SUPREME COURT.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3108, 14 June 1881, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

MONDAY, JUNE 13,

(Before His Honor Mr Justice Gillies )

The Court resumed at 2 p.m., when the following evidence was taken in Connelly's case, charged with forgery :— Alfred Clarke, accountant in the National Bank of New Zealand, Napier, deposed that on February sth the prisoner presented a cheque for £60 drawn by John Kelly. The cheque produced was the one. The amount was paid in notes. By the Prisoner: The signature wan perfectly correct. Detective Grace deposed to arresting the prisoner. Before doing so he had a conversation with him on the evening of the sth. Witness asked him if he had cashed a cheque for £60 purporting to be signed by John Kelly. Prisoner said ho did. In reply to a lurtber question, prisoner said that the amount was due for work done. He added witness would find the cheque perfectly correct, Oa ttuj

following day witness saw Michael rtiely, & mate of the prisoner's, beyond Omahu, and there received from him £27. Witness arrested Kiely for acting in conjunction with the prisoner. On the following morning witness brought tbe two prisoners together, and told Connelly that he had received £27 from Kiely J»; which Kiely said he had received from Connelly. The latter said Kiely had no right to be locked up; that Kiely knew m nothing about tbe alteration, aud that whatever alterations had been made in the cheque had been made by the prisoner himself. J By the prisoner: It was the manager of the Bank who first gave information to witness about the matter. The manager said he had reason to believe that the cheque had been altered from six to sixty pounds. This was the case for the Crown, The prisoner said that Kelly signed the cheque for £60, and when told of it he created a row about the matter. The jury without retiring found the prisoner guilty on both counts. His Honor, in passing sentence, said he would give the prisoner the benefit of the time he had been in custody ; also that it was his first offence, and that be was not fully aware of its grave nature, as he evidently thought, as did others, that forgery only consisted in siguing a false name. The prisoner was sentenced to eighteen months' imprisonment with hard labor. BIGAMY. a "Robert, alias Andrew Gallagher, was indicted for biejamy. Mr Lascelles appeared for the defendant. Mr T. K. Newton was chosen foreman of the jury. f" The evidence in this case has already been published by us when tbe prisoner was committed for trial. After a short retirement the jury returned a verdict of guilty. The prisoner was ordered to be brought up for sentence at 10 o'clock this morning. The Court then rose.

TUESDAY, JUNE 14. His Honor took his seat at 10 a.m. SENTENCE.

Robert Gallagher was brought up for sentence. His Honor, in passing sentence, said that the prisoner had been found guilty on very clear and conclusive evidence of tbe grave crime of bigamy, a crime looked upon by the law as a very serious one. Bigamy was not only a crime against the woman who was wronged, but, in committing it, the prisoner was guilty of falsehood, fraud, imposition, and perjury, in addition to a breach of tbe solemn vows entered into at his first marriage. The heaviest punishment the law awarded for this crime was seven years; he (the V Judge), however, would not sentence the prisoner to the full penalty, as it appeared the crime, in this instance, had in some measure brought its own punishment. The sentence of the Court wns that the prisoner be kept in penal servitude for the period of three years. The prisoner was then removed. FORGERY. Henry Wairoa was charged with this offence, and pleaded not guilty. The following jury were then drawn f —Messrs W. J. Birch, D. Simon, J. Sims, W. E. Combs, J. Heron, T. W. Bear, J. Martin, M. Quinn, J. Murphy, H. S. Ruddock, Isaac Williams, and W. Villers. The Grown Prosecutor stated the case to the jury, and called Hohapa Ngapa, who deposed that he lived at Kennedy's Bay, about ten miles from Coromandel. His wife put some money in the National Bank in her own name. It remained in the bank one year. After the first year she divided the money into two accounts. It remained at the _, bank. The bank at Coromandel was afterwards shut up, and the money was sent to Auckland. There were £25 to each of their credit. They never took the money out. After the money was divided they went to Waiapu. Did not know the prisoner. When the money was divided both he and his wife got receipts. They returned the receipts to the National Bank at Auckland. They were old receipts, and they wanted fresh ones. They did not receive fresh receipts. Never authorised anyone to deal with those receipts, or to cash them. He did not know anyone of the same name as himself. The signature on the receipt was not his. He never authorised any one to write it. Elizabeth Anderson (a native), sworn, ' said che was wife of last witness. Remembered putting £50 into the National Bank at Coromandel. She took the money out in 1879, and divided it into two, part for herself and part for her husband. There was interest added to the £50, and she added something herself. They again put it in the bank, and got receipts. Some pakehas who came to Waiapu told her that the manager of the bank said she was to return the receipts to the bank at Auckland. On the 6th January, 1880, she wrote a letter and enclosed the receipts. She sent it through the post to Auckland. She received no reply. She then wrote again and received an answer. She received no further receipts. She did not know the prisoner. John Wylie, sworn, stated that he was a storekeeper at Gisborne. Was em- ) ployed in Graham's store in 1880. Re- j membered prisoner coming there. Prisoner came into the store and said he had some money in tbe National Bank at Auckland. He showed a receipt and asked him (witness) to cash it. The receipt produced is the one. Told him to go to the bank. He said he could not talk English. Went with him to the Union Bank. The manager asked him if he could identify the native. He said "No." Said he could not cash it unless some one identified him. He went back to the store and prisoner came again, and said he would have to go to gaol if He could not raise money on the receipt. Prisoner said, *' Give me £20, and keep the balance." Witness asked him why he did not send up to Auckland and get the money. He said be could not wait; he would have to go to gaol. Witness said he could not give him the money. Shortly after Darwell, a publican, came in. He seemed to know the prisoner. Witness asked Darwell if he knew the prisoner, and he said he had known him for three years. Witness told Darwell that prisoner wanted money, and showed him the bank receipt. Asked bim if he could identify the native if he gave him the £20. He said he could. He then asked the prisoner to sign h*s name on the back of the receipt. He signed it. The name on the receipt produced is the one he wrote. Darwell said that was the prisoner's signature. He (witness) then gave prisoner the £20. Witness then took the receipt to the bank, and asked them to send it to Auckland. At the bank they said they would require a cheque. Prisoner then signed the cheque produced, and went away, raid tbe cheque into the bank for collection. By the Court: When he asked the native to sign the receipt he did not tell him what to write. He bad no doubt when Darwell identified him that be was the

person he repra»sented himself to be. Had no dotibt when he was willing to take £20 for £29 10s. He thought it was an honest transaction to gire only £20 for tbe cheque under the circumstances. James Wallace, of Gisborne, corroborated a portion of the last witness's evidence. John Bourke, sworn, said he was clerk in the Union Bank at Gisborne. Remembered Wylie coming into the bank in 1880. A native was with him. He thought it was the prisoner. He asked Wylie if he could identify the native, but he said he could not. He (witness) said he could not have anything to do with the receipt unless the native was identified. They came back and asked if Darwell would do. They came back a third time with the receipt, and it had Darwell's identification on it. He also required a cheque to be given. The cheque was given, and he placed it to Wylie's credit. Could not positively swear to the prisoner beissg the native who came into the bank. The cheque was cashed by the National Bank. Tawhai, sworn, said he knew the prisoner. Had known him for several years by the name of Henry Wairoa. Never heard him called Hohapa Ngapa. By the Court: The prisoner belonged to another people. This concluded the case for the Crown. The prisoner said he had no witnesses to call. Prisoner, on being asked if heb;.d anything to say to the jury, said he did not sign the cheque. It was not his name, nor his writing. His Honor suggested to Mr Cotterill that it was only fair to the prisoner that his signature to his statement in the Court below should be shown to the jury. There was certainly a remarkable difference between that writing and the writing on the cheque. The depositions with the prisoner's signature were handed down. His Honor, in summing up, said that it depended solely upon Wylie's evidence as to whether the prisoner signed the cheque. No other evidence was given of the signing of the cheque. It would be seen that the signature to the cheque was widely different to the signature to the depositions. If Wylie and Wallace believed that the native was the man he represented himself to be it was scarcely creditable that tbey should receive such a large discount just because the native was necessitious. There was a strong resemblance between the signature on the receipt and the signature on the cheque, but they were different to the signature on the depositions. The jury then retired, and after being absent about fifteen minutes they returned with a verdict of not guilty, and the prisoner was discharged. LARCENY FROM THE .PERSON. Inia (a native) was charged with stealing certain monies of one Matau Tia. The prisoner pleaded not guilty. The following jurors were then drawn : —J. Clarebutt, O. Mills, R. Graham, T. Shirley, S. Watt, J. Hindmarsh, J. Davidson, G. Fitzgerald, T. Willan, J. Orr, T. K. Newton, and A. Palmer. Mr Newton was chosen foreman. The Crown Prosecutor opened the case for tbe CrowQ. Matau Tia, sworn, said he remembered being in a public-house in February last. He went there to receive money for his potatoes. He received £3. He put it into his puree after he had changed one note. He afterwards went to sleep. He was drinking a little, but was sober when he went to sleep. He took no money out of the purse after he put the £2 in. The purse was in his pocket when he went to sleep. When he woke up he found the purse gone. The purse produced was the one. He knew the prisoner. Prisoner had no right to take the purse from him. Mary Moana, sworn, said she was at the hotel in February when Matua Tia was there. He got drunk. He went to sleep alongside the ' woolshed. Her husband told her that Matau Tia's purse was taken from him. Prisoner was alongside Matau Tia when he was asleep. He was turning Matau Tia over. After that prisoner gave her the purse, taking it out of his trousers pocket. There was no money in it. Ihe purse produced is the one. The prisoner never went out of her sight from the time he turned Matua Tia over till the time he produced the puree. Eruriki, sworn, said he wa3 at Pukerikiri lf.st February. He saw Matau Tai there; he saw him asleep. He saw prisoner putting the purseinto his (prisoner's) pocket. Prisoner was squatting down beside Matua Tai at the time. Did not actually see him take the purse out of Matau Tai's pocket. He told his wife that prisoner had taken the purse. Prisoner gave the purse, and said there was no money in it. After the prisoner had addressed the jury shortly, His Honor said it was to be regretted that the jury should have been troubled and the country have been put to expense over such a trumpery case of petty theft as this. The case should never have been sent to the Court but dealt with summarily. The jury retired to consider their verdict, and after a short consultation returned a verdict of not euilty. j The prisoner was then discharged.