Supreme Court.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 482, 2 December 1869, Page 2

Supreme Court.

— ■♦ CRIMINAL SITTINGS. Wednesday, Dec. 1. (Before Mr Justice Gresson and Common Juries). false pretences. Walter Roberts was placed in the dock on a charge of obtaining money by means of false pretences, namely, by representing to the prosecutor (Morris Salek) that he was the owner of a certain cow, which he agreed to sell to the said Morris Salek. The prisoner, who pleaded " Not Guilty," was defended by Mr Wynn Williams. Mr Duncan briefly stated the case to the jury, and called the following witnesses in support of the indictment : — Morris Salek : I am a storekeeper at the IHead of the Bay, Akaroa. I remember the 28th of September last. I saw the prisoner on that day. He had some conversation with me respecting a cow. He told me that he had a cow for sale, and that he had been offered £7 for her. I told him that I would give him the same sum. I agreed to do so. He gave me a receipt. His Honor : Did you pay the prisoner any money ? Witness : No, your Honor. He had goods to the amount. Mr Williams said that the Crown Prosecutor and himself had a conversation with regard to the indictment. He submitted that the indictment failed on the depositions. His Honor said that of course the indictment failed if the prosecutor gave the prisoner no money. The purchase of the goods was another transaction. Mr Duncan asked the witness if he had paid the prisoner any money. The witness replied in the negative. The prisoner was indebted to him for flour and sugar, and he considered that he (witness) paid the prisoner in flour and sugar. Mr Duncan said that of course the indictment failed. His Honor asked the witness why he didn't say to the committing Magistrate that he had paid no money to the prisoner. The witness replied that he had not been asked the question. Mr Wynn Williams said that if the case had gone on he would have been able to prove to the jury that the whole thing was a mis* take. The young man in the dock had several cows on his farm at the time, and the party who had written out the receipt bad inserted the wrong brand through inadvertence. In consequence of the conduct of the prosecutor in not representing the matter to the Magistrate in its true light, the prisoner bad suffered to a very large extent, his farm having been taken possession of by his landlord. His Honor said that the case was a hard one, and severely reprimanded the prosecutor for his conduct. The jury, by his Honor's direction, returned a verdict of " Not Guilty," and Roberts was immediately discharged. FALSE PRETENCES. Edward Thomas Phillips was indicted for having, on the 27th July last, obtained certain goods from George Brooker, by falsely representing tbat he bad £500 in the Bank of New Zealand. The prisoner, who was not defended by counsel, pleaded " Not Guilty." Mr Archibald Johnstone was chosen foreman of the jury. Mr Duncan having stated the case to the jury, called the following witnesses : — George Brooker : In the month of July last, I was a publican at the Royal Hotel. I know the prisoner. He came to my house with three others, about the 16th of July last and remained till about the 2nd of August. I applied to him for the amount that was owing to me, three days after his arrival. I understood it to be a wedding party. His bill was £16 10s at that time. He said he would give me a cheque. He did not do so. I waited a day or two, and applied to him again. He then said, " Oh, Mr Brooker, I have £500 sent out to me through the Bank of New Zealand, in the name of Thomas Edwin Phillips, instead of Edwin Thomas Phillips, and owing to that informality, Mr Murray, the manager of the Bank of New Zealand, will not cash my advices, but it will be all right in a day or two." Owing to this statement, I allowed him to remain at the hotel with his f.iends — sometimes as many as eight or nine to 'dinner— and furnished him with the several articles mentioned in the indictment. He remained at my hotel until the 2nd of August. He told me that he went to Mr Wynn Williams, who was to correspond for him with the bank on the subject of the £500. It was prisoner's statement of his having £500 in the Bank of New Zealand, Cbristchurch, which induced me to supply him with the goods mentioned iv the in-

dictment. He did not pay me a fraction for them. I have never been paid for tbem. By Prisoner : I was not present on the evening of your arrival. I think the first time I saw you was on the third or fourth day after you had been at my house. I think your account was rendered to you jointly with Mr Gray. It was after I rendered the first account that you told me you had the £500. I believe I did not render any account to Mr Gray. It was you to whom I a] plied for payment. Samuel S. Revans : I am accountant at the Bank of New Zealand. I don't know the prisoner. I don't remember seeing him until October last. No remittance of £500 passed through tbe bank in July last in favour of Thomas Edwin Phillips or Edwin Thos. Phillips. By Prisoner : All advices and remittances to the bank, in the ordinary course of business, would pass through my hands. W. H. Wynn Williams : I am a barrister and solicitor of the Supreme Court. I didn't know the prisoner in July last. He never applied to me to correspond with the Bank of New Zealand in reference to a remittance to him of £500. This was the case for the Crown. The prisoner addressed the jury, stating that he told Mr Brooker that he expected money, and not tbat he had got it. He acknowledged the debt, and said tbat if he had intended to defraud, he could bave left the country, as he was not arrested until nine days after he had left the hotel. Instead of leaving the country, he lived two or three miles out of Christchurch. His Honor then summed up, and the jury having retired to their room, returned into Court with a verdict of " Guilty." Tbe foreman said he had been requested by his brother jurors to express their censure of Mr Brooker'B conduct. In their opinion, he might have prevented himself being duped by applying to the Bank and ascertaining whether the prisoner's representations were true. His Honor said it would be a very salutary thing if publicans exercised more caution than they were in the habit of doing in cases of this kind and with regard to cheques. The prisoner was then sentenced to nine months' imprisonment at hard labour. LARCENY. Ellen Lynch pleaded " Guilty " to a charge of larceny. Evidence as to previous good character was given. Mr Wynn Williams, who appeared for the prisoner, stated that the amount of the cheque taken by tbe prisoner was in the .bands of the police. Would his Honor order the money to be banded over to Mr Parker, the person who had cashed the cheque ? His Honor said he would consider the application after passing sentence. The prisoner, who wept, was sentenced to one month's imprisonment with bard labour, his Honor taking into consideration the length of time she had been in prison awaiting trial. Bis Honor ordered the cheque to be handed to Mr Langdown, and the money found on the prisoner to be given to Mr Parker, prisoner admitting that it was part of the money which she received from Mr Parker, who cashed the cheque. The Court then adjourned. This Dat. His Honor took his seat in Court at ten o'clock this morning. LAB-EN- A 8 A BAILEE. William H. E. Pinching was indicted on this charge, and on his arraignment pleaded " Not Guilty." Mr Duncan prosecuted on the part of the Crown, and Mr Joynt appeared for the defence. Mr William Reid was chosen foreman of the jury. Mr Duncan briefly stated the case to tbe jury, and called tbe following evidence: — Henry William Felton: I am a sergeant of police, stationed at the Bealey. I arrested the prisoner at the Bealey on the 2 lst November. He was driving a waggon and two bay geldings. He was going towards Hokitika. It waß just this side of the Bealey that I arrested him. I examined tbe waggon. There were four " swaggers " in the waggon, and two boards with the words" Christchurcb and Kaiapoi Express" painted on them ; and there was a bag containing a new suit of clothes, tied up in paper, some horse-feed, and some empty bags. I charged him with stealing the waggon, horses, aiid harness, and cautioned him. I searched him, and found on him a pocket-book, lis 6d in money, and sundry articles. When I wa3 searching him for money, he Eaid it was no use, as lls 6d was ali he bad. I searched him again on hia arrival in Christchurch. Mr Joynt contended that tbe evidence was irrelevant. His Honor allowed the objection. By Mr Joynt : Prisoner made no statement whatever about the horses and waggon. He acknowledged his name at once. Edward George Kerr : I reside at Kaiapoi. I know tbe prisoner. lam the owner of the horses, waggon, and double set of harness in question. I hired them to the prisoner from day to day. I first hired them to him very nearly three months ago. The horses were to be. returned to my stables every night. He got them into his possession on Thursday, the 18th November, to go to Christchurch for (as he said) some machinery for Jenkins' Flax Mills. He did not return to Kaiapoi until brought back in the custody of Sergeant Felton. My waggon bad two boards fastened one on each side, with the words " Christchurch Express, Kaiapoi," painted on them. He was to use the horses and dray between Christchurch and Kaiapoi only. He had no authority or right to use them elsewhere. I let him tbe waggon and horses to trade between Kaiapoi. and Christchurch. I was to receive one-third of the net proceeds as hire for the horses and waggon. Prisoner did not get permission from me to take tbe waggon and horses to the Bealey.

By Mr Joynt: The prisoner had not the slightest interest or property in the waggon or horses. He had no right of possession beyond what I have already stated. He never had any right or property in the team. I bought the team from a man named John George. It appears that George bought the horses and waggon from the firm of Weston and Parnham, Kaiapoi, on certain conditions. They had agreed to let to George the horses and waggon in question, on £20 being paid down. They let them for three months, providing £20 were paid down, and prisoner's acceptance for three months, and if the acceptance were met, the horses, waggon, and harness were to be handed over to George ; if not, the £20 was to be forfeited. Before I bought the team from George, I was aware that the prisoner was to receive half the earnings of the team, but was to have no property in it. I believe he was to get half tbe earnings of the team for working it. I believe that was the arrangement between George and the prisoner. Pinching was to receive the whole of the earnings in the first place, and if the bill were met, it was to be allowed him as a credit for what he had received. Pinching told me of the arrangement I have stated — tbat the horses and waggon had been bona fide bought by John George, and that he (Pinching) was to receive the half profits for working the team He did not tell me what be was to get if he met the bill. . I knew when I bought the waggon from George that George had paid only £2 ), and that Pinching's acceptance was current for the other £20; but I did not know what Pinching was to get if he met his bill. George got a complete title by paying the £20 and by Pinching's acceptance. I bought the complete team from George, and if Pinching's acceptance had not been met by him, I should have had to meet it myself. I would not have bought the team if I bad known that Pinching had any interest in it. Pinching did not meet his acceptance. I gave George £21 for his right, title, and interest in the team, and for all book debts due in connection with tbe working of the team up to tbat date. There was nothing in writing between myself and Pinching. At the time I bought the team the horses were in the Ferryman's Arms stables. I instructed Pinching to stable the horses there until the bridge was completed, when they would be brought over to my own stables, if the weather was fine, the horses were fed in my Btables and then turned out in a paddock. I am supposed to pay Mr Neilson for the use of the paddock. He makes the claim on me, but I don't consider that I am entitled to pay him. It was the prisoner who made the contract with Mr Neilson for the use of the paddock. Prisoner paid tolls and incidental expenses on the road. I knew that the team was doing very well on the road, for the prisoner used to hand me a statement of each day's work, and sometimes handed me petty cash to enter to the credit of the team. All tbe bills were made out in the prisoner's name. I did not wish publicly to identify myself with the ownership of the team. I had purchased it to befriend the prisoner. He was the ostensible owner of the team so far as concerned the public. I did not recognise that he had any right or title in the team. After his acceptance was dishonoured, the same arrangement was carried on between us. I never expected that the prisoner would meet it. By hearsay I know that prisoner received £2 or £3 which he did not account for. John Henry Moore : lam a shoemaker in Kaiapoi. I remember Thursday, the 18 th November. I gave the prisoner £1 on tbat day to bring me up some goods from Christchurch. Prisoner returned without them. He said he would bring them up next day. He didn't bring them. By Mr Joynt : He returned the£l to my brother. This was the case for the Crown. Mr Duncan briefly addressed the jury. Mr Joynt addressed the jury for the defence. He contended tha*, before they could convict, the jury must be satisfied tbat the team was the absolute property of the prosecutor, and that the prisoner had no interest or title in the property. It was evident from Mr Kerr's evidence that a distinct bargain was entered into between Weston and Parnham and George and Pinching, and that George only sold his own right, title, and interest in the team to Kerr. It was evident that the prisoner had some right, title, and interest in the team, and be (Mr Joynt) submitted that the indictment had not been sustained, and that the jury must return a verdict of acquittal. His Honor summed up, and the jury, after considerable deliberation, returned a verdict of " Not Guilty." His Honor, addressing the prisoner, said it was not for him to say whether the verdict of the jury was or was not a right one. This he would say, that the prisoner had committed a very rash act, and he trusted his present position would be a warning to him for the future. There being no other charge against him, prisoner was discharged, and the money found upon his person ordered to be returned to him. BREACH OF BANKBUPTCY ACT, 1867. Evan Griffiths was indicted for a breach of the Bankruptcy Act. The prisoner pleaded " Not Guilty." Mr Archibald Johnstone was cbosen foreman of the jury. Mr Duncan briefly stated tbe case. Richard Davis, acting Deputy Registrar of the Supreme Court, produced the documents filed in bankruptcy in re Evan Griffiths. There were no other documents filed by the prisoner than those which witness put in. J. D. Bamford and Francis James Garrick, barristers and solicitors of the Supreme Court in New Zealand, gave evidence in proof of tbe prisoner's signature to the verifying affidavits as to statement of property, and to tbe declaration in bankruptcy. J. E. Graham : I am Provisional Trustee in Bankruptcy, and trustee of Evan Griffiths'

estate. [List of property produced.] It does not contain any allusion to two drays, two horaes, one set of harness, or any leasehold land. I had several conversations witb the prisoner after I became trustee, with reference to his estate and affairs. The result was that he didn't disclose to me, or give rae any information, that he had any of the property mentioned in the indictment. I was present in the Bankruptcy Court upon the occasion of his final examination for discharge. I don't recollect his disclosing any property on thnt occasion. It was a long examination, and I cannot recollect what occurred. After that examination, I had a conversation with the prisoner in my office. He 3aid that he bad come property which he had made over to Mr West in Port, and which was not included in the list filed by him. The property he spoke of was land in Lyttelton. He also spoke of having made over two horses and two drays to his brother-in-law at Oxford, named Nicholas. I afterwards obtained property not mentioned in the list filed in Court. It consisted of a mortgage deed of land in Lyttelton from Griffiths to West, and the two horses, harness, and drays. The latter I sold for the creditors. They realised £40 net. By the Prisoner : There were several. Isaac Allen : I am bailiff to Mr Graham, Provisional Trustee. I acted as such in the estate of Evan Griffiths. I seized two horses, two sets of harness, and two drays ; one set of harness, one horse and dray at Mr Nicholas' house in Christchurch, and the rest at Oxford, on Mr Nicholas' farm. They are not included in the statement filed by the prisoner. It shows no assets at all. The horses, drays, and harness were sold for the benefit of the creditors. [Left sitting").