LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1618, 9 December 1912, Page 8

LAW REPORTS.

SUPREME COURT. TWO PRISONERS SENTENCED. THE HOUSEBREAKER. Mr. Justice Sim passed sentence on two, prisoners in the Supreme Court on Saturday morning. Mr. H. H. Ostler, of the Crown Law Office, represented the Crown. A Tecent arrival from Scotland, a young man named Peter Young, was first placed in the dock. Ho had pleaded guilty at Hastings to a charge of breaking, enter-, ing,- and theft, and was not represented by counsel. In answer to the question if he had anything to say as to why sentence of the Court should not be passed, the prisoner said: "I was hard pushed at the time, and that's why I committed the theft." Mr. Ostler reported that Young had been proved (by the finger-print system) to be identical with Henry Thompson, who had been sentenced to three months' imprisonment at Christchurch in June, 1911, for being idle and disorderly. His Honour imposed a sentence of six months' imprisonment with hard labour, and ordered that prisoner be afterwards detained for reformative treatment for a period not exceeding three months. Leslie Stapleton's Lapse, Leslie Stapleton had nothing to say why he should not be sentenced for failure to comply with the terms of his. probation order. His Honour: It seems to be- necessary under the Actio take the evidence of the probation officer, Mr. Ostler. Mr. Ostler replied that he proposed to call that evidence.. . > From the evidence of the probation officer (Mr. J. C. Scanlon) it appeared the prisoner had been sentenced to two months' imprisonment for theft at Palraerston North. He had been under the influence of liquor when arrested, and had jjiven the nam© of Leslie Watson. On his arrival in Wellington, however, it had. been discovered that he was Leslie Stapleton, who had been admitted to probation in Auckland early this year on condition that he earned his living by honest means, and abstained from tho use of alcohol. His Honour: Do you Tecommend that he be released on probation again? The probation officer replied that he could not make such a recommendation in faoe of the prisoner's lapse. His Honour passed a sentence of six months' imprisonment with hard labour, to bo followed by three years' reformative treatment. City Council v. Moore, The case of the City Council v. Moore, in which plaintiffs applied to havo defendant attached for non-compliance with the building by-law, was on Saturday adjourned further until February 3, 1913, lo allow of the by-law being complied with. The adjournment was made on the application of tho City Solicitor (Mr. J. O'Shea).

(Before Mr. W. G. BiddeH, S.M.) For insobriety, Charles 'Miller was fined IDs. at the Magistrate's Court on Saturday. ' -