SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1665, 4 February 1913, Page 4

SUPREME COURT.

(Before Hi? Honour Mr. Justice Chapman) / THE CRIME WAVE SMALLER. , CAUSE ASSIGNED., ONSET ON THE HABITUALS. Some eleven cases are, s«f down -for hearing at the criminal sessions of the Supreme Court which opened before Mr. Justice Chapman yesterday morning. Mr. F. S. K. Slacassey represented the Crown. • The.'following were the Grand Jury:— Charles John Hill (foreman), 'Arthur Leigh Hunt, William Edward Fuller, James Cable, George Winder, John Boveridge,- Godfrey Thorno George, William Kerr, Alex. Newton, James William Brown, Frank Knibbs, Thomas Vernon Venables, David Bnchan Carrick, Jas. Wilson Wallace, Jas..Clark, Herbert William Preston, Henry Percy F. Blundell, George A. Hurley, Herbert Allen Kirkcaldie, John Castle, Win. Alfred Chote, His Honour ori'Decrease in Crime Trials, In addressing tho Grand Jury, his Honour remarked that 'none of the cases presented'any complications for primary investigation. Comparing the list with that for the same period two-years ago, the number of cftses had : noticeably diminished. "The cause of this," 6aid his Honour, "is a matter for research, but I daresay I have a right to attribute a considerable portion of the diminution to the operation of the law relating to habitual criminals and reformative treatment." His Honour then, went on to state •that, under present law, criminals'were receiving snorter sentences than formerly. That was tho case both here and in England. In this country, however, the operation; of tho law relating to habitual criminals involved longer sentences.. This had the effect of convincing a certain class that a criminal career was, not likely to prove a ,yery profitable business. His Honour did not know whether certain individuals (faced with our existing law) left the country, or whether they settled down to more honest lives,' but certain it was,that the number of criminal trials l was diminishing. His Honour went on to say that he was personally under tho impression that, for, a. time, the Dominion. had been receiving, an undue proportion of, criminals from the other side.-and that might have'been because of the greater severity of the laws in the neighbouring States. This, however, did to bo the case, now, and'the position ;of affairs seemed to be lack to normal again. Regarding tho particular cases'-:on. the list* his Honour remarked anon an un-> fortunate : feature-three sexual cases.' ..hese were similar: to those investigated on previous occasions'. A case of ns.ault and robbery was, his Honour raid, serious berause, apparently, a drug h-d been used., and'there were cases el tity robberies in which a gang of )oung men were involved. What his-Horonr referral to as an "extraordinary case" was ihntinwhich a young man was chnrged' with the destruction' of a dwelling-house by means of an explosive such as gelignite or something of tho kind. No motive was disclosed .for the action, but the Grand Jury'need not concern itself n'th a motive, if they consjdcr?d s -.that;,the eyif; dence made out a primoacio case'. '"' '■■' True .Bills Found. . '/■'■'.■ True bills were found in'tho following cases:—Albert John Udy, wilfully destroy-, ing a dwelling-house; John stone, indecent assault; William Hanimington,' nliaa_Hill, criminal' assault; John Condon, Thomas Donovan, and William Henry Adams/assault and robbery; Herbert Wallace, alias' Worman; thelt; Walter Krausch and James O'Neill, breaking, entering, and- theft; James O'Neill, breaking, entering, and theft; Seddon Beid, James O'Neill, William Fades; and Walter"Kransch, breaking, entering, and theft; George Waters, breaking, entering, and theft; John George Norn's, assault with intent tocomihit rape; and William John Hogan, assault causing actual bodily'harm. .. ;- ;'. ■''■ ■''.'

(Two Years': Reformative Treatment. . : Albert Henry Palmer was brought up ~for-sentence'on a charge of theft. He nppearod some days ago, but had been on remand in order that Mr. Justice Cliapniau , might consider what, was best' to be done with liim.. ;,'"'. , His Honour-remarked that he'had come to the conclusion that the best thing was to seritonco accused to a moderate term of reformative 'treatment. He warned prisoner that'convictions were piling up against him. and, unless ho took.,care, he might, before long,' ba declared an habitual criminal. On this occasion a sentence of two years' reformative treatment would be imposed. ./.' •'■''.: .'Counsel's Plea 1 for Forger. When Horace James Richards appeared for,sentence on a charge of forgerj-, "Mr. : C., Qoulter usked if his Honour could'admit the prisoner to probation. • His Honour: I don't think that I can. I have had, so many of these forgery cases—eases like this one. Mr. Goulter then mentioned 'that drink was the cause of the trouble. It was not as if there had been other offenoss. His Honour pointed out that thero were two charges. .When a man committed crimes of.'the'kind.l indicated, he must be taken in hand 'by sbmcbne else if he oould not restrain himself. A sentence of bix months' reformative treatment was passed,. his Honour recommending thnt l prisoner be sent to the Invcrcargill Gaol. ■.■'■'.■■ THE TRIALS. V A CASE OF "NOT ?GUILTY.""' ■A youth, named Jbhn Rickeard Rilstone, was called upon to answer a charge of criminal assault. Mr. T. Neave appeared for the prisoner, ■ who pleased not guilty.

Before the trial commenced Mr. Neavo asked, that his'.client bo discharged on the ground of irregular procedure, hut after hearing . argument (reported, elsewhere), his Honour declined to accede to the request. ■■■-.'' The case was heard behind, closed doors. ' Tho jury retired at 3.J0 p.m., and after, an absence of 25 'minutes, returned .with a verdict of "Not guilty." WAIRARAPA SENSATION. HOUSE BLOWN.UP: ', 'Albert John Udy, about 30. years of ago, was. charged with placing an explosive substance in a dwelling owned by Mary Ann Udy, with intent to destroy or damago tho dwelling. The alleged oflonco took place on November 5 last, at Waihakekc, in tho Wairarnpa. Accused was also charged with wilful}? destroying the same building. I Mr. T.. E. Maunsoll, of Carterton, appeared for accused',; who pleaded not guilty. ■___■■ , The first witness called for the prosecution was Dr.iQunn, of Carterton. He stated that ho was called to see tho accused/(Udy) about 5 p.m. on November 5, aftof ■ the ■"explosion. Udy. was then suffering' from'a sprained shoulder, nnd had ttppnrrnlly received the injury within twelve hours of that time. Although quite sober, Udy could give no account of tho injury. He was addicted fo drink, and also suU'ered from fits. Mary Ann Udy,. mother of accused, slated that sho resided at Carterton, but she owned the property at Waihnkeke— a dwellinghouso with 150 acres of land. The houso was worth X.IOO, and insured for, .£l7O. Tier son- managed the place. She could not.account for the explosion, kuniess it had been.caused by rats getting at tho explosives, which wcro kept thoro ! for use in rooting out stumps, Sho had

never had an angry word with her 6on, whom-sho believed was on good terms with his -wife. Occasionally her son took more drink than was good for him. Witness had not arranged to take tho management of tho farm out of lier son's hands. Slio did arrange with a young man, named Hercock, to milk the cows, but that was after the explosion, and the arrangement was to take effect only till her son recovered from his injury.

Henry Hawker, ironmonger, employed by tho W.F.C.A. at Carterton, gave evi-, ; dence as to selling explosives in June last.'They wore charged to Mrs. M. A. Udy, and delivered to the'houso of Albert Udy. Charles Jensen, a farmer employed by Mr. T. E. Maunsell, stated that he passed by Udy's honso shortly before the oxplosion, and noticed a horse and trap close to tho house. A few minutes later his attention was attracted by the sound of an explosion, and ho looked round. When tho dust and smoke cleared away witness saw that TJdy's house had been blown up, and that the horse and trap wero near the, cowshed. Had the horse and trap remained where they had been they would have been blown to pieces. Witness went back nnd saw .accused about a chain from the house'. A small crowd had collected then, but although witness,made some inquiries as to the cause of'the explosion, he did not receive a satisfactory answer. After this witness had concluded his evidence, the Court adjourned until 10 a.m. to-day, the Crown case not| having been completed. ' , .