RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, CAMBRIDGE. Saturday.—(Before H. W. Norfchcroft, Esq., R.M.) Alleged Theft of a Watch. YESTERDAY.

Waikato Times, Volume XVI, Issue 1361, 22 March 1881, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, CAMBRIDGE. Saturday.— (Before H. W. Norfchcroft, Esq., R.M.) Alleged Theft of a Watch.

YESTERDAY.

SINGULAR CASE OF MISTAKEN IDBNTITY. Jno. J. Palmer was charged on suspicion with having on the 2nd insfc. abstracted a watch from the dwelling-house of James Hamilton, a settler, residing 1 on the Hamilton-road j said watch being valued by the prosecutor at a sum of £10. Constable Brannan conducted the prosecution ; the accused being defended by Mr Beale. The following evidence in support of the charge was adduced : — James Thomas Camp, hotelkeeper, Tamahere, deposed that accused had lived at Tamahere for some time prior to the 2nd inst. Accused left his house about halfpast 8 on the morning of that day for the Hot Lakes via Cambridge. The prosecutor's (Hamilton's) house, is located about three-and a-half miles from Tamahere. It would have taken a man on foot at least two hours to walk all I the way to Cambridge. Accused paid witness what he owed him, and he (witness), was otherwise aware that the accused was supplied with funds, when he set out. The Bame day another man called at the hotel. That would bo between the hours v of 9 and 10 a.m. He remaiDed about twenty minutes, and gave witness to understand he was in destitute circumstances. He represented himself as being a carpenter by trade, and wanted to get employment. Acting on witnesses advice, he set out in the direction of Cambridge, where he (witness), thought it was probable he might succeed in obtaining employment. That man bore a resem-

bianco to the accused. Witness had since learned his name was Sutherland, and that he was wanted by the police in connection with theft of money at Piako. James Hamilton, the prosecutor, identified the' watch produced as his property. He was employed ploughing in a paddock 16 or 17 chains from the house on the morning of the 2nd. The watch was hanging against the wall when he left that morning, and when he returned about 4 p.m., it was gone. From where he was at work, he could see a portion of the house. In the forenoon, between 10 and 11 o'clock, he noticed a man walking away from the house. He could give no description of the man, further than that he wore a " lightish coat." His house is situated between four and five chains from the road. He communicated with the police the day after discovering his loss. A. "Rayne3 landlord of the National Hotel Cambridge, recognised accused as having come to his house about mid-day on the 2nd inst. Ho had dinner and left again; in the afternoon he returned again about 5 p.m. and had tea. The tea was over about 6.30 and between that hour and 9.30 p.m. when he was shown to bed witness saw him at repeated intervals sitting in a back parlour writing. Witness was in and out of the parlour the whole night and he saw the accused busy writing every time he went there. Had accused been out of the parlour in the interval for any length of time he would have noticed his absence. He j firmly believed he was there all the evening up to the time he went to bed. Matiu Pirimi a native, desposed that about mid -day on the 2nd inst, he was accosted by a man in the streets of Cambridge who offered to sell him a watch. He agreed to give him £1 15s for it, 10s being paid at the time and the remainder to be paid afterwards. Witness got possession of the watch on payment of the 10s. Sometime later the man applied for the balance, but as witness had not got it he agreed to give him two shillings and his own watch as security for the balance. The watch handed to him by the Bench was not the watch he then purchased. Constable Brennau— He doe? not seem to be able even to recognise the watch. The Bench — 1 am not astonished at that. I changed the watch to test the witness and handed him my own watch. (Laughter.) The Courl— Now look at that watch. Is that the one you bought. Witness — Yes ! that is the watch. Examination continued— l do not know the prisoner. I know I purchased the watch from a white man, but it was not the prisoner. This man has a more gentlemanly appearance than the one I got the watch from. He is dressed in a different suit of clothes too. The man's whiskers were much longer than those worn by prisoner. There is nothing in the appearance of the prisoner to lead me to suppose that he is the man. I was perfectly sober at the time the watch was purchased. Had the prisoner at the bar, sold me the watch, I must have known him again. I told the police the person I bought the watch from bore a striking resemblance to a resident in Cambridge, named Chalmers ; the only difference being about the nose, which I likewise explained to the police. I had no conversation with anyone about thi3 case before coming into Court. When I first saw accused I told the police he was not the right man. Prisoner was taken out into the street for the purpose of identification, and as soon as I saw him, I said he is not the man. I was afterwards asked to go to the policestation, and when I got there accused was told to speak, so that I might be able to identify him by his voice. I then told them I did not recognise the man's voice. Chalmers, the man now produced in Court, was the man to whom I referred the police for a likeness of the man they wanted. Two other natives who had also been present when the sale of the watch was negotiated, were produced in evidence, but both of them corroboi ated the previous witness, and insisted that accused was not the man. Constable Abraham was adduced to prove that the native witnesses had stated to him the reason they refused to identify prisoner, was that they would have to go to Auckland to give evidence in the Supreme Court, and that in their absence their claims in the Land Court would be prejudiced. In reply to the Court, the witness said this communication was made to him partly in English and partly in Maori. He was not sufficiently versed in the Maori language to repeat the exact words made use of. He could not remember what was said in English, and was not able to repeat what had been said in Maori. The Court -It has often come within my own knowledge and must be within the knowledge of others brought into contact with the Maoris, that in expressing themselves in that way they are liable to make use of words different in their meaning from those intended. Unless we can get at the exact words used it is impossible to arrive at a fair estimate of what they did say. In reply to questions put by the Court, the Maori witnesses denied having made a communication about not "wanting to go to Auckland to the previous witness or anyone else. Mr Beale — Moreover they could not have known anything about the case being sent to Auckland for trial. It was quite possible for accused to have pleaded guilty, and in that case he would have been dealt with by this Court, in the exercise of its summary jurisdiction. The witnesses could only have known about any probability of the case being sent to Auckland through the police themselves. The Court— Dops the prosecution think it 13 worth while calling further evidence. Constable Brennan— l should like to call the next witness just to show that the police were justified in the action they have taken ; not that I think it is any use pressing the thing further against defendant. R. W. Sergeant, watchmaker, Cambridge, deposed that between 6.30 and 7 p.m. of the 2nd inst., accused called at his shop and got a watch-glass fitted into one of the watches produced and identified. He then stated he had sold a more valuable watch, and that he had taken the watch pointed out as part payment of the price. He (witness) was quite sure prisoner was the man. He had been asked by the police to identify him, and with that view they had him (defendant) brought down to Duke-street. When he first saw him he had some hesitation, but afterwards, on hearing him speak, that hesitation was removed. To Mr Beale. — Defendant would be ten minutes or a quarter of an hour in the shop, when witness supplied him with the watch. It was just about dusk of the evening. Still it was light enough to enable him to get a good look at him. It would be about a quarter of an hour before he lit the lamps. Witness had a good many people about his shop during the sitting of the Land Court. He could not say what number had been about the place that afternoon and evening. The next time he saw prisoner was on Saturday last, in Duke-street. He was then along with the constable. Witness had been previously asked to identify prisoner. The constable was in plain clothes. He knew the constable, so that there wa3 no likelihood of hia mistaking the constable for prisoner. On being afterwards questioned, he told the constable .he thought it was the man, but that his beard seemed to be a little lighter. That difference occasioned a slight doubt iv big

mind ; but when he afterwards heard him apeak, all doubt on the point was removed. He was now quite confident prisoner w« the man. The Court— lf a witness ;who bought the watch, and others, who were present at the time, swore in Court, this was not the man, would you still adhere to your staf ement ? Witness — Yea — I am quite confident be is the man. The °ourt— lf another witness, a European—(Mr Raynes) swears that at the time you say this man was in your shop getting the glass the defendant was in his house sitting at the tea table would you still be sure this was the man ? Witness f— l would. The police stated this was the case for the prosecution. Mr. Beale said he was prepared to call evidence that would be equally conclusire of the prisoner's innocence if the Court thought there was any case to answer. His Worship said that no evidence for the defence was necessary. The case for the prosecution had entirely failed. He was quite satisfied with the evidence given by the natives. One of them he knew to be * mosfc retpect* able man, and was not at all likely to come to Court and commit perjnry without any apparent motive. All ho could see was, that the accused had had the misfortune to be very like somebody elae^ and that somebody happened to be oflT the same road, and had committed a theft about the time the accused was there. _ X was clearly a case of mistaken identity, and the defendant was therefore dismissed. In reply to a question asked by defendant, His Worship said that, so far as shown, there did not rest the shadow of a suspicion on him.

[BY TBLEGIUPH. — OWN CORRESPONDENT. W. B. Reid was charged on remand today with vagrancy. Mr Beale appeared for the defendant. The police applied to withdraw the information, as they had ascertained since his apprehension that he had been left a legaoy and that he had influental friends in the place. Mr Beale characterised the proceedings as grossly irregular, and condemned the action of police. Mayor Wilson, J.P.. who presided, agreed to allow the case to be withdrawn accordingly.