LAW REPORTS

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2376, 4 February 1915, Page 9

LAW REPORTS

SUPREME COURT

mm'AL SESSIONS CONTINUED

FURTHER ACQUITTALS

When the criminal sessions of the Supreme Court were resumed yesterday, His Honour Mr. Justice Chapman was again on the Bench. Mr. H. fl. Ostler, of the Crown Law Office) conducted the prosecutions. Hearing was resumed of the case in which Albert William Foote was charged with the theft of £9 from A. R. Durrant, the proprietor of tho New Commercial Hotel. The money represented the amount by which tho cash in the office safe was short on the morning of December 16, as compared with the amount known to havo been there when the takings were checked at halfpast ten o'clock the previous night. The accused was night porter at the hotel, and on tho night in question ho had found the key of the safe lying in the office, and had later on handed it to the proprietor's wife. As a result of inquiries made by the police, ho was arrested some days after the occurrence and charged with stealing the money. Mr. V. R. Meredith appeared for the accused, who had pleaded not guilty. After the close of the case for the prosecution, Mr. Meredith called evidence for the defence, and the jury, after retiring for a quarter of an hour, returned with a verdict of not guilty. The prisoner was discharged. FIREMAN IN THE DOCK. Jack Dillimore, a fireman : by occupa- ? fcion, was placed in the,dock to answer ■< ; ; iJjarge of assault causing, actual bod- < j ii.F. harm. He pleaded not guilty, and v $*>*} defended by Mr. H. F. O'Leary. >I - /i-ir 3 ' °f the witnesses for the prosecui i iion. ivere absent from Wellington yes--1 jj J .-ftstey, and one of them was prevented 8 frjjm being present on account of illj I aii*: A- great deal of the evidence for 1 I t,hf prosecution had therefore to be hi; read to the jury from the depositions \ : taken in the Magistrate's Court. Brief- « iy, the facts were that on October 13, . f a fireman, named Beharrie, was shot in the bllttock while, going aboard the Ulimaroa at Queen's Wharf. At the time he received the injury—not a serious one—Dillimore |and another man, named Lynch, were behind Beharrie. The' letter had, on a previous occasion, seen Dillimore carrying something which looked like a revolver, but had not seen the shot fired on October 13. In his evidence,, Beharrie declared that he had no grudge against Dillimore, and that the latter had no grudge against him. At the close of the" case for the Crown, His Honour expressed the opinion that the jury could not be expected, to convict the accused. Without leaving the box, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty, and the prisoner was discharged. NOT GUILTY. Arthur Hainsworth, 19 years of age, was found not. guilty on a charge of carnally knowing a girl under the age of 16 years.. Mr. V..R. Meredith, defended tho: accused.. ALLEGED THEFT. 'At 5 p.m., when the Court adjourned until this morning, Allan George Smith was on trial on a charge of stealing on August 5a gentleman T s gold watch, a lady's gold watch, and a chain, the property, of Edward Hurconib.'The value of the stolen property was said to be about £30. There were two other charges against Smith, one of "receiving stolenproperty, and another'of-corrupt-ly taking a reward of £17 from Edward Hurcomb for the recovery of the property without using due diligence in an endeavour; to bring the thief to justice. Mr. P. W. Jackson appeared for the accused, who pleaded not guilty to all charges. Edward Hurcomb gave evidence to the effect that on August 5 he was in Wellington, and on the same evening the gold chain and two gold watches he

t !>. was wearing were stolen from him by ii ° men, attacked him in Willis <? Street. The theft was reported to the " ' police. On the morning of Thursday, h' ._ December 17, witness went to see acj(' .< cused at an express stand in Courtenay 1 Place. When called aside by. witness, 1. accused asserted he could recover the watch that had been stolen. Accused ■ said he had rendered similar services to other people who had lost jewellery. iWitness would have to pay £17 10s. before he received the watch. They went into Heed's shop in Tory Street, where witness was told that accused had recovered a silver wateh and chain for Reed. An understanding was come . to that witness was to receive the watch on going back to the express stand. .Witness went instead to the police station aad interviewed Detective Bailey. Later, witness saw accused, and demanded that he should see his property before he handed over the money: accused refused, and they .parted again. At another meeting at the Terminus Hotel, witness produced £17 in notes. About half an hour later Smith was just handing over the watch and chain when Detective Bailey appeared. AVitness told the latter the watch and chain were_ his, and accused was arrested. Witness was being cross-examined by Mr. Jackson when the adjournment was taken. ....-.,•

CHAEGB OF SHEEP-STEALING. 127 Tclesrajn—Rrew AesocittlMJ . TJmaru, February 3., rn .the Supreme Court the charee against Robert Guthrie, holder of a prazing-run at Mount Messing, of stealing 48 sheep from a neighbour named Maxwell, began to-day. Mr. Macassey, of the Crown Law Office, Wellington, assisted Mr. White, the -Crown Prosecutor, and Mr. C. P Skerrett. with him Mr. AW P. Campl bell, are for the defence. Mr. H. D. 'Aclahd watches tho case for the Sheepowners' Union. Tho Crown relies upon Guthrie's failTiro to give notice of his intention to muster; his refusal at first to muster on the police demand; that a number of Maxwell's sheep had been shorn by Guthrie, and branded with his brand; and that some of Maxwell's sheep had had earmarks altered to convert them to Guthrie's mark. In cross-examination, Mr. Maxwell, also Mr. Neville, Stock Inspector, said that some altered marks were not converted to Guthrie's, being on the wrong ears or wrong shapes, and nobody's marks.. The case is likely to, last over fo-mor-row..