Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

LAW REPORTS.

SUPREME COURT

QUESTION FOR COURT OF APPEAL,

A new point in criminal law was raised in the Supreme Court on Saturday morning, when a young half-caste, named Bernard Tamatea Walden, appeared for, sentence before His Honour Mr.- Justice Hoskir.g. . The charge against the prisoner was that he had 1 broken his probation order by being guilty of forgery aiid false pretences, crimes for which he is at present undergoing two months' imprisonment. Mr.. U. &..-Ostler represented the Crown,' while ,Mr. H. F. Ayson appeared for the prisoner. In addressing His Honour on .behalf ,of Walden, Air; Ayson submitted that .it was for the 'Grown to prove that it "was: a condition of the order that accused was to be of good behaviour. If such a condition were in accused's license, counsel would contend that it was there without warrant as he was quite clear that the Chief Justice in passing sentence had laid-down, uo such condition.- , " -■• ■ Mr.' Ostler 6aid he: had only had a few moments' notice of the point to be i-aisedj and was not, prepared to argue it right away. ■' His Honour considered the point was an important one. when admitting a prisoner t6 probation, His Honour laid it down that such prisoner was to bb of good behaviour; It might bo that the Court of Appeal should decide the point raised, and if there were any' means of stating a case he would' bring it before that Court: In order that the question be looked into, 'the prisoner would be remanded for a month. As his sentence would not expire in that time, he would not be prejudiced by the remand. \ ACTION SETTLED. The case of Horiana Natanahira y. Alexander James Toogood.and the Public Trustee, a .Native land case, which occupied the attention of the Supremo Court on Thursday, was to have been continued on Saturday morning, but when the time for hearing- arrived it was reported that the parties had agreed upon a 'settlement.

MAGISTRATE'S COURT Sir. D. G. A. Cooper, S.M., presided over a sitting of the Magistrate's Court on Saturday morning. ■ Michael Noon pleaded guilty to the theft of a quantity" of brass fittings, the property of the New Zealand Pictures ■ Supply Co., Ltd.' The theft had been committed from the back of the old Opera House. Chief-Detective Broberg explained that when, asked about the theft, Noon had'given.his name.as that of a well-known criminal similar in appearance to himself. Mr. P. H. Putnam ; pleaded for leniency on accused's behalf. Noon was fined. £2, in default seven days' imprisonment, and was ordered to pay 4s. 9d. to the second hand dealer to whom he. sold the metal. William Barker, an old man, waa charged with being an idle and disorderly person. Inspector Hendrey said that Barker was discovered by, a constable'begging in the streets.' When he was refused alms he became

abusive. Barker had 57 previous con- '; victions against him; in different parts , ! of New Zealand, and the Inspector knew there were many inore. A sentence of three months in gaol was imposed. James Allison M'lntosh was remanded to October 9 on a charge of theft of one razor and blades valued at £2 from Williafh Doran. Thomas Evans and Alfred Lund, who had caused a disturbance in Willis Street on-Friday evening, were charged with committing a breach of the peace by using threatening behaviour. Evans was fined 205., in default three days' imprisonment, and Lund was fined 10s., with'alternative of 48 hours' imprisonment. , Edward Doody was convicted and discharged for using obscene language. This was his first appearance before the Court. Lilian Jukes was fined £1 or three

days', imprisonment for insobriety, and a similar amount for using obscene language. The alternative in tho latter charge was fixed at seven days' imprisonment. Henry Spencer was convicted and discharged for insobriety, and was fined £2 or seven days' imprisonment for indecency. ' . i'pr insobriety, James M'Laughlin was fined £2, in default 14 days' imprisonment; James Davey and George Reilly 10s. or 48 hours; Herbert Wynn Williams and James Moore each fined 20s. or three days' imprisonment. John Young was remanded for medical treatment. '.'-_,.■'

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19141005.2.73

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2272, 5 October 1914, Page 9

Word count
Tapeke kupu
689

LAW REPORTS. Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2272, 5 October 1914, Page 9

LAW REPORTS. Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2272, 5 October 1914, Page 9

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert