SUPREME COURT.-CRIMINAL SITTINGS.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 2, Issue 434, 9 April 1880, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.-CRIMINAL SITTINGS.

Wednesday April 7. (Before His Hnnir the Chief Justice and a Common Jury.)' (Prom the Times.) —♦ :;i SENTENCE. John Thompson who, on the previous evening, was found guilty of stealing a cash-box, was brought up for sentence. When : asked what he had to" say why sentence should not be passed, "" Prisoner denied-all knowledge of the robbery, and said hb heard nothing at all about it until he arrived at Greytown. He repeated his former statement as to how he had become possessed of the money. His Honor said 'he did not believe a : single word of His statement. The jury had. found luin gui'.ty of a very' serious offence. There was. no excuse whatever in the prisoner's case, ...for he was a man of some education, was respectably connected, and .was not in want of tunney. The. sentence :of the Court'would'be twelve months'- imprisonment. 1 -. George Viclcefstaff who', oil' Monday,' pleaded guilty to stealing two post letters, was bvoucht up for-sentence. : . The Crown Prosecutor said the postal | authorities were quite willing that the lad ■ should be discharged on his own recognisance to come up for judgment-when called upon to.do .so. . The uncle of the lad was not willing to enter into recog- • iiisances for the boy, but his-father would come down from the country, and do so. His Honor said that the punishment |, would.be a.mere nominal one, and the : security of .the.- fiitlier'would very likqly • be of little more value than the security of the aon, aeeing that he had only lately come to the country, and was apparently \ in poor circumstances, and it would pro- • bably involve him in considerable expense, if he had to come up to "Wellington. Tho uncle flight, have some reason for . d'ecli- > ning to enter into recognisances on behalf j of the lad". Seeing that the Poistal authorities took the view they did of the matter, he would take upon himself to let the boy' i go, binding him over in his own recog- , iiisances to come up for judgment when called upon. It was merely a nomiijal ' punishment", and the boy could be apprehended again and brought up for judgment if "necesaary- It was to be hoped that the parents-would look after hiin, and find liim.sQine employment, He coni Bidered he should be justified in adopting this course,- seeing that the boy had taken the letters not for the purpose of stealing i them, but' out of curiosity. Not that there was any excuse -for that, and if he had been a grown person he would have ' been very' seriously punished. The boy : would now be discharged on his own recognisances, and would have to como up for ]ud^ment # if called upon,. < ■'The Crpwn'Proseoutor said the Postal authorities wished it to be dißtiiicfcly understood that their- leniency in this case . mußt hot be taken as a precedent.. ' The boy was then discharged, and afterwards entered into recognisances for the sum. of £SO.