SUPREME COURT.

Wairarapa Age, 16 March 1923, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

ALLEGED FALSE PRETENCES. VERDICT OF ACQUITTAL. The sitting of the Supreme Court was continued yesterday, His Honour Sir John Salmond presiding, when the charge against Alfred H. Brentuali, for alleged false pretences at Martiniborough, was concluded. -Mr H. R. Biss appeared for accused, and Mr B. R. Burridge conducted the case far the Crown. H. L. Griffiths, solicitor, practising at Martiniborough, deposed that accused made a declaration before him on December 4, 1922, in reference to a fire. In the declaration accused stated that the slabs were worth from £250 to £3OO. Witness filled in the values on the declaration at accused’s dictation, though he was very uncertain as to what values should be put in. He was not sure of the cordage of the heap of slabs or the value of it.

To Mr Biss: It was at the suggestion of witness that a margin of £5O was made on the value of the slabs in the declaration. Albert A. Hoare, cabinetmaker, Martinborough, said he was the local agent for the New Zealand Insurance Company. Accused made a proposal for a £2OO cover on timber slabs. Accused stated they were worth about £3OO. The policy wa s issued for £2OO and handed to accused. To Mr Biss: Witness was informed by his company to insure timber up to. its full value; therefore a £3OO risk was offered to Brentnail, but he was satisfied with £2OO. Witness heard Bastings tell accused that if he only paid £5 for the slabs, that was all the compensation he was entitled to, regardless of what they were worth. Alexander McLeod, constable, Featherston, said be interviewed accused in October last year. Bastings was also present. Accused said he had bought the slabs from Whiteman for £l5O and had the receipt. Detective Nuttall said he visited the mill site after the fire. On De•cember 16 witness interviewed accused and took from him a statement which stated that he had not paid Whiteman for the slabs. To Mr Biss: Accused said he had backed bills for Robinson to the amount of £l3O. He later said they amounted to £94—£77 to the W.F. C A. (Greytown), and £l7 to Bridge. (Carterton). Constable Hewitt, Martinborough, said he obtained from accused a statement to the effect that the slabs belonged to him—that he had purchased half of them from Whiteman and the other half from Robinson. His Honour here observed that the case was one where an attempt was made to defraud the New Zealand Insurance Company, but he failed to see how the evidence in any way showed that the declaration of loss got to the company. Henri Bastings (insurance assessor) re-called, said he received his instructions from the chief clerk (Mr Bree) of the New Zealand Insurance Co., to go to the scene of the fire and assess the damage, but he did not recollect having seen the declaration. H. S. Griffiths, re-called, said he had received an acknowledgment from the New Zealand Insurance Co. of receipt of Brentnail’s declaration. W. G. Whiteman, re-called, said the quantity of timber cut at Pihautea averaged about 56,000 feet per month. The lowest for any month was 48,000 ft. To Mr Biss: Witness was cutting fo” 11 months at Pihautea and had been cutting for seven months at Gladstone. The average at Gladstone I was 84,000 ft per month. The slabs at Gladstone at present were 200' cords, approximately the same as the output for 11 months at Pihautea. This closed the case for the Crown. FOB THE DEFENCE. Willoughby Drummond, licensed surveyor’s assistant, Greytown, said; he had visited the mill site in company with one Burch, an old millhand. The plan (produced) of the site of the slab heap was prepared to scale, and as the slabs were stacked there were 23 cords to every foot in height. To Mr Burridge: The plan was prepared under the direction of and from an explanation of the site by a millhand. Herbert C. Burch, s awmiller, Greytown, said he was tailer-out at Whiteman’s mill. Witness pointed out the boundaries of the slab area to the surveyor. The slab heap was about 12 feet high, and was level on top when the mill closed down. The slabs would be worth 15s to £1 a cord to a man with teams to get them out. ACCUSED’S STORY. Alfred Henry Brentnail said he did the hauling for Whiteman for 2s 9d per 100, but he agreed to reduce it 6d per 100 for half of the slabs when the mill was finished. Whiteman kept the tally of the timber hauled. When the mill closed down there was a large heap of good-quality slabs, but witness never measured up the stack. Witness considered that the matai slabs, cut into foot lengths, would produce as much as any other firewood procurable on the market. Witness was to take three loads of wood to Masterton, the carting of which he valued at £29, for half of the slabs left at the mill. Witness became possesor of th e other half of the slabs for meeting the W.F.C.A. account and Bridge’s account for one Robinson. Nothing in either account was witness’s personal debt. These amounted to £95. All the slabs on the mill site then belonged to witness. The demand for this class of firewood was good, and the slabs were bought as a commercial asset. Witness intended to remove the slabs when his teams were idle. The slabs cut up would be worth from £2 to £3 per cord and 8s per cord for cutting. Witness estimated the value of the slabs at the site at £3OO, and insured them with the New Zealand Insurance Co. for £2OO. Witness offered to take the agent over to see them but he said it was not necessary. Wtness did not know that Raison had carted any slabs away till after he put in the claim for insurance. Witness was in Palmerston North when the fire occurred. When making tho declarat’on witness told the solicitor he did know the value. Witness told Bastings that he had bought half the slabs from Whiteman but did not say that

he paid for them by cheque. He might have made a mistake between tho slabs and the 100 cords of firewood he bought from Whiteman at 22s 6d per cord. Mr Burridge: Js it not a fact that you tried to conceal the true position?—No. The selling value of the slabs in Martinborough was estimated at £4OO. Witness could not account for Wilson selling half of his slabs for £5. Witness had not had a settlement with the company, and did not know if they had refused to settle his claim. Ralph Smart, sawmill-hand, Gladstone, detailed the dimensions and position of the slab heap. John Andrew McGrath, Carterton, and Albert Holdsworth, Greytown, corroborated the previous witness’s evidence. William J. Hore, contractor, Marti nborough, said he bought 180 cords of slabs three years ago, and the demand was good. The price was better now. Loads of three cords sold at £4 10s. To Mr Burridge: Witness bought six cords recently at the site for 10s per cord. George Scrimgeour, accountant for the W.F.C.A., Greytown, s aid Robinson’s account was settled by accused. Ail the items were Robinson’s household purchases. To Mr Burridge: Robinson’s p.n. became payable in May, and as the money was not forthcoming Robinson was pressed. This closed the case for the defence. Counsel for accused and for the Crown addressed the ’jury for 40 and 35 minutes respectively. His Honour commenced his summing up at 5.30 p.m. He said that if accused was found guilty of the first charge he would be guilty of the second, but if he was found not guilty on the first he would be acquitted on both charges. The charge before them was rather an unusual one, and it was a hard job for the Crown to prove that the accused had fraudulently (swindled the insurance company. The Crown had conclusively to prove that accused was guilty of the offence. The over-esti-mation of values was a common occurrence, as it was merely a matter of opinion and judgment. It was the duty of the jury to prove whether it was purely an optimistic estimation of the value of the slabs or whether he had in mind the possibility of defrauding the company. The Crown had come to the Court with no definite title as to the ownership of the slabs, and the Crown evidence was not consistent. One Robinson, who was called in the lower Court, had not been called in the Supreme Court by either side, and it would be interesting to hear what he had to say regarding the ownership of the slabs. One point in favour of the accused was that the company had offered him £3oo' Insurance and he had only accepted £2OO. There was also a point on the other side—that was his statement regarding how he possessed the title to the slabs, this afterwards being refuted by himself. ACQUITTED ON BOTH CHARGES. When the Court resumed at 7.30 the foreman of the jury announced that the verdict was “not guilty” on both charges. Brentnail was therefore acquitted. ALLEGED ATTEMPTED MURDER. CHARGE AGAINST A NATIVE. At 6 p.m., Pakia Haeata, aged 30 years, was charged that on February 4, at Blackrock, he attempted to murder James Kenrick. He was further charged that on the same day he did actual bodily harm to James Kenrick. Accused pleaded not guilty. Mr W. Noble appeared for accused, and Mr R. R. Burridge conducted the case for the Crown.

The following jury was empanelled’ Thomas H. Hughes (foreman), Davis N. Adams, H. W. Bungate, Harry Webb, Edward O. Mills, George Watt,. Fredrick J. Taylor, Albert Jenser-. Ernest Tooby, Arch. Broadbent, Walter Harrison, Henry Hilton. The evidence of the Crown witnesses was on similar lines to that given in the lower Court, and reported fully iii “The Age’’ oh Saturday. James Alexander Cowie, medical practitioner, gave formal medical testimony describing bow he had attended Haeata and Kenrick at Blackrock on the morning of the affray. To Mr Noble: Haeata -was suffering from shock and an injured arm, which necessitated an operation. He was under the anaesthetic for an hour, and with the injections of morphia his mind might have been mentally con fused for some hours. Re-examined, witness said the an aesthetic had different effects on some people. James Kenrick, drover and shepherd, Blackrock, gave evidence similar to that which he gave in the lower court. On February' 3, the evening before the shooting, witness met ac eused on the Te Ore Ore road. Accused refusal to shake hands and remarked “I told you to get off the place” (meaning Blackrock). Accused resent ed witness passing his (accused’s) place, but this route was the only w r ay of getting to town. Witness offered to be good friends and 'et the matter drop, but accused refused. Witness Lad hoard that accused had threatene 1 to shoot witness, and on being asked if this was time accused replied in the affirmative. Accused said he then had no time for his wife, and that he was going to leave the Mrs Haeata had then been occupying witness’s cottage at Blackrocfc for a little more than two months About 7.31 witness arrived home and retired at 10.30. Mrs Haeata, witness and his two daughters, aged 16 and 18 year.--, occupied the house that night. Wil ness rose early ankl left tne stable for town about 3.30 a.m. . A CHALLENGE. When about three chains frem th-’ stable a voice called 1 ‘Pull up. Ken rick,” and Haeata came -minir down one side of the orchard. ’ ruse 1 was then sitting on a gate, seven yards from witness and had a gun n hi harjl. Witness said: “Are yo” iroing to de it this time?” and ar . 1 re

plied “Yes.” Witness said “Well, give me time,” and walked round the trap on the opposite side from accused. Witness toolc off his coat and walkel up to the trap and raced accused. Wit ness said: “Make a good job while you are at it,” and accufu/1 tqpk a long aim and fired. Witress moved a little, and the discharge whizzed past him and hit the splash-board. The horse roarc)l up, and as, witness attempted to hold it he received a dis charge of shot in the buttock. Witness then ran back to the house, and while running received another charge. He ran to the back door and into the sitting room. then called in Maori to the two girls to leave the bouse, and then broke in the two win-dow-panes with his gun. The four inmates of the house went into the pass age, and while there a further shot came through the front door and lodged in the wall beside witness’s younger 'daughter. Witness then got bis own gun and waited in the bedroom for accused to show himself. Ac cused appeared at the broken window, and witness firckl at him. Ten minutes later accused' called out: “Come on, Jim, and shake hands.” Witness thought, accused was only coaxing, so remained inside. Accused then crawled through the window in the front room and asked wirncss to shoot him. Witness then found that he had wounded Haeata, and took him out on the verandah to wait for the doctor. Witness (to counsel): The accused had told Mr Cameron before the shooting to shift witness off the place. He also instituted Givorce proceedings and v-itness was cited early' in January as co-respondent. Mr Noble: When you met Haeata on the road you asked him to shake hands. Were you surprised that he would not?—No; but I had done him no harm. You had only taken his wife and broken up his home.—He forced his wife on to my hankls. How did he do that? —She came to my room. Is that true?—Yes. How many more women have forced themselves on you? His Honour: Wc can’t have that, Mr Noble. You can attempt to discredit his evidence, but not damage his reputation. Mr Noble: You askctl him if ho was going to shoot you?—l wanted it straight from himself, as I had heard it from others. You told us he took careful aim, yet only one shot hit you in the eye: why did you tell Constable Phillips, at the hospital, that accused di)d not hit you?—l was Ired at, all the same. At six yards he fired a shot-gun and one pellet hit you in the eye; is that true ?—Yes. He could have shot you easily if he had wantejd to?—I suppose he could. His Honour: Why did you take off ycur hat and coat?—l don’t know, your Honour; I just plucked up, that's all. Mr Noble: Did you think it would be better to idie with your haf ’off? Did you think you were going to be killed?—Ask the man with the gun. His Honour: You must answer the question.

Mr Noble: Didn’t you think it was just a bluff to frighten you away? — Bluff? huh! No bluff when he fired at six yards. The doctor says that only threa shots hit you and none penetrated very lleeply?—Yes. He was not threatening your life when you shot him? —No, but he had his gun up. The doctor says you are not perma neatly disabled, yet Haeata has half his arm blown off.- —Don’t you think I am a lucky man? Counsel: Perhaps you ere, Mr Kenrick. I would not like to say. Re-examined by Mr Burridge: You said accused forced his wife into your hands. What did you mean?—First of all she came to my room at shearing time about 10 o’clock one evening She woke me up. I told her to go back. Haeata returned to my room with his wife, and said “You ha|l better leave things alone,” aid they both returned to their rooms.

His Honour: Do you wi. h to pursue this point, Mr Burripge? It is common ground that Kenrick and accused’s wife were living in adultery. Mr Noble: I do not wish to pursue it, your Honour; only witness has said that accused forced his wife on to him, and now this statement of accused while in Kenrick’s bedroom con tra|dicts that statement. Elizabeth Kenrick, daughter of the pievious witness, detailed the account oi the happenings on the night of February 3 and the morning of February 4. To Mr : Witness did not see, Haeata fire any shots. He could have shot into the room when the lamp was alight, but waitdl till we went into the passage and then fired through the door. Then ho ■was firing at the door, and not at anyone inside? —He knew we were inside. He di(d not seem keen about killing anyone when he fired at the door? —I don’t know what his intentions were. Mary Kenrick, the 16-y car-old daughter of James Kenrick, corrobo rated the evidence of her sister. On the night of the affray the four occupants of the house slept in the same room. When Haeata came into the front room he put his arm aroun)!witness’s father’s neck and asked Kenrick to shoot him. Witness found three empty cartridge cases outside. To Mr Noble: I never saw Haeata fire at my father. The curtains on the window were parted, and anyone outside could see anyone in the room. The person firing from outside could not see anyone through the front door? —No. Therefore, accused w r as not firing at your father?—l could mot say. The Court adjourned at 9.50 p.m till 9.30 a.m. to-day.