SUPREME COURT.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 4169, 1 December 1884, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS

This Day,

. • (Before His Houor Judge \ Gillies.) His Honor addressed the Grand Jury as follows :—The calendar is an unusually large one—the largest that had occurred in _£_c ''' district for many years—seventeen charges against nineteen persons. Some of the charges, also '.were of. a very serious nature, an attempt to murder, arson, and others. of, minor .effect.,. The most serious case with which they would have to deal was that of a charge of shooting with.inteht to murder. The facts of the case' were -very siiiiple, that he :riced not trouble them. " further .'than to remind them, where a pcr--onteoVa loaded gun 'or pistol, presented, if STanother, : and drew the trigger to fire ■off the pistol, he was presumed in law to have committed the : of fence. The law assumed that he. was aware \of what the natural consequences of his act would be, and therefore assumed the intention' td kill. That view might be repudiated by the prisoner,. If they found 'that the accused presented a loaded pistol and drew the - trigger then they would be justified in finding a true bill.; There was. another case ofoffence against the person, that was a charge'-of.: attempting to commit suicide. ~- He. thought might. exercise a . little discretion in-regard to that so called

crime. It was founded in the olden times the idea that a man belonged to the State, and-any one killing hiraselLwas .reducing the number of the fighting men : for the service of the State. r That reason had

departed long ago,. It' seemed strange to punish a niau for failing to commit;-a crime, but it was for- the.. jury fo,,deal with the case.' There was a case of perjery which as they were aware was a serious crime tending

to destroy tho application of the law," '-to defeat ; the :r ends .of • .justice, and therefore a very serious-crime. In the case the prisoner had: been committed-, by the Magistrate 'after hearing 'his evidence in a, case ; in which he was a vifcness.< In order,to find a true billin a case of perjury-there must be false swearingswearing of that which was false. The matter sworn ; to must also be material to the judicial proceeding, on which the evidence was given. The crime of perjury differed from others in_ that it required more than one.witness, if there were only one, it would bo ; oath against oath; - Ono other witness at least was required so . that thero could be a preponderance of evidence that tbe accused swore falsely. There was considerable difficulty in the case that would come before them, inasmuch as-, .the perjury alleged against the ' 'accused was - that he swore ' he did not hear and see 'certain' things."_ It was very difficult to prove that a man did see or hear a thing. He might have been in circumstances where he might have seen and heard if he chose, but it was a difficult matter to prove a man did hear "a thing. _ They would have to be satisfied that ho did hear and soe certain things. Of course, it did not requird absolute-proof, but prima facie proof, sufficient, to satisfy them of the, guilt of the person. There was a case of arson. He would direct-- their attention to the fact that f-,.evidence was not of the highest character. It appeared that a man applied for lodgings at a station which was refused, but he got some food. He passed on, and was seen going in the direction of a barn, in the neighborhood of which he was seen. Half a milo beyond he was seen, walking his horso quietly, and said " good evening" to them in passing, apparently not hurrying away or showing any signs of guilt, and on that evidence alone tho man was committed. It would not be sufficient for thorn that there were suspicious circumstances. There was a case of maliciously wounding a horse. In that oase also there was no direct evidence. Shots were heard in the forenoon and afternoon and a settler found his horse peppered with shot. A neighboring settler hearing, enquiries were being made, came to him and wished him to say nothing about it, and it was solely on that semi-confession, not a deliberate confession or statement how it was done, the man was committed. There was no confession of intentional and malicious wounding. There wero three rrases of forgery, two of cheques which were rery plain. Ono was in respect to a guarantee to a bill. The crime of forgery consisted in making a false statement n signing another.man's name to an instrument of value; signing another man's name, or no man at all, with the intention to defraud by making an apparently good nstrument. It appeared in tho case is if tho person apparently signing the lame had admitted his liability, although lenying the signature. That made no difference, if it was put there without uithority, that constituted forgery. There ,vas a case of killing cattle with intent to •teal the carcass against two men. Tlie .vidence was somewhat confused. Thoy vould have to consider whether there was my evidence that the parties killed the mitnal, and in tho second place if at the ime of killing the intention was to steal he carcass. One of the parties he was inormed had since died. There were two rases of horse stealing. In all cases if stealing, recent possession of anything stolen, the possession of it shortly after it ras missed or stolen, gave presumption that he person in whose possession it was found vas the thief unless he accounted for its •oming into his possession. There must in 11 cases of taking be the ietent to defraud i.o true owner of his property. In one case, c -.bought they would have no difficulty, 'he iVorse was missed, a similar horse was jld by the accused at some considerable istance from where the horse was lost, tho nly question would be the identity of tho orse. The other case was somewhat urious." There'a native horee was missed, nothcr native had found it at a consider - ble distance, he went with it to a store-, ceper and said he found it, and that c was going to ride it and c and the horse' would bo found here, naming a place, and he horse, r.d they found the man and that vas- before any police enquiry. linriediatcly after the police were in search' of orse at the place where he stated. Thero rere three cises of housebreaking. In one ho evidence was weak—lie referred to the loney taken were a largo number of six'aupo case —except the fact that in the . eiicos, and on one of the prisoners there _ •as a large number of sixpeu'ees. That Denied to be the principal link. In one ixm tho.prisoners were told thoy would not ie proceeded against by the police if they aid where a-certain watch was. ;. They vould not be entitled to take - any uch confession . into consideration, [■hose "confessions were .-not legal evidonce, md ought not to-be placed beforo them. There wcretiiree cases of larceny, in which he evidence was so simple that he need not lirect their attention to them. NO BILL. The Grand Jury found no true bill against Teah'Sollor. HOUSERDEAKINO. - Alfred Lebst was charged with the abovo iffenco. Mr Moore appeared for the de'ence. The accused pleaded guilty to lar;enj but not guilty of housebreaking. Mr Jotte'rill,i the Crown Prosecutor, accepted .he plea. Sentence was deferred, to enable witnesses for the defence to speak to the jharacter of accused, being called. Prisoner asked for mercy, as it was his first offence. Prisoner was sentonced to twelvemonths' imprisonment with hard labor. LARCENY. Edward Perry was charged with larceny at Wairoa. Accused, who was undefended, pleaded not guilty. George Taylor, of the Ferry Hotel, North Clyde, deposed ho knew the prisoner who: was at his house in May last. He slept three nights in the hotel. Prisoner slept opposito Miss Finucane's room. Recognised the jewellery produced as the lady's property. Mary Anno Finucane deposed tho jewellery produced was her property, and on the 27th May she missed the articles. About a week after gave information to the police. Had not given the articles to anyone. Corroborative evidence was given by Harriet Taylor. Sarah Anne Green deposed tho prisoner gave her tho ring and ear-rings on tho 31st May. Prisoner said he bought them. She gave them up to Constable Phillips. . Constable Phillips said ho arrested the accused on.the. 17th June last at Nuhaka. Prisoner denied taking anything from Wairoa, saying ho bought the jewellery from a cook at the hotel. Prisoner made a long statement, to the effect that the cook at the hotel wanted to go and see his wife at Gisborne, and he (prisoner) bought tho jewellery from.the cook. The Judge summed up in the prisoner's favor, but the jury brought him in guilty. Prisoner was sentenced to twelvemonths' imprisonment with hard labor. ATTEMPTING TO COMMIT SUICIDE. Daniel Flanigan was charged with attempting to commit suicide on the 19th October last. Prisoner pleaded guilty and expressed his regret for what he had done. He had served his Queen nineteen years, and being an old man was unable to get work. His Honor said it was a cowardly act to try and take his own life to ayoid trouble. He was dismissed upon entering upon his recognisances for future good behaviour. ....... LARCENY. ' Michael O'Connor was charged with theft from a dwelling. Prisoner who was defended by Mr Lee pleaded not guilty. William Kane deposed in August last he was at Waipawa and stayed at Mr Brighouse's hotel. Had eleven pounds on him when he wont to the hotel, all in one pound notes. r Slept at the hotel three nights. Had money in his watchpocket and breastpocket'of his coat when he went to bed on tho Saturday night. '■'■ '■''" [Left sitting.]