SUPREME COURT.

Wanganui Chronicle, Issue 15000, 19 September 1900, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

(Before His Honor the Chief Justice.) • TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18th. Tim Comt resumed yesterday wvning Hi 10 o'clock. ALLEGED FALSE PKETENCKS. Thomas Rodgers was arraigned en a chargo of obtaining, by false j.rclmccs, the sum of ±;b irom liuny P.iloy r, of i'aimerston north, on August 17th. . - Accused pisadeo not guilty and was deitnued'by iUr H. (jiU'otU-iUooie 'iliu lo'iiowing juiois were I'lnj.anne^l — Robeit Miller, jwn\ f James Irviiie, Aiired Mailman, I'iiouuis Mi'o'ib'l, b. hoibrook, John Barrett, George II ria >n, Wa - ur Junes, W. Taylor, J. A. L<i! ilu.v, David IW.pleton and J. G. Thompson (Uitvirarr). Mv F ; .tzherbcrt, in i>p?niiig iti" <»*e ?••' the prosecution, briefly explained the circumstances. Accused was a carrier in Palmovston ; Palmer the proprietor of a produce and auction mart. Accused had been working f"ov a farmer named Webber and hud 303 due to him. Webber wrote out a cheque for 30s in the usual way and handed it to accused in payment for his services. About two days afterwards accused went to Palmer's place and agreed to purchase a sack of potatoes from one of the employees. He tendered in payment a cheque. Apparently the figure "1" had been tampered with and altered to a "7." The employee did not look at the body of the jhe'quo or he would have seen that it was irregular. He asked accused was the cheque for £7 10s and he replied that it was. The employee had not the change on the premises and went to -a hotel to get change. The wife of the holelkeeper cashed the cheque and she apparently did not notice that the body of the cheque was written in for "one pound ten shillings.' The employee (Co lins) returned with the cash and handed accused £7 10s, less the price of the -potatoes. Next morning the hotelkeeper noticed the irregularity of the cheque and. came wer to Palmer's about it. Accused was approached, but denied having received more than the ""change as t'vom a 30s cheque. Subsequent conversations indicated, Mr Fitzhebert said, that iccused admitted the receipt of the larger sum oi money, and it would be for the defence to give explanations of this. The -.•harge was not one of forgeiy, but one of obtaining money "by false pretences. In cross-iexamination, witness Collins (Palmer's employe) said that, in speaking to Constable De Norvill soon after the ■lay on which the/ cheque whs cashed, may have said That accused, in reply to his (Collins) question as to the cheque being for £7 10s, merely nodded hi.-s head, and did not use the word "yes" or any other words. Ho (Collins) corrected this statement to the constable -immediately after. After a somewhat lengthy cross-examin-ntion of this witness by Mr Moore, His Honor pointed out that tho who'e case i turned upon the question whether accused either by assenting by nodding his head or by the use of certain words obtained this money, which he was not entitled to, fhen ho was guilty of false pretences. Six other witnesses were called for the Crown, after which accused was put in the box, and denied ever having told Palmer ho had got the £7 10s, nor led him to believe such a thing. He was never asked for the money. The first time hf saw the face of the cheque was when Rollins brought it to him on the morning of tho Saturday. He kept the cheque for a "lark," intending to return it to-Webber. Accused waa subjected to a severe crossexamination by the Crown Prosecutor, but adhered to his statement. ■ After counsel for accused and Mr Fitzherbert had addressed the jury, his Honor ■summed up, and the jury retired to consider theiv verdict. Tho jury found a verdict of "guilty" and accused was remanded to Thursday, to enable the Probation Officer to. make inquiries. Louis Fitzer was indicted with having on Apri 29th, committed the crime of mischief, viz,., wounding a horse, the property of a native named Tiopiro. Mr Fitzherbe'it appeared for the Crown, ■uid Mr Treadwell for accused, who pleaded guilty. The following jury was empannelled :— r J. N. Coleman, R, Baddeley, W. Lyall, W. Rodwell, H. Hager,. W. Jamieson, T, G. Simpson, W. Mitchell, D. Rowe, G. Leyfield, A. Thompson, Matthew Siddle, Mr Rodwell was chosen foreman. Tho jury returned a verdict of "guilty," and accused was ordered to come up for sentence when called upon. ' Several law points were reserved for the Privy Council. y THEFT: ■■ -' /■ Duiistan'Hoskins was indicted with'luiving, on March 7th, stolen a watch chain* the property' of Ernest Way. Accused 'pleaded -guiltyr-*r Mv Treadwell appeared for accused, and said he did not intend to ask His Honor to admit prisoner to probation, for ascertain reason. His Honor would .see by the depositions taken at the lower Court, that the theft was committed when accused was under the influence of liquor. Accused was one of those unfortunates who- could not, through drink, keep a, penny ijt his pocket. Tho accused's parents 'wished His Honor to convict him and hand him o\er to them. They h"hd made arrangements to send t»im to sea, being of opinion that that was the only means by which he might be redeemed. ■ His Honor said that unfortunately -the accused was not the only young man Vho was ii victim to drink. He was of oi>iniop that unless guilty of prior offences of a similar class, endeavours should ba made to keep a youug njan out of gaol, and he was always anxious to give every chance to reform. He would order accused to come up for sentence when called upon, and to enter into a. bond of £50. His Honor remarked that it was very sad to see so many young people undeT 21 brought before the Court. In fact, he had never seen so many at any sittings he had held.