SUPREME COURT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 4807, 22 November 1893, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

■ • . ♦__ _ Criminal Sittings. THIS DAT. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Denniston.) The third day's sittings of the Criminal Session began at 10 o'clock this morning. CRIMINAL ASSAULT. Joseph Gurney was brought up for. sentence for criminal assault. Mr Byrne said he had been instructed to call witnesses as to character, but they were not present nor did he know why. His Honor eaid he had nothing before him to chow any previous misdemeanours and he therefore assumed good conduct. Looking at the evidence, he had seldom read of a more persistent or violent attempt on the part of a youth to commit a criminal assault or a more exceptionally vigorous and courageous defence of her honour on the part of the girl. The prisoner had been guilty of a great amount of brutality. He would be sentenced to four years' imprisonment with hard labour. EMBEZZLEMENT. William Thomas Champion Mills was indicted for embezzling from the inhabitants of Heatheote, while clerk to the Heathcote Road Board, £4,9 11b 3d; on a further count, £20 16a 6d, and, within six months, £36; and on a third count £15 15s, and, on a fourth count, for falsifying the books of accounts of the Heathcote district while a public official of the district. Mr Joynt appeared on behalf of the prisoner, who pleaded " Nob Guilty " to the first thrae counts, and did not plead in respect to the last. The count in which the accused was charged with the embezzlement of £20 16s 6d and £36 11s 6d within six months afterwards, was taken first. Mr Stringer opened the case for the Crown as detailed in the Police Court. The alleged system •of defalcation that the accused had followed, had been, he said, to omit from his cash receipt book reference to certain cheques, but to pay the cheques into the Board's account at the Bank and deduct from other accounts the exact amounts. He had. in fact, cashed the cheques for himself out of the Board's funds instead of cashing them at the Bank on which they were drawn. Evidence having been given for the prosecution, Mr Joynt addressed the Jury, and stated that tb& officer of the Audit Department, after obtaining a refund of money amounting to £609 from Mills, had issued informations respecting other sums not therein included, and after sweating such informations had gone to Mills, and told him that unless he paid back the balance next morning he might not have another chance to do so. The Jury should, he slid, take in consideration this treatment of the accused which, to say the least, was extremely objectionable. Mr Stringer objected to this, and his Honor upheld the objection, saying that Mr Joynt had no evidence before him whereon to attack the Audit Department, and he certainly should not do so. It had nothing to do, either, with the charges against the accused. Mr Joynt asked the Jury to consider the {act that Mills had paid 'back every time he had been called upon, and that probably if he had had time he would have repaid the whole. The Jury had to decide whether the state of the Board's accounts had come about by the intention on the part of Mills to defraud. His Honor prefaced his summing up by pointing out that no defenoe had been raised, or could be raised, other than by asking the. Jury, as generous-minded men, to take into consideration the fact that Mills had repaid certain sums. If the Jury did this they would be going against the oath they had taken. The statement of the prosecution had been fully sustained, and had not been rebutted in any particular. The Jury, after a minute's retirement, returned a verdict of guilty. Mr Stringer said he would not proceed with the other counts of embezzlement. Tho prisoner was asked to plead on the count of falsification of books and did. so in thejword "guilty,"

MrJoynt raised a legal objection"/ a His Honor advised the prisoserto via "not guilty "to the count. , This the prisoner did. Formal verdicts of " not guilty *' we returned regarding the other counts >c embezzlement. g 2Kb Honor sentenced the prisoner, < the count on which he bad been four guilfcy, to two years* imprisonment wil hard labour. BOBBERY. William Hall, Clara Hall, Jameß Cam] bell, Mary Haineß and Johanna Gallaght were charged with robbing Roderic r M'Kenzie of £17 18s in money and cerfcai articles. » Mr Stringer opened the case, statin that the prosecutor had gone to the ho us } of the accused.- and had lost his mone j> and certain articles. The detectives ha j searched the house and had found some o t the articles. , After evidence had been given, M ; Stringer allowed the case to drop, as h ; had no evidence to fix the offence on an, i one of the prisoners, and his Hono j directed the Jury to find formal verdict of "Not guilty" against the prisoners ) who were discharged. , The Court then rose, this being the lac ; case on the calendar, except those againe the members of the late firm of Harpe r and Co.