SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 4012, 5 January 1876, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SESSION. Yesterday. (Before Mr Justice Williams.) indecent assault. Win. Gregg was indicted lor having, at Kensington, on September 29,. indecently assaulted Ellen Stephens, his sister-in-iaw. Mr Dennistoun defended. The jury, after a short consultation, returned a verdict of “Not Guilty,” and the prisoner was discharged. BESTIALITY. John Darcy was indicted for having, on the night of December 22, been guilty of a detestable crime on board a schooner at the Rattray street Jetty. At his Honor’s request Mr Dennistoun watched the case for the prisoner. The jury, after a short retirement, returned a verdict of “ Guilty of an attempt to commit the offence.” The prisoner was sentenced to three years’ penal servitude. Wednesday, January 5. , SENTENCES. Thomas Langlands (38), convicted on the previous day of embezzlement, was brought up for sentence.

Prisoner, in answer to the usual question, said he was sorry for what he had done ; aud hoped that any punishment which might bo put upon him might be a warning to any others, who gave way to drink. He had occupied a position of trust all his life, and always bore a high character for honesty wherever he had been employed. With reference to the cheque!under consideration, he did not wish to deny that he wrote it, but he did not remember doing so. The charges under which he was present suffering were committed at the same time and on the same day as the present offence ; ho did not know what he was doing at the time. Mr Caldwell (to his Honor) : Prisoner is at present in custody on two warrants of conviction. His Honor : It appears that both offences were committed on the same day as this charge of which he is now convicted. Prisoner said he had been employed for twelve years in the Bank of New South Wales, Victoria, and left there with a high character. His Honor: Prisoner at the bar : It appears that at one time you bore a good character: your former employer Mr M ‘Kenzie testifies to the fact. I think your statement may be taken as true —that drink was the cause of your having committed the crime or which you have been convicted; aud of having committed the two others for which you are at present under sentence, and which were committed on the same day as the present offence. Forgery is a crime unfortunately. too common in the Colony, and one which whenever it comes before me I shall visit with a heavy sentence, especially when the antecedents of the prisoner have been criminal. In your case they have not been so—the two offences for which you have seen sentenced, and the present one having been committed on the same day. The sentence of the Court is that you be kept to penal servitude in the Colony of New Zealand for the term of three years, to take effect from the commencement of tne present sitting.

Daniel M'Millan (18), who pleaded guilty yesterday to two charges of horse-stealing, was next brought up. Prisoner asked his Honor to be as lenient as possible. He was sorry for what he had done, and hoped to reform. His Honor remarked that from the papers handed to him by the prisoner, the latter had apparently had the highest educational advantages. He had been educated in algebra, geometry, mathematics, physics, French, and German, and if he had made proper use of such advantages he might have occupied a very different position to that in which he was now placed. He had been convicted of two separate deliberate offences, for which drink could not lie alleged as an excuse. The sentence of the Court was that prisoner be committed for penal servitude in the Colony of New Zealand for a term of three years from the commencement of the present session— three years on each indictment, the sentences to take effect concurrently. John Hay (25), who had pleaded guilty to embezzling money belonging to Sargood, Son, and Ewen, was then placed in the dock. Mr Stout mentioned that prisoner had previously to the committal of this offence always borne a good character. His Honor: Is his employer present to testify to that.? Mr Tewsley was called, but did not appear. His Honor : I should very much like Mr Tewsley to be present. If Mr Tewsley could testify that this was the only complaint he had to make against the prisoner, it would very much influence me in passing sentence. William Lambert, in the employ of Sargood, Son, and Ewen, deposed that prisoner had been in the firm’s employ. To witness’s knowledge there was nothing known against prisoner up to the committal of the present charge. His general character was good. His Honor (to prisoner) : This being your first and only offence, I shall pass a light sentence, which I trust may be a warmim to you. The sentence of the Court is that you he imprisoned in the common gaol of Dunedin and kept to hard labor for six months. ARSON. _ Mr Chapman remarked that the depositions un Jenkins’s case had not vet been filed. J His Honor replied that if it was the case that last week a Coroner’s inquisition was held, and that the depositions had not been returned, it was contempt of Court on the part of the Coroner not to do so. If directed, lie should call on the Coroner to show cause why he should not be attached.

Mr Chapman : 80 far as my client is concerned there would be no object in attaching the Coroner. His Honor; You can have a rule of mandamus if you wish. The Court will take that. Mr Chapman ; The affidavit is not bled, your Honor. When it is I will move. Later on the matter again cropped up, and his Honor said there had been a clear neglect of duty on the part of the Coroner in not forwarding the depositions before the opening of the criminal sessions, and such a neglect of duty on the part of an ollicer of the inferior court in inspect to matters coming before the Supreme Court was a contempt. He therefore considered it his duty to order a rule to issue to the Coroner, calling upon him to appear on the following day to show cause why he should not be attached. Rule issued accordingly. THE IIEIBSTOX AFFUAV. Andrew lilack was indicted for the manslaughter of John M'Evoy at Reidston, near Oamaru, on December 25. Mr Stout defended. The facts, as stated at the Coroner's inquest, have already been published. Prisoner, in self-defence, struck deceased, who died from the result of the blow. 7. he Crown Prosecutor, in stating the case, said that deceased was to blame for allowing himself to be brought into a quarrel with men in the state in which deceased and bia’ companion wore at the time of the a dray.

There was no doubt that it was only in consequence of very great provocation from the the Wow that i>nsolier eventually struck A verdict of “Not Guilty” was returned. LAUOEXY. Aim Williams, charged with robbery at tar ersham, was acquitted, JUjEc larv. Henry \ ozey,_ iishuionger, was charged with breaking into the house of. Henry Howprth solicitor, Walker street. Mr Aldridge derended. perate habits of the accused, at m" 17 retircd t0 consiller their verdict [Left sitting.]