SUPREME COURT.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 3339, 14 December 1883, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

TIMARU—THIS DAY. (Before His Honor Mr Justice Johnston) His Honor took his seat at 10.30 a.m. GRAND JURY. The following gentlemen were sworn as a grand jury:—Messrs JohnMee, K. K. Parkerson, W. M. Sims G. F. Olulee, C. J. Eayner, W. Davidson, J. H. Gladstone, F. Hotter, J. Granger, A. Macpherson, F. J. Wilson, J.A. Gamack, R, Stewart, F. Cullman, D. M. Mackay, J, Hall, E, Elworthy, T. Turnbull, E. R. Pitt. Mr Elworthy was chosen foreman. absent jurors. Messrs S. D. Barker, F. H. Barker, and J. C. Knight, being absent were fined ; the last named five shillings, the others five pounds each. In the case of Mr Knight, Mr F. J. Wilson informed His Honor that Mr Knight was a mailcontractor and had been unable to find a driver to take his place and he was therefore unable to attend. His Honor inflicted a penalty of five shillings, which, he added, must be paid without delay, or it would involve some £lO expenses. His Honor stated that Mr Knight had written to him on the subject, and His Honor expressed his grave displeasure at such an action. Messrs Wakefield, R. A. Chisholm, and C, S. Fraser wore excused from attendance on their showing cause.

HIS HONOn’s CHARGE. His Honor briefly charged the Grand Jury. He remarked that both as to numbers and gravity of the offences the calendar was not a heavy one, though it was sufficiently so. He then proceeded to instruct the Grand Jury as to the various cases, and they then retired. TRUE BILLS. The Grand Jury found true bills against Charles Fobeul, for sheep-stealing (two indictments) ; John Flynn, for larceny ; F, C. Bourdon, for embezzlement (two indictments.)

A NOLLE PROSEQUI. Mr White, Crown Prosecutor, stated that in the case of the lad Newell, charged with placing stones on the railway line at St. Andrews, he had, acting on instruction from the Attorney-Gen-eral, entered a nolle prosequi , the lad being insane and likely to remain so. His Honor discharged the recognisances. SHEEP-STEALING. Charles Fobeul, alias LeLievre, was charged, on two indictments, with stealing and killing sheep at Otaio, such sheep being the property of Mr Thomas Teschomaker. The prisoner pleaded guilty to both charges. Inspector Broham, in reply to His Honor, stated that there were six previous convictions against the prisoner, and that he had for years past, been under police surveillance.

On being asked whether he had anything to say why sentence should not be passed on him, prisoner said he killed the sheep for the purpose of feeding the family of his mate Edmund Smith, who had begged him to do so, and who resided near his (prisoners) hut. Edmund Smith had urged him to commit the offence, and there were people who coaid give him a character. His Honor said Mr Broham had given him a character—six convictions. Edmund Smith had doubtless assisted in the theft and had then given information about him, but he had not been indicted. Had he been so, it would have gone hard with him, and he advised Smith, who was present, to be very carefnl in future or he wonld get into trouble.

Prisoner urged that his former employer would give him a good character, but he (the employer) not appearing, His Honor remarked that it was useless to produce such evidence, and the sentence of the Court would be, four years’ penal servitude, concurrently on each indictment.

LARCENY FROM A DWELLING. John Flynn was charged with stealing from the dwelling of Herman Mahnke, at Temuka, on October 12, 1883, a silver watch valued at £6lss, a chain valued at £l, a locket valued at 10s, aud a vest valued at 12s 6d. Mr White appeared to prosecute on behalf of the Crown. Prisoner pleaded “ Not Guilty.” The following jury was sworn Messrs J. S. Gibson (foreman), D. Ross, B. Jones, J. Rapsey, J. B. Forbes, J. R. Dick, P. Brosnaban, J. Cuthbert, F. E. Childs, R. H. Clark, A. Mee, and M. Reilly.

Mr White stated the case for the prosecution and called Hermann Mahnke,bootmaker,Temuka, who said on the day specified, prisoner called to see him (witness) and they had beer together. Witness, being drunk, went to sleep while they were taking the beer. The watch chain and locket (produced) were witness’ property, and he had last seen them in the pawn shop at Temuka. Witness had never given any of the articles to prisoner. When witness awoke, prisoner was not there, but the police asked him shortly if he had missed bis watch. He met prisoner next in the lock-up where they both were for drunkenness, and prisoner asked witness to help him out of the scrape. To prisoner—We had no drink together earlier in the day. We never had any conversation about your watch. Ido not know how you came to my house. I suppose I fell in with you. Ido not remember giving you the watch to dispose of for me. You told me you were a shoemaker and I invited you to call at my house and stop all night. I was locked up for drunkenness ou the Saturday following the commission of the theft. X was put into a padded cell in Timaru and remanded for medical advice. ‘

John Moreton, constable, detailed the circumstances attending the arrest of prisoner on October 13. Witness entered Mahnke’s house and found him insensible, and prisoner pouring beer into his (Mahnke’s)* mouth. Subsequently he found prisoner in possession of the watch and chain and arrested him, when he gave several names, deciding on John Flynn at last as his real name.

To prisoner—When I saw you at Mahnke’s I told you to leave. When I arrested you you were not drunk. You said there were people in Temuka who knew you, but you did not name them. Mahnke was arrested on the Saturday following the robbery, for drunkenness. Eobert Fenton, ex-publican, said that on Friday, about the date named, prisoner offered to sell witness a watch. Witness did not buy the watch. To prisoner—You were only five minutes in my house. T. Burk, constable, gave evidence concerning the identity of the vest. To prisoner—l assisted to convey Mahnke to gaol for drunkenness. On being called on for his defence, prisoner said two hotel-keepers, named Parker and Story, gave evidence at the E.M. Court for him, and he wished now to call them. They were not present, however, and His Honor, having looked over the depositions, said their evidence would have done prisoner no good, and called upon him to make any statement to the jury. Prisoner then read a statement, which was to the effect that Mahnke wanted him to sell the watch and chain for him, he (Mahnke) being during the whole time insane from drink. His Honor said the only question for the jury to consider was,—would an honest man, supposing the prisoner’s story to bo true, have taken charge of property from a man in the state in which Mahnke was at the time; and also whether the property had been handed to prisoner or he had feloniously taken it. The jury, after a few minutes deliboration, found the prisoner guilty. Inspector Broham said prisoner had been convicted on several occasions for drunkenness only. His Honor said the case was a bad one, the worse because the prisoner had his faculties about him and his victim was insensible or under the influence of drink. Ho would however pass a moderate sentence, viz :—l2 months imprisonment with bard labour. ESIBEBZEEMENT. Frederick Charles Bourdon was charged with embezzlement from his employers (tho N.Z, Grain Agency Company, Limited) of the following sums, viz., on March 16, 1883, £l4 2s ; April 17, £6 17s 4d; April 29, £27 2s 9d j Juno 14, £55; July 21, £4 I3s9d; August 14, £6 19s 9d. Prisoner pleaded “Not Guilty.”

The following jury was sworn;— Messrs W. Renshaw (Foreman) H. Gardner, J, O'Connor, D. Boss, B. Edmiston, A. Martin, jr, S. Currie, B. Austin, J. Orr, W. Budd, J. K. Dick, J. North ans. The Crown Prosecutor stated the case for the Crown, and called evidence which has been already published in connection with the magisterial enquiry. The principal evidence was that of T. McCatchie, junr., (former manager of the Grain Agency Co.) who repeated the statement made by him at the former enquiry re the payment of moneys by the prosecutor, viz., that sometimes petty charges were paid out of cash in band, and cheques drawn for them afterwards, and that no cash book was kept in the office. . His Honor characterised the affair as very incomprehensible. During the examination of Mr J. Houghton, that witness asked His Honor whether he must repeat the terms of a conversation between himself and the prisoner re the defalcations of the latter, as he had promised not to use it against him. He was, however, doubtful whether he had given such promise before or after the confession. His Honor after argument _ decided to exclude a portion of this evidence. This case was not concluded when we went to press. TRUE BILLS, True bills were returned against JCheyne, for demanding money with threats, and for assault with intent to commit robbery. No bill was found against Thomas Harris Parsons, for arson. ! The Grand Jury were then discharged, with the thanks of the colony.