DISTRICT COURT, OAMARU.

Evening Star, Issue 3201, 24 May 1873, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT, OAMARU.

Tuesday, May 20.

Regina v. M 'Sweeney. Cornelius M‘Sweeney was charged with having, on the 29th day of Mar cl} last, attempted to set fire to a stack of straw, the property of one William Kayner. The prisoner, whp was undefended, pleaded “Not guilty.” The following evidence was given :—William Rayner stated that he was the landlord of the Junction Hotel, Papakaio ; that on the 29fch March the prisoner came to his house, and after drinking some time, became quarrelsome, and struck witness, A t about nine o’clock witness put prisoner out of the house, when he (prisoner) stated that unless he was let in he would burn the stack. About ten minutes afterwards a cry of “fire” was raised. Witness, Colin Campbell, and two other meu, went out at the back of the hotel, when they saw some loose straw about the stack on fire, and the prisoner standing near to it. He asked prisoner what he was doing, and his reply was “ I’m warming myself.” Two men nut the fire out. Witness took prisoner inside. He (prisoner) stated that Ilia hopes were blighted this time, but that he would burn it again. If the fire had not been put out tbe stack would have been burned. —M ary Smith stated that she saw the fire at nine o’clock, and the prisoner standing near to it. He did not try to put it out. She gave the alarm.—Colin Campbell corroborated Win. Rayner’s evidence. The prisoner addressed the jury at some length, stating that he was at Kayner’s Hotel from Saturday the 29th until Monday the 31st March. On Saturday he went out of the hotel, and lay down, but feeling cold lit some straw to warm himself. He denied any intention of burning the stacks, or that he had said that he would do so. He afterwards went into the house and lay down on the sofa, but recollected nothing from that time until the Sunday morning. He was charged with attempting to set fire to the stacks on Saturday ; but on Sunday, the day following, prosecutor shouted for him, and was drinking with him during the day. Prosecutor and others were playing skittles on that day, tffid he (prisoner) was picking up the pins fdr them. There was also dancing going on. He never knew that he was a prisoner or to be one until he was given in charge on the Monday. He had worked for prosecutor off and on during about three years, and had made

his place hia home since he came to the Colony, and bore him no ill-will, nor ever intended to injure his property. The jury, after a short retirement, returned into Court with a verdict of “Guilty of setting fire to the straw, but not; with malicious intent.” His Honor said tha,t that amounted de facto to a verdict of “ Not Guilty.” The Crown Prosecutor submitted that the jury had to take into consideration the necessary consequences of prisoner’s act. Hia Honor again explained to the jury the quest on they had to decide, and stated that they must give a verdict either of “Guilty,” or “ Not Guilty.” The jury again retired, and after consultation for about three-quarters of an hour, returned a verdict of “Not Guilty.” and the prisoner was discharged, —North Otago Times.