SUPREME COURT.

Wellington Independent, Volume XX, Issue 2216, 8 June 1865, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

1 CRIMINAL SITTINGS. J Tuesday, 6th June, 18G5. ' (-Before His Honor Mr Justice Johnston.) , His Honok took his scat on the Bench at 1( [ o'clock. L LAB CENT. ■ Joseph Graham was placed at the bar charged : , with stealing two blankets and one boot, and on another count with receiving the same knowing them to be stolen. j Mr Izurrt (who appeared for the Crown) ',| slated that the- goods were taken from Mr Barry's, the Ship .Hotel, and shortly afterwards found' in possession of the prisoner on board the ship 1 Mallard. He called the ibUowiug evidence: — Richard Hurry deposed, — I am a publican and keep the Ship Hotel. On the 16th May in the | morning I missed several parcels and blankets left in my charge. There were blue blankets tied with leather straps, and grey blankets tied with string. There were also other blankets missing resembling horse rugs. I saw some of them on the loth May in the evening, and again on the 16th on the ship Mallard. I saw the horse rugs in the prisoner's berth on board. I saw the prisoner at my house drinking between 10 and 11 of the 15th at the bar. The goods were in the back parlor behind the bar, which is used by my customers. The entrance is through a long room, and it communicates with the yard. I last saw him in the long room. I missed him after 11 o'clock. Prisoner was in the galley when 1 was on board the Mallard. The policeman with mo said to him he had come in search of blankets which were stolen from the Ship Hotel. The prisoner said he had not taken any blankets. The blanket produced by John Doran is the one resembling a horse 'rug. Two blankets or rugs were found in a bunk over the cook's place. The prisoner's bunk was underneath. The policeman took them. 1 can only swear that 1 have had blankets resembling these produced. Blankets were left in my custody by a person named While, but these are not them. They were deposited by a person whoso name I do not know, who went up the coast. By the prisoner — I do not know how you came info possession of those blankets. I did not see you searched. The man in the bunk where the blankets were, said they were put there to get him into trouble. Austin White deposed, — I am a fireman. I know the prisoner at the bar. I bought some blankets of him yesterday three weeks at night after 10 o'clock. I bought two blankets and a rug I believe. The prisoner told me he had been prospecting up at Tarawiti nnd was hard up. The clay was Monday. He asked 80s for them, and I at last gave him £1. The blankets produced arc the same. I afterwards gave them to Dorau. There were a pair of blue, a pair of grey blankets, and a rug. There was a prayer-book inside the blankets and a pair of trousers. Nothing was said to me about the prayer-book nor trousers when I bought them. By the prisoner — I bought them of you on board. James Norman deposed, — I am a miner. I have seen the grey and blue blankets. I tliink the blue blankets belong to a mate of mine. The grey belong to me. I know them by certain holes in them. I left them in Barry's charge on the 1-itli May. I next saw them on board tho Wanganui on the 2Sth. Austin White recalled, — I saw them on board the Wanganui, not the Mallard. James Norman deposed as to the manner in which tho blankets were tied. Witness continued, — A mate of mine left other blankets. The prayer-book and trousers produced are mine. They were folded up in the blankets. John Doran deposed,— l apprehended the prisoner on tho lGth May, on board the Mallard. 1 t old him I apprehended him for stealing blankets, and (hat I would search his bunk and boxes. He refused to allow me. I searched his bunk. He had his back against it. I found blankets wliieh were identified by Mr Barry. I also received some blankets from White on board the Wanganui. By the prisoner, — I found the blankets and two bundles in your possession, which were delivered in the Magistrate's Court. Barry, recalled, — Norman came to my house about the 15th May, and left such blankets. The prisoner said he came on shore from the ship Mallard, and met a man who had shipped in the Mallard. He told him to take some things on board for him, which were afterwards found in his possession. The prisoner called the following evidence, — Jos. Davis, deposed,— l sold you a blanket in Finlay's boarding house between seven and eight weeks ago._ The blanket was a grey double blanket. You were to pay me 12s 6d for it when you got your advance note. The blanket produced is the same. Cross-examined, — I brought the blanket up from Dunedin. It was not in a very good condition. There were no holes in it. lam a cook. I have known the prisoner for seven or eight weeks. (Witness here described the blanket). The blanket is plain grey throughout. Ido not recognize the prayer-book or trousers produced. I know nothing about the other grey blanket. By the Court,— l am a Portuguese, and have been some t ime in the Colony. The prisoner was boarding at Finlay's three or four weeks. We nevev drank together or had any other transactions together. Tho money for the blanket was to be paid when the prisoner got his advance. I saw the blanket in the Resident Magistrate's Court, and was a. witness on the second trial. I asked Finlay about my money and he would not give it to me as the advance note was no good, and I came to the Court for my 12s Gd. I examined the blanket in the office. The boarding master is not in Court. Mr Izard said the blanket the Avitness spoke of was not the one Norman swore to, hut was found in the prisoner's bunk, and called Mncuiiili Head, who deposed, — I am warden of the gaol. The blanket sworn to by the last witness is the one said to be found in the prisoner's bunk. His Honor pointed out in summing up that the prisoner had only attempted to defend himself on the charge of stealing one of the blankets, which they might dismiss from their minds, and consider the other part of the case against him, that of Mealing Norman's blanket. The jury almost immediately found the prisoner guilty. The prisoner was then charged on another indictment, with having been guilty of the above crime while under conviction of a previous felony. Maeaiah Read deposed that the prisoner was discharged from gaol in April, 1365, after having been sentenced to nine months imprisonment, having received an absolute pardon from his Excellency in consequence of his good conduct, lEi.s Honor said ho was sorry to hear that sentences were carried out in such a way, as a man after receiving such a pardon stood in the position of a man who had not been convicted of a felony. His Honor further said the pardon ought to have been pleaded, for it was diflieiilt now to direct the jury what to do, as after the evidence it would be absurd to say ho had not, been convicted of a felony. According to the terms of the pardon any property which might have been forfeited would have to be rest ored. After some consideration II in Honor said he would ask the jury to find that the prisoner had been convicted of a larceny and since pardoned, and reserve the point for tho Court of Appeal whether the general verdict should stand or not.. His Honor further said that there was a great difference between the conditional pardon given in England, called a " ticket-of-leave," and tho absolute pardon given by his Excellency, by the advice no doubt of his lc<ml advisers. Subsequently, by the direction of His Honor, the jury found the prisoner guilty of larceny, after haying previously been convicted of a felony, and His Honor reserved two points of law connected with the pardon for tho consideration of the Court of Appeal. His Honor, in sentencing the prisoner, commented on tho enormity of his crime, and expressed his opinion that a prisoner standing a second time in the dock on a charge of felony ought to be punished most severely. Ho would sentence the prisoner to four yews penal servitude.