SUPREME COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXII, Issue 56, 22 March 1900, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SESSIONS. Wednesday, March 21st.—Before His Honour Mr. Justice Conolly. TnE Grand Jury empanelled were:— Messrs. G. A. Adlam,A. H. Arnold, O. E. Atkinson, W. Bewley, J. Blytli, A. E. A. Clarke, J. H. Foofce, C. R. Forte, A. D. Gray, 11. Hammond, 11. King, C. T. Mills, Jas. Paul, K. Pi ice, J. Sanderson, W. J. Shaw, K. K. MauDihiM.id, J. K. Skinner, Stock, Stohr, J. Veale, E. i). Westmacott. Mr. Paul was chosen foreman. His Honour, in his charge, said : -

Gentlemen of the Grand Jiu the oases presented are not numeiou, and with two or three exceptions pre sent no difficulty. There is a charge against a native of stea'ing £4 12s from his mate. The ckarge was originally one of breaking ani entering, but I think you will find that i here was

no evidence to sustain that charge, but that the offence was one of stealing. There is another charge of breaking and entering against a native for stealing ; there is no doubt in this case, as the theft was admitted and the accused showed where the stolen property was placed. There are two other charges of breaking and entering, one of stealing and another against the same person of intent to steal.

There is a case of- horse stealing which presents the usual features—the horse was taken away—taken to a long distance and sold. A case of cattle stealing will require little attention. Three heifers were taken away and sold, and the owner after wards accepted payment, believing the prisoner's statement. It is for you to consider whether there is sufficient evidence to support the charge. The most serious case is that of a man setting fire to a building in the town occupied by the Taranaki Herald. The evidt-nce is circumstantial. A man is very rarely detected iu the direct act of setting fii e to premises, and if the evidence does not amount to that then it is circumstantial, You will doubtless find sufficient evidence to put the man on his trial. [His Honour detailed the circumstances as shown in the evidence taken in the lower court, drawing the jury's attention to salient points of the case.] The Grand Jury returned "True Bills" in every case—that of Mana being for theft oaly. They concluded their labours shortly after 3.301 and were discharged.

HORSE STEALING. Thomas Wilkie, aged 18, was indicted for stealing a horse, at Mangamimi, on August 26tb, the property of Root. Wilson.

I The jury "were Messrs. Wyllie, \V. P. Bishop, D. Alexander, E, L, Humphries, R. B. Honeyfiold, G. H. Millar, tl. Gilbert, G. Waters, F. Gilbert, H. Yates, J. F. Lepiue, and Thos. Furlong (Foreman). Mr. Kerr prosecuted. Accused was undefended.

The evidence of Robfc. Wilson was to the effect that the accused was employed by him on a bushfelllog contract, and borrowed a white horse, which he was to return the same night or the following night at furthest but the horse w»s never returned. I

In reply to accused, wituess denied ever iving a letter from him, or that hn owed accused £2.

G. Kehely, of Kapuui, deposed to I exchanging a black mate for the greyj horse tiwi mml had with fowl

Accused said he got the horse frtm Gordon, of Wanganui. Evidence was also given by Constables Stackpole and Simpson. Prisoner did not call any witnesses. [His Honour, in summing up, said the case was very clear. When prisoner tormed the decision to treat the horse as his own could not be known, but the prisoner parted with the horse, and the theft was complete. Prisoner's statement that £3 was owing was not an answer to the charge. Without retiring, the jury brought in a verdict of «Guilty." Previous convictions were proved, also that prisoner had been under police suparvision for some time.

In passing sentence, His Honour said it was a very sad thing that a lad of only 18 years should have a record of five convictions. The present charge was a very serious one, and the sentence would be two years' imprisonment. STEALING BANK NOTES. Henare Paparoa, an elderly nativo, pleaded guilty to stealing threw .£2O noiu at Smart Road on 27th Ducember last, the property of Tamati Wanganui. Two of the notes had bees recovered ; with part of the other note prisoner had purchased a captain's uniform and a double-barrelled gun. Major Brown interpreted, In reply to the usual questions, prisoner said he had nothing to say in defence, except what was in a letter, which was read, but had no bearing on the case. Prisoner asked to be admitted to probation. After calling Tamati and Mr. Frost (manager of the New Zealand Clothing Factory), His Honour eaid he did not, feel disposed to send the man to prison, as the act was more foolish than criminal. Prisoner would be admitted to probation for 18 months. The £lO paid for the uniform would have to be refunded by Mr. Frost to Tamati, it being stolen money. BURGLAE?. Arthur J. Thomson pleaded not guilty to breaking and entering the premises of H. A. Arthur, a cabinetmaker at Hawera, on September 21st. A second count was for being unlawfully on the premises with felonious intent.

The jury consisted of Messrs. P. Gilbert (foreman), T. Cowling, 0. Colson, W. P. Bishop, T. W. White, J. P. Watson, H. Glare, W. Harknett, H. Gilbert, J. Hawke, H. Spurdle, J. T. B. Marsh. Prisoner was undefended. Mr. Kerr outlined the evidence, and called Henry A. Arthur, who stated that on the night in question all the windows were closed with the exception of his own. The outer doors were closed and locked. He was awakened in the night by someone knocking at the door. Fragments of burnt vestas were found. He had never seen the prisoner till at the lower Court. In reply to prisoner, witness said he was awakened about 12.30. Did not recollect whether the front door was locked or not. Heard a slight confused sort of noise when on the point of waking. It was possible for a man to roam about the house and knock things overwithout his being awakened. Miss Williams slept in the opposite room to his. Did not think it strange for a young lady not to give an alarm on seeing a man enter the house and knock tilings over. His :<on slop 1 ; at. the back of tin; house, and it would take a gru.it earthquake to wake him. Mis-v Williams told him she could identify th.o man. To Mr. Kerr: lie examined the

look when ho got up am] the key was there tho samo as the previous night. To His Honour : (Jould not recollect

that when he got up, ho examined all

the doors and windows and found them all as he lefb them on going to bed. Ida Williams (grand-daughter of the previous witness) stated that between 12 and 1 in the night she was awakened hy someone walking in the passage She hoard a match struck and saw the lighted match through the crack of tin door. She next saw a man's head and arm come round the door. The man

looked round the room, and then went back. Part of his face was visible, from the forehead down. The match

went out, and he went towards the dining-room. She recognised the prisoner as the man she saw on that night. After the man left the diningroom she hoard a footfall, like stockinged feet, outside the door, and subsequ ntly heard the click of the front door as if it wore being pulle) to. She identified the prisoner at the Police Station directly she saw him, and was quite sure as to his being the same man.

To the accused : "When she saw the

light she was frightened. The man's face was visible by the light of the match for a few minutes. She did net slam the door when the man went away from it, as he was still in the house. After the man left the house she got up and called some of the other inmates. She made- no alarm, and i, was useless to call Mr. Arthur, as the man would be gone before he could got up. She did not look to see if the front door was locked. She told the police constable that the man she saw seemed taller than him. The hat

produced (the prisoner's) was not the same as that worn by the man she saw. Alice Arthur said she heard sone one tampering with the bedroom windows. All was quiet for awhile, then she heard some one tampering with the front door, but she then fell asleep, being awakened by a light. She heard a footfall come into the dining-room and someone collided with a chair.! Her bedroom door, whicn opened into' the dining-room, was then opened.! All w;>.k quiet for awhile, then the 1 i-vreeii which wr.s against th.2 coiv:'' j v. iioro she was sleeping was overturned, \ Thore was no tight. Slio hoard nothing ( more. ° ?

To the prisoner : The front door was locked, 'she did not scream out when Uie screnn was overturned.

Detective Bishop (Wanganui district) deposed to visiting Mr. Arthur's and receiving a description of the man (•een, from which he felt sure that the prisoner was the man. Subsequently prisoner was arrested on another charge, and with five other men was placed in a row in the Police Station yard and was immediately identified by Miss Williams without any hesitation whatever. When charged accused stated he was at home that night. To the prisoner; The young men vvtth wham, 1$ was Dfooed wejre pMe^i

out as being strangers; none were known to Miss Williams.

Evidence was then given by Misses Kate and Bella Morgan that they saw prisoneron the night in question about 9.30 going in the direction of Mr. Arthur's house.

This concluded the case for the prosecution.

Prisoner called Alice Marshall, who stated that she never heaid Kate Mor.gan say "she would have it into him (prisoner) some day." She said she : was present at the quarrel, but did not hear what passed. Prisoner read a lengthy statement referring to the evidence (presumably that given in the lower court), drawing special attention to the alleged noise and overturning of furniture, especially the screen close to where Alice Arthur was sleeping, and yet no alarm was given or anyone challenged. The question was, Was any stranger in the house at all that night I He strenuously denied being there, and asserted his innocence.

Mr. Kerr did not reply. His Honour, in summing up, explained to the jury what constituted burglary, and said before they could find a verdict on that charge they must be convinced that the prisoner did enter by some means oranother. If they were not prepared to find against him on that count there was another count of being unlawfully on the premises with felonious intent. Reviewing the evidence. His* Honour pointed out the concurrence of testimony to someone being m the house, the evidence of Ida Williams, who was wide awake, beinc very clear on the point. Against the prisoners statement that he was at home there was the evidence of two witnesses who saw him going in the direction of Mr. Arthur's house that evening. The case was not free fromcomphcations, but the issue appeared to be between burglary and the minor count. It the jury entertained any doubt as to the prisoner's guilt, h must be a doubt ot a reasonable nature.

After retmng for a short while the jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty. The Court adjourned until to-day.