SUPREME COURT.

Otago Witness, Issue 3231, 16 February 1916, Page 27

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. TTJE3DAY, FeBKUABY 8. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Sim.) His Honor took his scat on the Bench at 10 a.m. BREAKING AND ENTERING. David Cameron was charged with, on November 10, breaking and entering the warehouse of WiJson and Cunham by night with intent to commit an offence therein, and, further, with stealing from the tame warehouse 12 hides, valued at £3O. Accused, when asked) to plead, said: "I really know nothing about it 1 have been driven into it. lam not an educated man. I can neither read nor write, and I would like to go about this in a very plain way." His Honor: "You have to plead one way or other. Make up your mind what you are going to do. If you don't plead guilty I will direct a plea of not guilty." Accused said he would plead not guilty. He added that he had a wife and two children. The Crown Prosecutor (Mr W. C. MacGregor, K.C.) then called evidence in support of trie charge. Accused DUUtu' an irrelevant and rambling statement in his defence. The jury, 1 after a retirement of 20 minutes, returned a verdict on the second count —that of stealing. Accused was remanded for sentence. RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY. Christian Christensen was charged with, between April 1 and September 30 last, receiving from one Alfred Edward Johnstone scwt of assorted jam-, valued at £ll 13s 4d, the property of Irvine and Stevenson, well knowing the same to have been dishonestly obtained. Mr A. C. Hanlon, with Mr B. S. Irwin, defended. The Crown Prosecutor said that accused bought the jam from Johnstone, who until recently was storeman in tho employ of Irvine and Stevenson. Accused some two years ago was a customer of the firm. Alfred Edward Johnstone said that accused approached him and asked him if he could get him some jam, and he said lie would. Nothing was said about price or quality. About a week later witness delivered him some jam in the factory cart. He sometimes got cash on delivery, and sometimes he was paid afterwards. Ho delivered about scwt altogether. The tin 3 were all labelled. Accused would always say which kind of jam he wanted, and, if witness had it in stock, he would let him have it. He never asked him what he was doing with it. There was no fixed price of payment. Witness just took what accused gave him. Evidence was also given by William Ste-' venson, jun., J. O. Kroon, W. S. Adamson (carter), R. F. Duckworth, and Detective Cameron. No evidence was called for the defence.

Mr Hanlon, for the accused, addressed the jury. Te questions for the jury were: Did the accused receive the jam, and did he receive it knowing it to have been dishonestly obtained? No doubt ha received the jam—about scwt or scwt of the jam which Johnstone had admitted he had stolen from Irvine and Stevenson. Naturally, Johnstone would try to hido the fact that ho had stolen the jam, and, therefore, although the accused might be innocent, there might be suspicious circumstances brought about by the fact that Johnstone was trying to hido the fact that he had stolen the jam. The real question at issue in the case was: Had the Crown proved that at the time the accused bought the jam from Johnstone he knew it had been diphonestly obtained by Johnstone? He submitted that the jury could not oomo to tho conclusion that the accused could have known the jam had been dishonestly obtained. The jury muet judge by the accused's actions whether ho knew the jam had been stolen. It was stated by the Orown that when the accused was spolc-n to by .the detective he could not remember where ho got the jam, but that he had got it in job lots. As a matter of fact, the evidence showed that accused had sold 20cwt of jam. He had, therefore, received from other people 15cwt or 17cwt of jam, and when it was alleged ho could not remember where he got the jam it could not be taken as a point against him when ho had bought so much of it in different places. It was also alleged that the accused paid a low price for the jam. That would have been an important point, and if the Crown could have established that the accused Lad bought jam at a very low price, the jury might have drawn the inference that he must have known it had been come by dishonestly. ' But, as a matter of fact, accused did not get the jam at a low prico at all. Ho paid 3£d or thereabouts for it, and that was a reasonable price, according to the evidence. Johnstone himself said there was nothing suspicious about the price. The Crown also said all the labels had been removed from the tins that accused sold. But the explanation waso this : It had been proved that tho accused had bought a ton of jam from various people, including 3cwt or scwt from Johnstone, and when ho sold it, of course he removed the labels and sold it among the rest, otherwise people would _ have known whoso jam it was. It was ridiculous to suggest that there was anything dishonest in respect to the labels.

His Honor reviewed the evidence for the benefit of the jury. The jury retired at 3.10 p.m. and returned at 7.30 p.m. with a verdict of guilty, with a strong recommendation to mercy on account of the previous good character of the prisoner. Prisoner was remanded for sentence. i THEFT OF CLOTHES. Claude Osmond Barker was charged with, ion December 30, at _ Dunedin, stealing an overcoat, a rug, a suit of clothes, and sundry articles of clothing, of the value of £l2 12s 3d, the property of the New Zealand Clothing Factory. The Crown Prosecutor said the facts were short, but peculiar. The .accused was a clever young man, and got the goods without paying for them, in this way: He selected tho goods at the Clothing Factory's shop in tho Octagon, and asked that they should be sent to tho Grand Hotel, when they would bo paid for. Wiion a lad took the goods to trio hotel he was handod .an envelope by the accused and, believing it contained a cheque in payment, he gave a receipt. When the lettor was opened at the shop ft was found to contain a noto from the aceusod saying he had decided to cash the chequo at tho hotel office, and tihat he wouldgo to th<> shop nnd pay for 4he goods. That was the trick by which the accused obtained the Roods. Evidence was given by Ernest John Darraoot, Ernest Johnstone, Ernest Victor Sly-

field, Victor Thomas Wilson, Mrs Spedding. Miss Ainge, and Detective Hall. Accused said he wished to call evidence. Ho asked that Mr Bedford should be called, but was informed that that gentleman was out of town. He then asked that Mr Aslin bo called, and a telephone message was sent to him to attend. John Francis Wilson (owner of a motor exchange) and Joseph Phelan (butler) gave evidence which had no bearing on the case. Mr Aslin, giving evidence, said he had heard of an arrangement under which Mr Bedford received a motor cycle to hold for accused. He could not say whether there was any money standing to tho credit of accused in his books. Accused, addressing the jury; said the case was not one of theft, but one of debt. He had money in the hands of Messrs Aslin and Bedford, and he promised in his letter to the company that he would call and pay for tho goods. His Honor summed up the evidence, and the jury retired at 4.35 p.m., returning at 5.5 p.m. with a verdict of guilty. Accused was remanded for sentence. An order was made for the restoration of the goods to the New Zealand Clothing Factory. Wednesday, February 9. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Sim.) FAL3K PRETENCE. Claude Osmond Barker was charged with, on or about December 28, falsely representing that he was a military man staying at the Criterion Hotel, Duuodin, on hoLday, and thereby obtaining from Matthew Bradley a pair of boots, valued at £1 7s 6d. Tho accussd had been found guilty on the previous day of theft. He had also pleaded not guilty to the charge of false pretences. Accused asked to be allowed to withdraw his plea of not guilty. He had thought over -his position, and in view of the evidence on the previous day he wished now to plead guilty'. A plea of guilty was accordingly entered. The accused, who was undefended, sa.d ho was 20 years of age, and asked his Honorfor another chance.

The Crown Prosecutor {Mr W. C. MacGregor, K.C.) said that on August 23, 1914, accused was arrested on a charge of failing to account for £l3, and was convicted and sentenced to 12 months' hard labour. He had been out of gaol for only five days when he committed tho present offences. On February 8, 1915. he was convicted o: the theft of a motor bicycle, and sentenced to six months' hard labour. On May 13, 1912, he was ordered to come up for sentence when called upon on a charge of theft. Prior to August, 1914, he was engaged in a canvassing business at Oamaru, and while there incurred debts with various firms amounting to £IOO, none of which had been paid. On December 24. 1915, lie was d.scharged from Jnvercargill prison. Towards the end of the month he entered into agreements with a number of business people in Dunedin for certain goods, amounting in valuo to £ls. but the goods were not delivered. The police were of opinion that the man was suffering from slight mental aberration. His Honor sentenced tho accused to six months' imprisonment on each of the two charges, and ordered him to be detained thereafter for reformativu treatment for a period of not more than five years, the sentences to be cumulative. RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY. Christian Christeisen was called on for sentenoe, having been convicted of receiving stolen property knowing it to have been dishonestly obtained. Mr Irwin, who appeared for tho accused, said hib previous character had been exceptionally good. He had Jived in Dunedin for many years, and two gentlemen had come forward voluntarily to give evidence as to his good character. Captain Sundstrum said he had known tho accused for 40 years. He had known him intimately for 35 years. Accused had been in business, end had at all times borne an excellent character. T. A. Maitland said he had known accused for 20 years, and had always found him thoroughly honest and straightforward. The Crown Prosecutor said the police report showed that the accused was a married man, and was a manufacturing confectioner on a small scale. Prior to entering into business on his own account he had been employed by a firm of confectioners in the city. He frequently went to their premises and made small purchases, but was not trusted. Johnstone's information to the polico was that probably tho outside amount of jam stolen from Irvine and Stevenson's was scwt, but from what was found on accused's premises, and from tho amount of jam he had evidently sold, there seemed little doubt that a ton or so was stolen from the firm and passed through accused's hands.

His Honor said the report of the police was not favourable, but there appeared to be nothing more than suspicion against the accused in regard to anything other than the present case. In dealing with tho case, therefore, he ought not to assume that the prisoner had not hitherto been a man of good character. Looking at all the circumstances, and having regard to tho jury's recommendation to mercy, he thought he would bo justified in imposing a pecuniary fine. Tho accused would be ordered to pay a fine of £SO, and would be detained until the fine was paid, the term of imprisonment net to exceed aix months. STEALING FROM A WAREHOUSE. David Cameron, an elderly man, was brought up for sentence, having been convicted of stealing goods from tho warehouse of Wilson and Canham. He had nothing to say why sentence should not bo passed on him. Tho Crown Prosecutor said tho accused's correct name was Andrew Cameron. On January 20, 1912, at Taihape, he was sentenced to two months' imprisonment for assaulting his father. He had been working in tho North Island as a farm-hand, and was looked on as a half-witted individual. Ho came to Duneclin nine months ago and got married. On November 29, 1915, he was convicted of theft from a warehouse, and was Gentrmoed to three months' imprisonment. He seemed to have made a praotioe of working in stores for a few days, staying behind at night and getting locked in, and then, late at night, making oil' with goods. Ho was a cunning thief of a low mental type. His Honor sentenced the accused to 18 months' imprisonment with hard labour. This closed the criminal business of tho court. IN BANKRUPTCY. Friday, February 11. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Sim.) IN HE A. MEIKT,E. Alexander Meikle. of Livingstone, miner,

who was represented by Air W. L. Moore, applied for an order ot discharge. The Assignee reported that there wae no reason why bankrupt should not get his discharge, and an order was made accordingly. ORDERS FOR RELEASE. Orders for the release of the deputy offical assignee, Oamaru, were made hi the estates of tiie following bankrupts:—Robert Mahan, M'Kenzie John Richard M'Bryde, George Matthews, William Cunningham, Robert Cook, Joseph Henry Ryder, Samuel Moore, Peter Bradley and Alexander Bradley, Ambrose Alphoneus Falconer, Albert* Arthur Barsdell, Alexander Meikle, and Milton Augustine Peart. The next sitting in bankruptcy was fixed for May 5 at 11 a.m.

WELLINGTON SITTINGS. WELLINGTON, February 8.

In the Supreme Court to-day, Albert James Adams and Robert Ralph Carr, seamen, wore charged with stealing tinned foods and surgical instruments, etc., from the steamer Corinthic when she was at Wellington in December. It was alleged that tho prisoners, who had been drinking heavily, broke into the ship's' surgery and purloined the goods. The surgery was accidentally set on fire. The jury returned a verdict of guilty with no criminal intent, tho act being committed while the men were under the influence of temporary insanity. The judge said he would have to consider what the effect of the verdict was. Caesar Waters was found guilty of indecent assault on a boy, and sentence was reserved. February 9. At the iSupreme Court to-day Mr Justice Chapman sentenced Thomas Langlois (a Frenchman) to seven years and Caesar Wautors (a Belgian) to six years, both for indecent assault In the case of Albert James Adam and Robert Rajph Carr, seamen, charged with theft from the Corinthic, in which the jury found that tho robbery was committed while the accused were in a state of temporary insanity, tho judge ordered tho prisoners to be detained in custody, and said he would state a case for tho~Court of Appeal to decide the meaning of the verdict. ALLEGED SHEEP STEALING. TIMARU, February 8. After a hearing lasting all day, the jury acquitted William Tiplady, a farmer at Geraldine, on two charges of sheep stealing — 14 from one neighbour and four from another. Some of the sheep were found with the accused's brand on top of tho other, but not hiding it. The defence was that the sheep had strayed and got boxed, and were branded in error in a hurry late in tho day. The jury added a ridnr that the law should require all sheep branding to be done between sunrise and sunset.