of the Cmrt is that you be imprisjned in the common gaol, Dunedin, raid kept to hard labour for the term of iwo yearc Ihe tetitenne is the same on each indictment, to tike effect comuirre'it'y. Jame3 Morgan (22), forgery. Nothing was known against the prise, er's previous oharactor. His Honor said : As this is your first offence, prisoner, and the amount involved is compiratively trifling. IBhill not pass a heavy sentence. The sentence of the Court is that jou bo imprisoned in the common gaol, Dunedin, for 12 months, and kept to hard labour. ASSAULT. George Brown was charged with having, on the 29th of August, indecently a^aulted a child, 11 years oi a£o, named Eli^beth, Moray Braid. "'

Several witnesses were examined, and Mr Dennhton then addressed the Jury ou behalf of the prisoner, and Contended that there was Dot merely a doubt as to the identifica'ion of the aceust d, but tha: the c was really no reliable evidence upon that point as a <onsideral le time — tßOmontl s— before, the child identified the man ■who h^d assaulted her. His Honor having summed up, the Jury retired for on hour, and on returning the Forenoon said : The Jury consider tho evidence of identity not stroLg nough His Honor: Then you find tho prisoner Not Guilty ? The Foreman : Yes ; Not GuiUy. The prisoner was then di-charged. HOUSEBREAKIKG. Eli Coolen was charged with breaking: and entering the dweliii g-house of James Young, Herbert, and stealing thoefrom (roods and money to tho value of £11 12s, on the 10th November last. 'Jhc pri-oner pleaded Not Guilty, and was dofended by Mr Dcuuiston. The Jury, after half an hour's deliberation, returned a verdict oi Not Guilty, tho Fottman remarking that the evidence was not sufficiently strong to support a conviction. The prißcner was then discliarßtrJ. MANSLAUGHTER. Marg-ret Scott was chaiged with the manslaughter of her infant child, at Oaruaiu, on the 14th of October. Mr Hatrgitt prosecuted, and Mr Denniston appeared for the prisoner. The facts of tb.fi case, as stated by the Crown Prcnecntor, wore, briefly, that the prisoner, for tome time previously to the day named in the indicimeut, had ben living in a cottage occupied by Mr and Mro Moore at oamaru. The accused h. d not infoimtd the persons with whum Bhe was living of her condition, and though Mr Moore had passed through her mom after the child had been born, (-he did not fell him nh«t hart happened. When she told MiSjMoore, Mrs M> o.e heard the child, and saw it, and then kf; to get assistance. When she returned the chid was dewd, and the evidence of Dr Fleming would thow that the child had died from suffocation. It was, tho Crown Piosfcuior said, in connection with this Euffocutirn of the chili that the iriso'ierwaa charged wi h niansl u.hter. It was imputed that the death of the child was due to her culpable negikence in not taking proper steps to preserve tho life of the child. Jf the piitoner had neglcctol to tike the steps necessary to procure the means to preserve the life of her child, when it was in her power to do so, she ha<l neglected a duty which the law cast upon her, and was gui ty of manslaughter. T. W. Parker, the X esideut Magistrate and Coroner at Oamaru, produced the dei oi>itu>ne taken at the Ootcmet's h\qwesti. Mrs Moore, Wia. fooore, Ma*y M'Liren, and Dr Fleming were examined, and detailed the cucum-taiic^s of tho birth aud death cf the child. . Mr Denniston asked his Eon or to decide if there was any evidence cf manslaughter lv the case, and referred to several cafes in support of his contention that ihero was no such evidence, and that an act of BO *fe. Bance wouM Lot support the indie ment. His Honor said he would res< rye the 1 oiut. Mr Den nib ton then addießsed the jury on behalf of the prisoner. His Honor, in h's summing up, said that the question of manslaughter did not involve any question of intention to destroy the life of the child, 'jo support a verdict of manslaughter, it would be nscessajy to find a negligent act, or the negligent omission of some duty on the part of the prisoner, and that the aeo or omission had been so l eglikent or car less us to amount to cria.in.l neglect The duty of the prisoner was to use the ordinary meanu at hand ana in her power to presorve the child's life; and it was for the Jury to aecido whtther the aid fo, what the inesus might have beeu, aid whether, if sbe had not used the ordinary nieins to pre erve the life of the child, such conduct amounted to iulpibb negligence. The Jury retired to consider their verdict at C4O p m. Shortly after 6 p.m. the Jury returned a verd'et of NotQuLty, and the prisoner, having been further arraigned on the Coroner's inquisition for the same offence and acquitted, was discharged. The Court then rose. Wednesday, Bth Januabt. charge of pekjdry. Jane Reid was charged with having committed wilful and corrupt perjury at the Police Court before two Justices of the Peace— Messrs J. Logan and James Brown— in connection with a prosecution for sly grog-selling on the 30th August, 1878. Mr B. 0. Haggitt (the Crown Prosecutor) conducted the case, and Mr Denniuton defended the accused. The Jury retired to consider their verdict at 4.15 p.m. At 6.30 p.m. the Jury returned, and the Foreman said : The Jury find the prisoner G-uilty, but recommend her to the mercy of the Court. His Honor : Would you tell me the ground of your recommendation, Mr Foreman ? The Foreman : The evidence in some instances was not quite satisfactory ; still there was a presumption of guilt, and various other grounds. Mr Denniaton : A compromise, in fact, you know. His Honor : I understand you. Gentlemen, you are discharged for this sitting. I have to thank you for the attention you have given this case. Mr Denniston : Your Honor will probably take bail ? Mr Haggitt : Of course it will have to be substantial bail after a couviction, but anything your Honor is satisfied with, I shall be. The bail was fixed at L4oo— the prisoner's husband at L2OO, and two sureties of LlOO each. His Honor : The sentence of the Court is postponed till the decision of the Court of Appeal is given on the points reserved. The Conrt then rose.