AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT. CRIMINAL SESSIONS. (Before His Honor, Mr Justice Gillies.) GRAND JURY.

Te Aroha News, Volume VI, Issue 296, 5 September 1888, Page 3

AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT. CRIMINAL SESSIONS.

(Before His Honor, Mr Justice Gillies.) GRAND JURY.

Tins Supreme Court opened on ISepcember 3. The grand jury was sworn at 1] a.m. as follows : — Alex. Wiseman, A. [-JL Nathan, J, M. Sheia, J. M. Lennox, F. C. Shailand, E. Boaid, T. T, Maseiield, Alfred Nathan, Win. Johnston, Alfred Ash lon, Ricbaul Camoion, Win, Boiry, Joseph J.. Wilson. Ale\. 8. Kusoell, Win. Y. Hunter, Edward Lewis, Wm. Buchanan, Henry C. Choyce. Mi- J. M. Shera was cliosen foreman.

THE JUDGE'S CHARGE. ilis Honor in his charge to the grand jury said:— -"Mi l«'oieman and gentlemen of the grand jury, — 1 am glad to bo ablo to cong tabulate you on l this occasion upon having an exceptionally I light calendar, there being 1 only fourteen peisons accused. Tho number of charges against them, how ever, iscon&idcrable,thero being something like thirty indictments.. These are mainly made up by two persons, one of whom is charged with embezzlement in ton diflorent cases, the other with eight dilleient charges ioi illegal pawning and larceny as a bailee. Thai is an oilence which comes either under the Pawnbiokcr.s' Act foi illegally pawning, or as an equal oilence under the Lucony Act as Lirceny as a bailee. The pii->oncr hat- been indicted on both count*. Thcic ib only one ease of what it. called "ollence.s against the pei&on," and one case ot illegally wounding. There i^ also a ca^e ol arson and these ai c thy most serious cases on the calendei, all tiie rest being simply laiceny, 01 house-bieaking, and one item ol nurglary. Burglary means the bi caking into 01 out ot tho house dm ing the night, that is between 9 at !.ir>ht and 0 in the morning —in bi caking out ot a house a- much as in breaking m, it the breaking out is connected with kuccn\ in the house. Thtsie uieno eases that rcqune meto address jou oi lo point out the law on the .subject Tho faetb aie simple and the depositions are eaiefuily got up, so that F. need not tiouble \ou with an\ lomark^ upon any of these eabO.->. J will |ust allow you to go to yom loom, and theic the bills will be piescnted to you. You, Mi Foreman, should remember that you aic not obliged to examine all the witnesses, but merely a sutlicient number to satisfy yoiu&elf that there is a jinma j'acu ca&e to be tried. You will [nit a maik agaitust the names of uhatex ci' witnesses you examine, and when you hnd a "Uue bill,'" oi "no bill you will wute it on the indictment, and sign as fot eman of the giand jury. The giand juiy then letiied.

Tni'L BihLb.- -The Grand Jury returned a tine bilLs against Alhcit. Johnson, lai - oeny; banip, & tea Him trom a dwelling.

LvKC'h>\ \yi) Sti,ALIV(. i'KOM A I)\\ I U,ini.. - - Albeit .lolmbun, a lad between 16 and 17 years of age, pleaded guilty to hawng on tny 19th of August at Tauiar.ga stolen a quantit\ of leuelleiy, the piopeity of iOuphenna Ala vw ell. He albo pleaded guilty to a s-econd chaige, chat of >teahng from a dwelling the -uai oi Cll ]os, the mono} fc ot Aithur Jly. Austin. Pii-oner baid, '"1 am \ cry bony foi what 1 did. ' V£is Honor haid. Albert, Johnfcon, J am that a young lad lil^e you bhould commence a caieei ot eume 1 am still moie sorry that 1 cannot extend to \ou the benents ot the Fust Oitendeis' I'iobation Act, us> this- is- not your tn&t oiletiee. Otheiwibe, L ohould have been glad to give you an oppoitunity to tedeem yourself Now, however, Iha\e no option but to sentence jou. Yon will theiefore be benteneed to 12 monthtT impiisonment iui each oiiencj, the sentences to run concunently.

Tjtrh BiM,b. — The (; laud .Imy leturncd i the following true bill- Heniy Darb}, on tlueo chaigetr of bicakinj^ and cnteiing; Emmanuel Olher, on cha'^cb of laiceny as a bailee and illegally pawning (seven ! charges); William Ciombie, bieaking out ; and William Xoblo and James Stoddart, ulicfi Stewart, larcenvfiom a dwelhncr. I

J3ri- \ki\u a>'i> Extlrixg. — Hemy Dai by j was chuiged fchar. he did on the 19fch June, 1888, unlawfully break and enter the counting house of Mam ice (Jasey, with intent to feloniously steal and cany away one com known as a half -ci own and two shilling j ueces, monej fe of the said Maurice Case> . Prisoner pleaded " guilty ' on thi* and two similar charges,. — Mr O'Mcagher appeared on behalf of the piiponer, and asked that heshould be dealt with under the First Offenders' Probation Act. — His-Honoi said that in this case the Piobation Officer did not recommend probation. — Mi O'Meagher submitted that even 30, His Honor could place the accused on probation under j section 8 of the Act. — Bis Honor said he had no doubt that he had the power, but it would be a Neiy peculiar case in which he would j use that power. In the present case such ingenuity had been .shown by the prisoner as was not consistent with the actions of a first offender, and in the face of that he (the Jndge) did not think would be justified in extending the privileges ol the Probation Act to tho accused. — Evidence as to character was given by Charles H. Murray, who deposeoT that he had known the accused, as a steady and industrious lad, rather dull, for a period of two years. — His Honor .said that piiboner had been found guilty on his own confession. It seemed that the money was missed, that it disappeared, and how it disappeaied could not be found out until, by marking some money, the prisoner was found to be the peison who entered the counting-house with a false key and took money from time to time. If there had been merely one instance of this piobably he might have received the benefit of the Probation Act, but seeing that the acts were done deliberately and done on consecutive nights, taking these small sums, If is Honor tclt that he. could not extend probation to the prisoner. At the same time, as this was the first offence, the penalty would be made as light as possible, viz. imprisonment with hard labour for twelve calander months on each indictment, the sentences to run concurrently.

Illegally Pawning. --Emmanuel Oliver was charged that he did on the 10th May 188S, unlawfully pawn a watch, the property of George McCartney, without the consent of the said George McCartney. There was a second count charging the prisoner with a fraudulent intent to temporarily deprive the said George McCartney of the use of the said watch. Prisoner pleaded " guilty " to the charge of illegally pawning and " not guilty " to the charge of fraudulent intent. Mr Madden, appeared on behalf of the accused, and the latter, after consultation with his solicitor, pleaded " guilty " on both counts. Prisoner also pleaded guilty to similar charges with respect to watches owned by John Olsen, Ebenezer Swinherd, William Jamesj Sayers, Edward Healey, John Smart, Cecilia Gill, and James Besant. — Mr Madden pleaded that the clemency of the Court should be extended to the prisoner., who he believed was before this or any court for the Brst time in his life. The prisoner had borne a good character and he was a married man with a wife and two small children. Mr Madden mentioned

that the prisoner had been for two months in Mount Eden Gaol, and had been doing hard, labour at his own motion. He had. also when in gaol acted bravely by rushing upon a man named Brown, when the latter had committed a murderous assault upon a warder, and probably saved the warder's life. He (Mr Madden) understood that the reason for indicting the prisoner on all these charges was mainly to obtain the watches for their proper owners. — His Honor said the Probation Officer did not report in favour of the prisoner. He had been found guilty on liis own confession of eight chaiges of illegally pawning — a long series of acts winch were not only illegal but immoral. Onlya few charges had been brought against the prisoner, who had been found fco have pawned upwards of fifty watcher in a few months. jjOn the evidence, it appeared that he obtained these watches for repair and that \w put the owners oft from time (o time with exciibOb is to why lie did uoi; return them. Theio was evidence of especially criminal inteet, and the sentence of the Court was imprisonment with hard labour for two years on each charge, the sentences to run concurrently.

Tkui, Bii^r,. — The giaiul juiy returned a true bill against James Bloom Hold, charged with breaking and entering;.

Biti<.AKixc vNDJbjNTbJiiNG. — James Bloomfield was charged that he did on the 3rd March, ISBB, feloniously break and enter into a house belonging to James Cm t mill, in the Auckland Domain, with intent to feloniously steal the <>oods contained Ilicicin. — Prisoner pleaded "not guilty." Mi U. Williamson, Crown Prosecutor, in hi.-j opening, stated that the evidence would show that tlie house of Mr C'artmill was broken into, and thut the piisouer was j found in the house. The only diiHculty the I jury would therefore have would be to conclude a-. to what his intent was. As a matter ol fact the prisoner stole nothing; he w r cis distmbed too soon, it he luid anj such intention, and the jury would ha\oto judge of his intentions from the circumstance of his having boon in the house and othci circumstances. Mrs I 'artmill loft the house about 12 o clock, and oaiefully closed all the windows) and Mr Caitmill lett the house .111 horn or so afterwaids, after caiefully seeming the back door. Ho returned between 2 and 3 p.m. and found the kitchen door open. When he entered he came face to face with the prisoner. The jury would have to be satisfied that Mi Caitmill had sufficient opportunity to enable him to identity the prisoner. Some conveisation took place. Mr Carl-mill asked the prisoner what he wanted, and he replkrl (hat lie was a gardener by trade, that ho wa a hard up, and that he wanted -iOme money or jeweller}. Dming this conveisation Mr Caitmill had opportunities of looking at the prisoner, and he had no doubt that the prisoner was the man. The ruisonoi then made his escape and wib au'Chted some weeks afteiwaids. Whi n the house was examined, it was found that tilings had been distmbod iind two money bo\eo bioken opui. ft the ]ury were satisfied that the piisoneL inteifeicd with these boxes-, they would draw inferences accoidmgly tis to liib intent. Evidence would aKo bo given by Mi? Cartmill, who would depose that- she met the pii&oner going in the direction of the house, and that she afterwards recognised him amongst other pii^oncis in the gaol. E\idence was given bj James Caitmill, and the piisoner who conducted his own defence subjected the witness to a eiossoxamination as to identification, and an interview between witness, and a St.v: icpoitei, --Evidence ie identification of the piisoner was also given by Mis Caitmill. — For the defence (he pi-soner called Michael FLuinery, warderofMountEden Oaol. This witnc-=B dcpo&cd that he was pie^cnt when Mrs Caitmill \isitcd Mt Eden (laol. A man did not step out and ask her what she wanted. Mis Cartmill pointed out the third man, the prisoner Bloomfield. — The piisonei then addressed the jurj He paid he was dumfounded at Mr Flanncrv's e\idcncc, and that it was stiange that the con.stable who ancsted him had not given e\ idence. He (the prisonei) did not deny that he had been convicted bcfoie, but dining the last twehc months he had been woiking Laid. ariested he was at Te Awamnlu He submitted that it was not concehablo that a man caught in a house as had been described would have given his own name, and that the jury would see theie were trravo doubts a.s to his identity. — llib Honor having summed up, the juiy letiied.--Prisonei was found guilty by the jury, and sentenced to seven years' penal servitude.