SUPREME COURT.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXVI, Issue 18566, 23 August 1922, Page 9

SUPREME COURT.

.WANGANUI SESSIONS OPEN The Supreme Court opened yesterday morning before His Honour Mr. Justice Reed. GRAND JURY. The following Grand Jury was empanelled:—Messrs F. G. Beaver, H. W. Cooper, W. S. Corby, N. H. D’Arcy, A. B. Gilmore, T. Gray. A. Halligan, C. Hannington. J. H. H'-ill. E. It. Jackson, C. G. Johnson, J. J. Meuli, J. McFarlane, A. J. North, E. O’Meara, J. H. Peters, S. Powdrell, T. H. Rice, J. C. Richardson. R. Scott, N. C. Staveley, N. P. Svenson. and W. R. Taylor. Mr. J. C. Richardson was chosen foreman.

HIS HONOUR’S CHARGE. In his charge to the Grand Jury, His Honour said that there were five criminal charges to be placed before them, and none of these was likely to give them any trouble. Justice Reed then traversed the various cases, outlining the circumstances in each one. In the case o£ Lloyd, committed for trial for theft, there appeared to be no evidence of intent on the part of the accused, and the case appeared to be one for a civil action. It remained for the Grand Jury to decide whether the criminal prosecution of the accused should be proceeded with. The charge against Joe Rawiri was of a more serious nature, there being several indictments agattast the accused. The evidence showed that Rawiri had escaped from his escort, was searched for by a number ot policemen who had to be armed on account of the escapee being in possession of a rifle which he had stolen The evidence further showed that Rawiri resisted arrest and fired on the police. The final case was that of a man named Mathison, who was indicted for theft of monies from the local gas office. Htß Honour considered that this was a case that should be left to the common jury. In conclusion, Mr Justice Reed said it was not one of the functions of the Grand Jury to by a case. Ii they considered there was a prlma fade case it should go before the common jury.

True bills were returned in the following cases: J. A. Dawkins, theft; 1. Underwood, mischief; R. Mathison, theft; Joe Rawiri, on several counts of shooting with intent and escaping from sustody. No bill was returned fin the case of Lloyd, alleged theft of a. waggon and horses, and he was discharged. THEFT OF POSTAL PACKET. John Aubrey Dawkins was charged with the theft of a postal packet at Mangaweka, on May Bth last, containing two postal notes of 2/6 The accused pleaded guilty, and was ordered to be brought up on Friday morning for sentence.

A LAD'S LAPSE. A boy named Murray came up for sentence on a charge of indecent assault. Mr Hussey, for the prisoner, said the accused was still a schoolboy of sixteen years of age. The boy had endeavoured to do all he could to make up for the lapse in helping the police, and he had told the truth. He asked that the provisions of the First Offenders Probation Act should be applied. His Honour said he could not entertain the application to meet the case with the First Offender Probation Act. This was a case where the boy required discipline, and he would recommend that he be committed to an industrial school. To do this he would have to sentence the accused and then recommend that he bj. sent to an industrial school. The accused was sentenced to three months imprisonment. FALSE DECLARATION OF BIRTH. Leslie Scoullar appeared for sentence on committal for making a false declaration of bjrth at Whatatane on October 4th, 1920. Mr T. B. Slipper pointed out that the circumstances were not so bad as in. other cases, and he suggested that a fine would meet the case. I His Honour said that the law must be obeyed, and he imposed a fine of £5, to be paid in twenty-tour hours, and in default one month’s imprisonment.

A TAIHAPE CASE. Isaac Underwood was charged with mischief, in that he smashed two windows at Taihape on May last. Mr J. M. Hussey appeared for the accused, who pleaded not guilty. The jury was composed of Messrs F. Chainey (foreman), J. Hockey, C. Scott. F. Tutty, F. Whiteman, E. R. Hodge, F. Oppenshaw. A. Holder, F. Thomson, R. J. Arthur, AV. Tilzey aud A. G. Pearce. Mr Gifford Marshall K.C., outlining the case for the prosecution, said that there was a block of buildings, owned by Mrs McCormick, at the corner of Hautapu and Mataroa Rds. at Taihape, being mostly shops having windows valued up to £6O. From the evidence it would be shown that on the day in question the accused went with a friend to a diningroom in the block of buildings, and the waitress refused to serve his friend. Between the hours of 6 p.m.

and 7 p.m. the two windows were broken by stones, which the waitress said were thrown by the accused. A borough employee also came along and saw a man throw a stone at a window, The accused disappeared into some stables, from whence he emerged a little later, leading a horse, when a constable, who had been communicated with, accused Underwood of breaking the windows. The waitress mentioned was at present in hospital and her evidence had been taken down. E'llen Hawthorne, waitress, in her written evidence, said that accused and a friend named Mitchell came in the dining room. She refused to serve Mitchell. The accused was under the influence of liquor. The witness also stated that she saw the accused throw the stones at the windows, and she told him she would "put his pot on.” Constable Geraghty, stationed at Taihape, deposed that on the road outside the block of buildings containing the shops the windows ot which were broken, was a heap of stones of various sizes. On May 26th at 6.25 p-.m. he saw two plate-glass windows broken. He saw the accused leading a horse, and on his asking him if he had damaged the windows he denied it. Witness made inquiries from the dining-rooms and the waitress pointed out to him the man. Underwood, who she said had broken the windows. The accused was drunk. Witness picked up a stone at the foot of one of the broken windows.

To Mr Hussey.—The dining-rooms were conducted by a Chinaman named George Gee, and the waitress was employed there. A. W. Begg, a driver employed by the Taihape Borough Council, said his attention was drawn by the sound of falling glass. He next saw a man throw something at Dick’s window, and it was broken. The man went towards Lord's Stables and witness went to ring up the police. A woman came out when the first window wais broken, but when the second one was smashed he was the only one in the street. The light in the street was weak and he could not identify the man. To Mr. Hussey.—When he got to Leighton’s shop, Reid's window was the only one then broken. Five minutes had elapsed between the breaking of the two windows. When he passed the dining-rooms he saw no one standing there. The waitress Hawthorne came out and was gone before the second window was smashed. If the woman had said anything to the accused he would have heard lit, and he did not hear her speak. Frederick Reid, grocer at Taihape, said he left his shop at 6.15 p.m. on the evening of May 2 6th, and returned about 7.30 p.m., to find the window broken. He valued the window at £4O. Samuel Dick, tailor, stated that he found his window, valued at £25, broken when he returned to his shop the morning after May 2 6th. This closed the case for the prosecution. Mr Hussey submitted that there was no case to answer. His Honour said that there was a case to answer. Mr Hussey, outlining the defence, pointed out the discrepancies in the evidence of the two principal witnesses for the prosecution. The accused went in to the box to give evidence. He said that he ci-.id not break the windows. He was at the Gretna Hotel until closing time, 6 p.m., when he left and went to the stables, never leaving there until he came out with the horse. Earlier in the day he went to the dining-rooms by himself. He did not use bad language, nor was he drunk.

To Mr. Marshall—He was not drunk, but he could not tell how many dr.ngs he had. Nobody went with him to the stables, which were in another direction, away from the broken windows. At the stables he saw several men, and stayed there talking until 6.25 p.m., which he guessed "was the time, fixed on the time he was arrested. He was fixing his horse up at the stables. He had no trouble with the waitress. He did certainly get drunk sometimes. George Ward, stablekeeper at Talinape, gave evidence that Underwood came to the stables at 6 p.m. and was there half an hour, not leaving during that time. The accused brought a bottle of beer with him. To Mi' Marshall—He judged that the accused, bringing the bottle of beer, had come from the Gretna Hotel He saw him coming from the direction of the hotel. The accused was then slightly under the influence of liquor, and was very talkative. When arrested, the accused was charged with being drunk while in charge of a horse. To His Honour.—He never lost sight of the accused after he saw h.im outside the hotel. He had no idea why his evidence was not taken in the lower court.

To Mr Marshall, witness said he would swear he never left the stables when Underwood was lucres Charles Kemp, taxi-drtiver at Taihape, said he got back from a trip at five minutes to six, and went to Lord’s stables. At five minutes past six he saw Underwood in the stable office, and at twenty past witness went out for dinner, Underwood being at the stable when he left. To Mr Marshall.—He took the time when he left the stables from the post office clock. The accused was talking, and witness didn’t see whether he was under the influence of drink. This Closed the defence.

After Mr Hussey had briefly addressed the jury, HSs Honour said lhe case resolved itself into a question of identity. If they desired to convict, they would have to do so on the woman Hawthorne’s evidence. This woman’s evidence was contradicted by another Crown witness, Begg, and the defence was an alibi, and he could not say why the accused had not called this evidence when the case was tried at Taihape. After an absence of five minutes, the jury returned With a verdict of not guilty, and the prisoner was discharged.