SUPREME COURT.

Otago Witness, Issue 3005, 18 October 1911, Page 63

SUPREME COURT.

PRISONERS FOR SENTENCE. Tuesday, October 3. (Before His Honor Mr Justice Williams.) FAILING TO KEEP PROPER BOOKS. James Hughes was brought up for sentence on a charge of failing to keep proper books of accountMr Hanlon, who appeared for prisoner, said Hughes was a journeyman carpenter, who during the last 15 or 18 months had succeeded in getting a couple of contracts —not very iarge ones, —and whilst carrying them out failed to keep proper books. Between whiles he worked at his trade as a journeyman ; it was only at slack time that he tried to get contracts to keep himself going. It was true that during these contracts he had failed to keep books such as would show his position; but although he muddled his affairs, he (Mr Hanlon) did not think it would be suggested by the Crown that the man was guilty of dishonesty. Further. Hughes had already for three weeks and two days been in prison. His position was not that of a trader of standing. Mr Macas:ey, who represented the Crown, stated that Hughes was a native of Ireland, 35 years of age, and he arrived here from Ireland in 1891. Nothing was previously known against him... _ He had the reputation of being an industrious man. The creditors' complaint was that he entered upon a contract, lost money, and incurred fresh liabilities under a second contract.

His Honor: No suggestion of fraud? Mr Maeassey: No. Mere muddling, I think.

His Honor: He has been in prison for three weeks anil two is&yys. That, in the circumstances, is, I think, pretty well enough. The sentence of the court is that he be imprisoned for one day. He will be discharged to-morrow.

EAL§E PRETENCES. Norman Leonard Findlay was placed in the dook for sentence on four charges of false pretences by means of valueless cheques issued at Dunedin, Milton, and Mosgiel. Mr Irwin, who appeared for Findlay, said prisoner was 21 years of e&f, and nothing was known against him prior to this series of offences, when he committed three other offences, for which he. had _ been sentenced in the lower court. ■ His parents were /respectable people, living in Taranaki. It seemed that the accused, when only 17 years old entered the employ of_ a firm of agents in New Plymouth, and with salary and commission he earned about £6 a week. Apparently he was handling too much money. His business necessitated his meeting purchasers and vendors- of properties, and he acquired tho habit of drinking, but he did not seem to have been drinking to excess at that time. He remained in that employment for three years, and was trusted all the tme. Then he left and started on his own account, when only 20, with the result that he spent what money he had and then came to Otago looking for employment. The depositions showed that he committed _ the offences in a stupid fashion, when, in a muddled state, though not drunk. Mr Macassey said that nothing was previously known against tho man. He was a native of New Zealand, and the son of respectable parents. He (ML Macassey) thought the prisoner's position was really due to drink. . He was convicted on three charges of false pretences at Dune din on th© 4th September, and got a month on each, the sentences to be concurrent. Those were offences committed at Wellington and other places on his way down. He cashed the cheques as ho came along. His Honor sentenced accused to three months' imprisonment on each charge, the sentences to be concurrent, a&d to commence at the expiry of the present sentence. If he came before the court again for. offences of this kind he would probably be committed for reformatory purposes for a long term. BREAKING INTO A DWELLING. Henry Wallace Smith Paterson, 27 years of age, stated that he had nothing to say when brought up for sentence on a charge of breaking into a dwelling in St. David street, Dunedin, and stealing therefrom £2l.

Mr Macaesey said that Paterson was a native of New Zealand and a labourer. His character was reported to be bad. He was at one time a cadet in the railway service, but lost his place by thieving, for which he was sentenced to six months' imprisonment. Afterwards he was punished for disorderly behaviour, obscene language, resisting the police, drunkenness, and failing to obey a maintenance order in respect of a baby. His Honor: A great part of the money was restored, was it not? Mr Macassey: I think all but £4.

His Honor sentenced prisoner to ( S'ix months' imprisonment, and added: "If you come before the court again on a charge of this kind you jwill probably be committed for reformatory purposes for a long term; so the best thing you can do when you come out of prison is to go straight, and avoid drink."

IN CHAMBERS. HENDEHSON V. HENDEESON AND ANOTHEH. Summons for payment of wife's costs and security for coats arising out of a petition for dissolution of marriage in the case of Robert Henderson v. Emilie Jeanie Henderson and Thomas George Do Rcnzy. Mr A. S. Adams said he moved for an order for payment of the amount fixed by the registrar and security. Mr Jno. MacGregor submitted that the matter should not be dealt with then, because there had been filed an application by the respondent for the removal of the Gase to Auckland. His Honor said it should be removed, of course, and the removal might affect the question of costs. Mr MacGregor said he understood the husband intended to be allowed to proceed in forma pauperis. Mr Adams said his objection was that the wife had been prepared to oome to trial here. She was without means, arffl if this change of veirue was ordered, and if the husband was to be allowed to continue the suit in forma pauperis where was the wife going to be? She had nothing. Be-rare any change of venue was considered he contended that costs should be paid. Ho understood that the husband was making £3 to £4- a week, and had never contributed a shilling towards his wife's support since the petition was filed.

His Honor made an order for the payment of cost?, and also for security, subject, however, as to the latter order, to any right the husband might have to apoly to proceed in forma pauperis—costs of the summons to be costs in the cause.