SUPREME COURT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 5334, 12 August 1895, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

CBIMINAL SITTINGS. I Monday, August 12. ) (Before his Honor Mr Justice Denniston). The criminals sittings of the Supreme Court opened at 11 a.m., before hia Honor ( Mr Justice Denniaton. i Mr Stringer appeared to represent the ! Crown. GBAND JUET. The following gentlemen constituted the Grand Jury :*-Meßsrs P. J. Fryer (foreman). D. B. Low, M. O'Brien, S. D. Barker, W. Tonka, L. W. Blake, 11. M'llraith, Colthurst Palairet, E. Blake, T. Gapes, H. L. Bowker, B. Toomer, W. J. Williams, E. Forbes, Major Cunningham, W. G. Brittan, J. A. Maroiel, G. M'lntyre, E. H. Pavitt, J. B. Brunt and A. W. Beaten. THE JUDGE'S CHABGB. His Honor, in his charge to the GrandJury, said that the calendar on this occasion- was not a lengthy one, and that the oases were, comparatively speaking, not of a serious character. It was a matter for congratulation that among them there were no charges of offences against the person. His Honor then referred to the details of the various cases on the list. In reference to the charge of perjury against G. J. Bruce, he said that he need scarcely ask the Grand Jury to dismiss from their minds anything that they might have heard outside, and to consider j solely what was before the Court. Perjury j was swearing before a competent Oourt what was untrue — untrue to the knowledge of the person swearing it. The accused had sworn that he could see the George Street bar of Coker's Hotel from the window of his lodgings in Manchester Street, and had seen men and women come tumbling out of it. It had been demonstrated that this was a physical impossibility. All that Jihe Grand Jury had to decide was whether the accused had used the words stated in the indictment in the sense alleged. The Grand Jury had not to try the case, but only to decide whether or not there was a prima facie case of the words having been used. The questions of the value of the evidence and of any explanation of the words, must be left to the petty jury. HOUBEBBEAKING. Bobert Carlyle pleaded not guilty to an indictment charging him with having, on March 14, 1895, at Lauriston, by day broken into the dwelling-house of William Hampton, and Btolen therefrom a silver watch, value £A, and a purse containing a railway ticket and 8a in cash. The accused was undefended by connael. Mr Stringer opened the case for the Crown, and said that Mr Hampton, a farmer, left hia house securely fastened, with his family, on Maroh 14. He returned in the afternoon, and found that a window had been forced open, and that a silver wt»tch and 8s were missing. Next day accused was arrested, and the constable who was taking him to - the station noticed, him trying to conceal something in his hat, and a watch, identified by Mr Hampton as his property, fell to the ground. The accused afterwards stated that he had found it on the r -ad. Evidence for the Crown was given by three witnesses. The accused said that he did not wish to give evidence, nor to address the jury. Ha asked Mb Honor to let him off on probation. His Honour summoned up, and the jury, without retiring, found a verdict of •• Guilty." Mr Stringer read a* list of twelve convictions for vagrancy, larceny, abusive language and escaping from custody between 1882 and 1895. He stated that the gaoler said that the accused had been in the asylum. His Honor said that it was better for society that a man of weak intelleot, whOBO weakness took the form of larceny or burglary, should be shut up for a considerable period. The accused would be sentenced to two years' imprisonment. BREAKING AND ENTERING. James Eeid pleaded not guilty to an indictment charging him with having, on or about May .21, 1895, broken into the Christchurch Museum, and stolen seven ouncea of gold, twelve diamonds, and a number of gold ornaments, of a total value of £44 10s, the property of the Board of Governors of Canterbury College. The accused was undefended by counsel. Mr Stringer opened the case for the Crown, and said that in . May last some repairs were being made at the Museum, and on May 21 the things mentioned in the indictment were secured in a case in the building, which was left securely closed. Next morning it was found that a window had been forced open by some person, and there were traces that some one had got through it. The officials found that the things mentioned were missing. The accused had been arrested by Detective O'Connor, at Dunedin, on June 80. The evidence against him was that early in the day, on May 28, the accused had no money, but that on the evening of that day he waa somewhat flash of money and paid his landlady, saying that he had met a friend who had given him some money. On the aame day a person sold to Mr Ketterer, jeweller, some gold, which, from marks on it and other peculiarities, had been identified aa part of that stolen from the museum. Mr Ketterer afterwards picked out the accused from a number of others, and was clear that he was the man who had sold him the gold. The same person had called on Mr Ketterer on a second occasion to sell gold, so that the jeweller's opportunities for identifying him wore not small. Detective O'Connor, when he arrested acensed, met him in the street, and accosted him by the name of Eeid. Accused stared at him in a vacant sort of way, and said that his name waß not Eeid, i but John Bobs. It would be proved beyond I a doubt that he was not John Bobs. The case in which the gold had been kept was found in Hagley Park. Evidence for the Crown was given by ten witnesses. The accused gave evidence on oath, and said that his proper name was William John Bosb. He had signed the name " James Beid " to his deposition beoause he had been told to do so. He had been five weeks in Chriatchurch after the robbery from the Museum. He had sold no gold to Mr Ketterer, at Lyttelton, and had never seen him in- his life. If he had his liberty he could prove that he was in Chriatohuroh at the time when he waa said to have sold the gold. There were two men, whose nameß he did not know, who could prove this. He had had the misfortune to get into trouble in Auckland, and his photo had been taken. From that photo the jeweller had professed to identify him. He had got £4 from a man who had owed him a debt in Weatern Australia. Accused also addressed the jury. His Honor summed up, t»nd the jury after a retirement of three-quarters of an hour, returned a verdict of " Not guilty.*.' MAIiICIOUS INJUBY. TO PBOPBRTY. Margaret Hurst pleaded not guilty to an indictment charging her with having, on August 1, 1895, wilfully destroyed a plate-glass window, value J620, the property of Sarah Baasett. Mr Eussoll appeared for the accused. Mr Stringer opened the oase for the [ Crown, and stated that Sirs Bassett owned

a shop in Lower High Street, and had let it to accused' a daughter, whoßa time expired on July 31, when she waa to leave, and the shop' had been leb to another tenant. On August 1, when moßt of the things had been removed, Mrs Hurst . waa about the shop, and seemed to be under the impression that her 1 daughter had been badly treated in the ! matter of the lease. A man was engaged in painting the name of the new tenant on I the window when a couple of horse-shoes ; were thrown through the window from inside! The painter turned round, out the person who threw them had disappeared. A son of the painter, however, wonld swear that the accused had thrown the horae-shoee, and another witness had seen her going out of the shop immediately after he heard the crash of the broken glass. It wonld be proved that Bhe had been about the premises at the time of the occurrence. WOEK OF THE GBAND JURY. The Grand Jury returned true bills in the cßßes of Eobert Carlyle, houaebreakingj Margaret Hurst, malicious injury to property ; James Eeid, breaking and entering ; Henry Thomas, breach of the Bankruptcy Act; George Peck, bigamy; Jane Williams and Elizabeth May Williams, theft; George Fuller, breaking, entering and stealing; Alfred Nottingham, housebreaking and entering, and George J. Bruce, perjury. I No bills were found against Otene Kuku { Karaitiana for attetnp'ed suicide, and Thomas Kennedy for theft. The Grand Jury was discharged with the thanks of the Queen and colony.