SUPREME COURT.

Otago Witness, Issue 2510, 23 April 1902, Page 4

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTING. Tuesday, April 15. (Bt ro"~r o"~ His Hoi. or Mr Jus*ice W:ll».ui - ) THEFT j-'KOM A DVELLIVG j Jjne Aimi«haw pl"dd--d gu'lty to two chaiseoi theft fiom a dwe'ln.g >n DuncJ::i ' Accused, when called upon, baid hei jge was 31 years. She h.id r-o statement to make. j His Honor. Is anything known about he- , j Mr Fij=er? j The Crown Prosecutor said this was the woman's character — On the 20th August, 1H93, she was convicted at Dunedin of theft, and discharged, on the 23rd November, 189 I *, '■he was convicted at Dunedin of theft, and ordered to come up for sentence , on the 28th of the same month she was convicted of theft, and ordeied to come up for sentence; and on the 3rd March of tlm jear she was convicted of theft at Dunedm, ai d leceived a sentence of 14 days Her general character was reported by the police to be that sh'" was addicted to drink and a bad cliuidcter. It was only right to say that hei character was bad only when she was drinking. When drunk she prowled about ay.d consorted with anybody, but when sober she was p hard worker and behaved properly. Mr Phillips (gaoler) said the woman had been in gaol foi a month, and had been working hard all that time His. Honor sentenced the "ccu^ed to t'irt-e months' impri'-O'-.iuent on ca-'i fliar^e tne sentences to mil concuriently— three mouths in all. ro°nr? v John H'Hitei pleaded gui'ty to j. cluija of foigtry Jl Ii icicarglll A(cus-.d, v. hen cj !ed up'in, slul hi- a£je was 19 yea. s Ho w.io defended by Mr W Do.w. c HUv.-art. Mr Strwait =ad it w.s the fir-t offence of which the accused hud i>i<?n convicted, and the probation officer's report win favouiable. 'I he evidence given in InvercargiU ?hov. ed that tho accused had always borne a good character Hi«- mother v.,i-. ?. widow, and the lioy helped to &upnoit In l Hi* picMcnt cmp!'\er had taken him back into his emp'oyment and given a en t'licaU that he would take him into hn emplcj ajjain if lie was t-dmitud to probation He Ucanied coimsel) u«kcd hi^ Hoi.or to admit the ac-uaed to probation. The Crown Prosecutor said he was in receipt of a letter from the firm that defended the accused at Invercargill, and al«o y letteT from his former emplojci, John Stewart. The detective in charge of the case had verified the statements in the letters. Nothing wa3 previon =ly known against him His character was good In arswer to his Honor, the Crown Piosecutoi =aul the uobts of the pioaecution would be about 3g<3 His Honor sa d ths accused would be re•ea=ed on probation for 12 months on condition that he paid £3 tow aids the cozti by instalment -j of 2s 6d a week. THEFT OF A LETTEE Hemy Wallace Smith Patterson pleaded j pmltv to a charge of stealing a letter contain- , mg clieque= amounting to i.17 9s 3d from a ' recei\mg-box, while a cadet m. the jaiiwaj bci-

When en lied upon, the accused gave Ins a^e a 18 year=. I Mr Sim appealed for the accused, ■who, he = aid. was a fii-^t offender. That being fo he would ask his Honor to extend to the accused 1' « ]jiG\i°ions of the First Offenders' Pio'm ioii Act. The accused v..is .a young man, who w.-.s employed on the railway, and the olToucg charged against him was that of btealmg a lettei. It seemed undesirable that the boy should be sent to gaol, but he (learned toursel) did r.ot know whether the probation officer's report was favourable or not. His Honor It does not seem to bo favour- | able. What is the pol.ee report, Mr Fraser? There seems to have been a suspicion of him before. The Ciown Prosecutor sr.icl a long report had been sent from the Oamaru police station by Sergeant King. The accused was a cadet, and was employed at Duuedin for tyro months before he was tian=fcrred to Duntroon in March lait. Previous to leavirg Dunedin he had been suspended for stealing c letter containing £4. Ho sa.d he had lost the letter. When arrested on the present churge there was found on him a promissory note for £48, which had evidently been taken fiom a letter. Some postal notes v.-ere plso found on him. They had been issued at Duntroon, and the stationuiaster there said h^ did not .sell them to the accused. The report of the accused's general character was not pood. Mr Sun. What Seigeant King said m giving e^ ideiice was tint the accused gave the prolnissory note np to him. I His Hoaor sentenced the accused to s.x ■ months' imprisonment, with hard labour. ' The Crown Prosecutor said the Ftim of £5 7d 2d was found on the accused, and 19s in promissory notes. The notes might be claimed yet, but the money was probably the proceeds of the cheque, ai.d he would like from the court ai' o-Oior ih"t the amount be lefundeu to the owuer. Mi Jjoudon. His Honor made an order accordingly.