LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1589, 5 November 1912, Page 11

LAW REPORTS.

(Before Sir Robert Stout, C.J.) X THE HISTORY OF GEORGE LEE'. HAWKER ST. CASE. OVER .FIFTY YEARS IN PRISON. Few cases were set down for hearing at tho criminal sessions of the Supremo Court, which opened before the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) yesterday morning. Mr. H. H. Ostler, of the Crown Law Office, appeared for tho Crown. The Grand Jury. .The following were called for the Grand Jui): Messrs. I{. C. Rennet* (foreman), !■' i. Gradj, G. Nathan, Campbell Young, G. H. Harris, R. E. Rawnsley, R. T. Badham, W. J. Harland, J. Aston, W H Wsnce, J. B. Fi.nlay, L. A. George, H &. ICins, W. Hopkirk, Ct. A. Chapman, »- li. -M. Brewer. J. P. Luke, juijW. H. b. Green, W. R. Plinnnor, W. M. Exton, A T. Bate, OVA, Fletcher, and G. Harrison In addressing the Grand Jury, his Hon. .our congratulated the district on the light list. There were very few persons for trial, although those who came before the jury did not represent the orimc in the •district, as others had pleaded guilty from time to time, and so merely cam© up for sentence. There were no serious cases, except one of a semi-sexual character. His Honour then made special reference to the | individual cases'on the list. I, True Bills. True .bills' were found in tho following cases:—Frank Loasby l'ocker, delaying postal packets; Fred, White, theft from the .person; William Knox, procuring j abortion (two charges); George Maxwell, forgery and littering; Edward Wilfrid Jacobs, breaches of the Bankruptcy Act; i and Arthur Henry Widdas, assault, causing actual bodily harm. No bill Was found in the case against Joseph Hemimngs, who had been committed for trial, along with Fred. White, on tllo chargo of theit from tho person. FIFTY YEARS OF GAOL. ELDERLY HABITUAL CRIMINAL. "Ah, if I'd been a younger man you'd never have caught, me." With these words, George Lee addressed his oaptors when arrested on a chargo of housebreaking in ■ Hawker Street on Sunday, October 27. Leo is a well-pre-served criminal, 75 years of age. His career of crime started something like fifty years ago, the first conviction being recorded-against him when he was 28 years of: age. Altogether there are eighteen previous convictions standing against him, and his sentences aggregate 50 years and C months, though remissions for good conduct would reduco'his actual service m gaol to something' less than that period. On one occasion lie was sentenced to fourteen years' imprisonment (in Sydney), on two occasions to seven year*, on three occasions to five years, once to three years, and once to two years. ■ Yesterday lib caißo up for' sentence on a . charge of'breaking into the house of Captainßlackburne,. in Hawker Street, and stealing therefrom tho sum of J!l 15s. 3d; To_ this charge and to a charge of wing m possession of housebreaking tools,, he had pleaded guilty iu the Magistralos Court last week. He wne not represented by counsel,-and had nothin° ' i as , to <- wh y se "teiice of tho Court should not be, passed on him. His Honour, in remarking upoh the ' a ?A '<&&&itf -crjiiie, stated thdt lie did not know what pleasure. Lee could have got out of life. At>- , P. aren «}', he .had, made up. his'.'mind to ■ live by housebreaking, and had ended ing gaol. His case.ought to be a lesson to any young men who were starting out oil a career of crime. There was only one thing to be done with tho prisoner. Ho would be sentenced to three years' imprisonment onv the housebreaking charge, and declared a habitual criminal, un tho chargo of being in possession of Housebreaking implements, a sentence of six months imprisonment was passed 1 '" 11 concurrentl >' with the other When arrested, Leo had over .£3 in his possession, and on tho application of Mr Ustier, an order was niado for restitu™°i? lwif 'V? 3 '. 3 - 1 '" nmo'unt can ho •kept to his credit," said his Honour, so. that he may have it if he ever gets out of .gaol. PLEADED WITHOUT ADVICE. PROBATION GRANTED. ■Theft, forgery, and false, pretences were tllo charges .to, which a young man, named m, ® i lom T as Jr £*>.Y. '""I Pleaded guilty in the- Lower Court. The offences had been committed at Waverlev Prisoner was not represented by counsel, but ■ stated from the dock that it was his first offence, and that if his Honour would admit him to probation he (prisoner) would' not trouble tho Court again. His Honour then pointed out that although there were three charges against tho prisoner,' one (false' pretences) did not appear to come within the Crimes Act -Mr. Ostler remarked that if that was 60 it was quite clear that the other offences were really only one act. His Honour remarked that prisoner must have pleaded guilty to the false pretcuces charge without advice. There ought to be an .entry made-so that it would not be heaped up against prisoner in future-tint this was really not an oifence. Prisoner was a young man, just past his twentyfirst year, and was very foolish to have started out as he had done. Ho would bo admitted to twelve months' probation, and his Honour hoped that it wiuld be a last appearance before the Court. A condition of tho sentence would lj ß that JlLvoy should refund the money which he had dishonestly obtained. COUNSEL'S SUGGESTION. . HOW THE JURY RECEIVED IT. The first trial taken . was that of Fred White, who pleaded not guilty to stealing a watch, valued at £2 55., from the person of William Smithyman. Mr. C. V. Gouljter appeared for the accused. According to the evidence for the prosecution, Smithyman, who is assistant secretary of the Seamen's Union at Wellington, visited several "places" ou the evening of September 21, and left the Duke of Edin--bm-gli Hotel at about 10 p.m. Ho walked up Willis Street, but after reaching a point, opposite tho Albert Hotel did not rccollect anything until ,thfe following morning." Ho clearly remembered, however, that while in the Duke of Edinburgh Hotel he had his watoh, but next morning he had'part of it only left iu his pocket. Something of what had occurred to him between the time at which he lost recollection and the following .morning was supplied by the evidence of Henry ■Graham, hairdresser, and his wife. It appeared thai Graham had left his shop just after 10 p.m., and lie and his wifo then saw Smithyman standing at tho side of the street, and White- and another man, named Ilemmings, standing alongside him.' White had his hand oil Smithyman's Wafcih-cli&ili. Mrs. Graham then went for a policeman, while Graham Watched the prisoner. By the time the policeman arrived, a crowd had collected, nnd someone called out: "He's dropped something." The watch was afterwards found on the ground at the feet of White. Evidence for the defence was given by White and by Heinmings. White's story was to the effect that he saw Smithyman fall over, and lie went and assisted him up and dusted him. White denied 'absolutely having taken tho watch. In addressing the jury, Mr. Coulter pointed out that at. the time of White's arrest Graham and his wife. had said nothing to the arresting;constable about seeing. White's hand on Smithyman's watch-chain, and that Ihe coDstnfile had heard no one in the crowd soy: ".He's dropped something." ■ Counsel suggested thpf this part of tho evidence ot tho

Grahams was "an nl>soliito and dclibcralo falsehood" made lip for tli.o purpose of supporting tho storv which tliev had started. Mr. Ostler remarked that he would not have troubled to address the jury but for tlio statement ot counsel that two witnesses for the Crown had given false testimony. He did not suppose his friend meant to say that they committed wilful perjury His Honour: It cim mean nothing else. .. ystier said that ho did not think that his friend meant to go so far as that. Continuing, counsel pointed out that there was nothing remarkable in tlio fact that the constable had not heard a chance remark in ■ tlio crowd, or that the Grahams had not at the time mentioned every detail. 11 S ji^° llo,l ''' summing, up; stated that there were only two findings open to the jury. Either tlio Grahams had told the truth and White was guiltv, or they had committed perjury and White was innocent. The jury retired at about 2.20 p.im and returned in half nn hour with a verdict of "Guilty." Sentence was deferred until Thursday morning. MARTIN STREET AFFRAY. WIDDAS FOUND GUILTY. A middle-aged' man, named Arthur Henry Widdas, pleaded not guilty to acharge of assaulted John Leahy so as to cause hiiii actual bodily harm. ■ iUr. C. V. Cioulter appeared for the accused. The scene of tlio nlfray was 25 Martin off Taranaki-Street, and the date ti. a i Wednesday, October 23. It appeared that for some considerable ti.oio prior to six months ago, the accused (Widdas.) lmd been absent from Wellington. On his return he discovered that his wife was living at 25 Martin- Street, with a man named; Douglas. During the past sis months the house had been occupied Ij J Doug as, Widdas and the lptter's wife, uhile John Leahy a corporation labourer, and his wife, had been-renting a room from Douglas. On October 23 s Widdas and his wife had an altercation, Widdas attacking her first frith a wood axe and then wth .n. razor. Leahy interfered in tlio nrst lnstanco anil secured the axe. iw™ Y 11 !: tf. interfere in the second 1,11 "I 1 fnva E '° well, as- •'!, - 1 " tho throat, ■ and slashed at him with the. razor. Leahv S'S f er »°"s Wdunds on m face, ami; . hospital* removed to the thlt ld |m\ (i T? d % c,lar g« al >d declared that ho had merely punched Lealiv on Lhe nose, after Leahy. had threatened to throw him out of the l °. ihe juij, after a retirement of nhnnf 0 rerdSet of guilty without mteht) "and the primmer was re manded until Thursday forSnce