SUPREME COURT.—Criminal Sittings. THIS DAY.

Taranaki Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 8611, 24 October 1889, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.— Criminal Sittings. THIS DAY.

Thursday, October 24. — Before His Honor Justice E. T. Conolly. The half-yearly sittings of the Supreme Court were opened on Thursday, His ' Honor taking his seat at half -past 11 i o'clock. CONGRATULATIONS OF THE BAR. Before the ordinary proceedings began Mr Standish, the Crown Prosecutor, rose, and, as senior member of the local Bar, welcomed His Honor on taking his seat for the first time here and congratulated him on his appointment to his high position. He remarked that the pure and impartial administration of justice was a matter in which the public and lawyers took the deepest interest. It would be always the effort of the members of the Bar to aid His Honor in carrying out the law in its purest and most impartial form. He hoped that His Honor and the Bar would work together cordially, which was a necessity if the law was to be carried out as lie had described. Mr Standish said a matter he would also like to refer to was the fact that this district was still attached to the Northern Circuit, and that the report that it might be attached to the Wellington district had not been borne out by fact, or the idea had been abandoned, fie said from the remotest times this district had been part of the Northern Circuit, under the late Chief Justice, Sir George Arney, and at a later period still under the late Justice Gillies. He hoped that the remarks he had let fall would be taken by His Honor not as merely f ormal, but as being heartfelt on the part of all members of the Bar. His Honor, in reply, thanked Mr Standish and the other members of the Bar for their kind welcome, which he appreciated more under the circumstances that he had not been entirely unknown to the public for some years. Ho was following in this district illustrious predecessors, and it would always be his endeavour, whether his* years were short or long, to carry out his duties as those before him had done. His Honor then made reference to the late Justice Gillies who he said had been carried off when many years of a useful lifo were apparently left to him. In conclusion he said he would rely on the members of the Bar to perform his duties, and he hoped that they would always he on good terms as when the Court and Bar did not agree the interest of persons Buffered thereby. GRAND JURY. The following Grand Jury was empanelled : — K. G. Bauchope, T. Elliot, A. H. Denham, J. Bayly, jtin., T. Avery, T. K. Skinner, T. Bayly, H. Brown, K. Price, H. Faull, I{. Putt, W. F. Brooking, W. H. J. Seffern, L. Colville, W. Cleave, C. B. Gabb, J. Paul, W. Sole, B. C. Lawrence, H. Newland, J. S. McKellar, W. Bayly, H. J. Crompton. Mr H. Brown was chosen foreman. In addressing the Grand Jury, His Honor said that on this, the first occasion of his sitting here, he had great pleasure in observing that they had all attended, without any excuse being given, thus , showing a laudable desire to do their duty. | He was also happy to inform them that | their duty would be very light. There I were few cases, but there were a good many "\vitnesse3 that might detain them ; some time. Thero were two cases only which could be really brought within the category of criminal cases. The first was one of breaking and entering an occupied house, and stealing an article therein, and the other was one of disposing of a horse and saddle, which had been lent to the person charged. They would have no difiiculty in either of these cases, as in both the accused persons practically admitted their guilt. There were two other cases, however, which he would have to make a few remarks on. Three persons were charged under the common law i with obstructing a public highway by erecting a fence across it. ,£Phe allegation in both cases was that the public traffic had been obstructed by the erection of the fences. Now if a person wilfully obstructed traffic — as, for instance, by putting an obstruction in the main street of this town — then that person would be guilty of a serious crime, and would deserve to be severely punished. It was, however, peculiar in these cases that in the town of Stratford, in which were the streets alleged to have been obstructed, these streets were such as were in common existence in the colony (in new districts and townships) and which were only paper streets. They were laid out but not formed, and impassable for traffic. They might be passable for foot passengers or horsemen, but that even might be doubtful, as he noticed .in the evidence that one witness had Btated there were creeks crossing the road. It was therefore practically impossible to obstruct traffic on such a road. There was another peculiarity in the cases. It would appear that the persons who moved in the matter were refused the removal by the Town Board, in whose custody the streets were, and members of which the accused parties were. When legal steps were taken the fences were removed before the cases came on for hearing, in fact, in one case before tno summons had been served on the accused person. There were many persons, who were called law reformers, who wore anxious to do away with the Grand Jury. Ho was one of the old school, and he did not hold with the idea that everything new was an improvement on tho old or vice versa. The Grand Jury was consttiuted to put a check on improper prosecutions by the Crown. There was no danger of such prosecutions now; in fact, the subject took the liberty now of encroaching, year by year, on privileges that used to be considered once the prerogative of the Crown. Tho Grand Jury were still useful as a check, In cases Avere malice was shown — ho did not say there was malice in this case — or where a case had been brought before a magistrate who had no legal assistance, and who was hampered and worried by the lawyers on either side, and sent the defendants to trial, the Grand Jury would be found to be a good body. It would be for them, however, to decide whether this was a proper case where a man should be made to take his trial, as if he were a criminal. That was a point for them alone. He believed that many of them had acted as Grand Jurors before this occasion, and they would therefore perform their duty. He could only instruct thorn. After careful consideration of the case, if they really thought there was v case, tkey should bring in v true bill regardless of the i positions of the defendants, for he under- ! stood they were all highly respectable men. If on the other hand they considered that the cases wore brought into Court instigated by any other motive than a high sense of public duty, which should prompt people in all such casos, then their duty was obvious. His Honor then concluded his address by a few more remarks, and tho Grand Jury retired. TUUE KILLS. The Grand Jury brought in true bills in i the cabuw — JRegina v. Macklyn, larceny as a bailee ; and Main Kai, larceny. LARCENY AS A BAILEE. Hufwt Cyril MacUyn, alias Hubert Cyril Judd, a youth about 17, pleaded guilty to the larceny as a bailee, on Miiy 13th, of a horse, saddle, and bridle, belonging to John Coldwell, of Stratford. in answer to the Court, accused said he hoped His Honor would take into account that lie had been in gaol now 5£ months almost. Mr ytandish snid that this, he believed, wits a first oit'encc. His Honor, after reading the probation officer* report, snid that this wai got

accused's first step against honesty. Accused had arrived recently in the colony, and had immediately afterwards obtained board and lodging on false representations, for which offence he was discharged. He then obtained money on a valueless cheque, drawn on an English Bank, but for this he escaped, as there was great difficulty presented in prosecuting in the case. Under the circumstances His Honor said he could not allow accused out on probation. A sentence of six months, with hard labour, was then passed. LARCENY. Mahi Kai, a Maori youth, was charged with stealing a watch, valued at £5, from the dwelling house of William Winmill at (Jape Egmont, on June 27. Mr W. Carrington interpreted to accused, who pleaded guilty. In answer to His Honor, Mr Carrington and Constable Hickman, of Pungarehu, stated they knew nothing against the accused previous to this offence. His Honor said in that case he would pass a light sentence, but if it had been otherwise, he would have inflicted a heavy sentence, as it was a serious offence to break into a man's house when he was away and turn things topsy-tirvy , and steal his watch. A sentence of six months' imprisonment, with hard labor, was passed. The Court adjourned till 2 p.m. On tho Court resuming at 2 o'clock tho Grand Jury came into Court and returned no bill in both the cases against Messrs Curtis Bros., and Mr T. Perm who were charged on the information of Henry Mehaffy with having obstructed streets in Stratford. His Honor said : I may state with regard to these cases that I entirely agree with the finding of the jury as this prosecution should never have been instituted, and I disallow an)* expenses to the prosecution. This disposed of the criminal business.