Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SUPREME COURTS.

[By Telegraph.]

Auckland, April 2. The criminal sessions of the Supreme Court opened to-day. In his charge to the Grand Jury, Judge Gillies said the number of cases was exceptionally small being only eleven, but the number of persons was exceptionally large, viz. 51. There was a case by Maoris against 19 Europeans, and a case by an European against 24 Maoris, the remaining six cases being by Europeans as against Europeans. His Honor, in noticing the rape charge preferred against a constable by his half-caste servant girl, said the case required careful consideration, as the girl admitted having previously had an illegitimate child, and that while she alleged the accused twice committed the alleged offence upon her in one night, none of five children who slept in the house seemed to have wakened. After referring to the case of attempted rape brought against a Maori man by a Maori woman as curious, if not ludicrous, His Honor went on to refer to the Cambridge ejectment case, wherein nineteen Europeans were charged with forcible entry by pulling down certain fences and destroying certain whares belonging to natives, notwithstanding their resistance. He quoted the legal definition of the offence, and then commented on it saying that what the law required was that the person ejected must be in possession and then if another came with force, arms, or a multitude of people to remove the person in possession, he committed the crime of forcible entry. The question of right or title to the property had nothing to do with the charge. The law discouraged the use of a strong hand. It required appeal to be made to itself. If the facts alleged were proved, there was no doubt the offence was one of forcible entry. The remaining case is one in which 28 natives are committed on a charge of assault and robbery with violence. This crime was an attempt to steal (section 44 of the Larceny Act of 1866 was quoted). The other circumstances, were the accessories which made the offence more serious. It was probable the natives would be indicted for other offences than the charges on which they had been committed. If the lattter bills were presented to them, however, it would be for the jury to say whether the evidence bore out the intent attributed to the accused. If they had some other object than robbery in view in making the assault then they were not guilty of the offence under notice, although they might be guilty of others for which they doubtless would be indicted.

The Grand Jury returned No Bills in the cases of Nicholas Marsh, ex-con-stable, for rapa at Maketu, and Hia, a Maori, for rape on a native woman at Maketu, Chas. Wener was acquittted of charges of larceny and horse-steaiing. Hry. Whitaker Duval, for larceny as a bailee, received three years’ penal servitude.

Wellington, April 2

The Supreme Court criminal session opened this morning. Judge Richmond in charging the grand jury, said he had again to congratulate them on the calendar, as, although there was an average number of cases, all of them were of a comparatively light character. He then referred to reform in procedure of the criminal and civil law. With regard to the latter, some action had been taken, but the criminal law had been untouched. They' were no doubt waiting the result of impending changes of the criminal law in England. He hoped that something would be done before long. The grand jury found true bills against al I the prisoners. Mary Douglas,, for housebreaking, was sentenced to three months, and Wm. Harris, for housebreaking, was acquitted.

Hokitika, April 2.

The criminal sessions of the Supreme Court were opened here by the Chief Justice to-day. True Bills were found against Tenant, for embezzlement, Coutts for larceny, Ferguson and Dunlop for cattle stealing, and Wyldie for embezzlement. Tenant pleaded guilty and was sentenced to nine months. Coutts pleaded guilty and received six months. Shanks was acquitted. Nelson was discharged, no evidence being offered by the Crown. The indictment against Wylde, late Town Clerk at Kumara, will.be heard to-morrow.

Christchurch, April 2,

The criminal sessions of the Supreme Court opened to-day. There are eleven cases to be heard. Judge Johnston in addressing the Grand Jury said :—I am sorry to say that the calendar which will be presented to your consideration to-day is by no means a light one as far as regards either the number or the character of the offences charged, but as I have often said before, I am unwilling to jump to hasty conclusions of a general character from such an occurrence as this as to its suggesting the existence of crime to a large extent in the colony. I happened recently to notice in the returns given or criminal records in the year 1881, while the con elusion is safely arrived at that the tendency to crime is decreasing the favorable symptoms are not to be qualified by the large number of convictions. The police have ascertained that the number of persons belonging to the regular criminal classes of prison has diminished, as also the number of houses frequented by them, while the number of convictions has considerably increased. The,. result arrived at by persons competent to judge is that the efficiency of the police and efficacy of the present mode of prosecution are thereby manifested. The number of convictions and of committal for trial is not sufficient therefore to cause us to arrive at the conclusion that there is any increase of crime.

Judge Johnstone passed the following sentences to-day : —lsaac Levy, four years penal servitude for forgery; Henry Doom twelve months imprisonmeat with hard labor, for larceny from the person ; Richard Carroll, alias Carl, three years penal servitude for larceny from a dwelling. In the case of Wm. Loake, for attempting an indecent assault sentence was deferred as the Judge may reserve a point for the Court of Appeal. William Connor was indicted for burglary, and on a second count of larceny from a dwelling. He was by an oversight convicted on the general indictment, though the charge of burglary was withdrawn. Mr Stringer, who defended him, raised the point that the verdict was not supported by evidence. Decision on the point was reserved till to-morrow.

The Grand Jury found No Bills in the indictment againt Bowron Bros, for breach of the Arms Act, and against men accused of rape. The trial of Ratirna Jacob, a Maori, for the murder of his wife, will be taken to-morrow.

Dunedin, April 2,

The criminal sittings of the Supreme Court opened to-day. In his charge to the Grand Jury the Judge said that the cases for their consideration were very few and of an exceedingly simple

character. They called for no special comment. Annie Jarvis pleaded guilty to concealment of birth and was sentenced to two months imprisonment without hard labor. William Patey and Thomas Wright for housebreaking, were sentenced to four months imprisonment with hard labor. Jas. Maurice, for forgery, received nine months. Charles "Vickers, for housebreaking, got five years, having been previously convicted. G. W. Winter, for embezzlement from the New Zealand Insurance Company, was found not guilty, but was not discharged, as there is another indictment against him.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/SCANT18830403.2.9

Bibliographic details

South Canterbury Times, Issue 3120, 3 April 1883, Page 2

Word Count
1,217

SUPREME COURTS. South Canterbury Times, Issue 3120, 3 April 1883, Page 2

SUPREME COURTS. South Canterbury Times, Issue 3120, 3 April 1883, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert