SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 4165, 3 July 1876, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SESSIONS,

Monday, July 3. (Before His Honor Judge Williams.)

The quarterly sessions of the Supreme Couit commenced this morning at ten o'clock precisely.

GRAND JURY. The following gentlemen were sworn in as a grand jury:—Messrs D. Proudfoot (foreman), John R. Strang, Robert Rutherford, William Melville, James Kilgoiir, Joseph C. Hodges, John Hill, Charles Plexman, James Craig, A. H. Burton, G. S. Brodrick, H. J. Boumann, John Barron, B. Bagley, jim. Mr J. H. Braithwaite, a defaulting juror, was fined L2 2s. Mr H. H. Baxter, who attended immediately after the swearing of the Grand Jury, had his fine refunded.

THE CHARGE,

His Honor delivered the following charge: —Mr Foreman and Gentlemen of Grand Jury,—The calendar contains but little calling for special remark. The crimes charged are of the kinds commonly met with here, and the number of prisoners is about the same as it has been when I have presided at this Court on former occasions. In one case a man is charged with forging a deed. It is sufficient to constitute the offence if the signature to the deed, thdugh identical with the name of the person signing it, was in fact intended to represent the signature of some other person, and was affixed with intent to defraud. In this case it appears that the accused did not himself sign the deed, but that it was signed by a lad under his direction. When an offence is committed through an innocent agent the employer is answerable as the principal offender. There is a case of criminal assault upon a child under ten years of age. The fact that the child appears to have been a consenting party does not alter the character of the offence. The depositions show that the evidence of the principal witness in this case is but slightly corroborated. You will be best able to judge from personal examination how far her story is credible. The re maining cases comprise forgery, thcfta of several kinds, unlawfully wounding, obtaining goods by false preteneeij, and embezzlement. I apprehend you will find no diffi culty in deahng with them. Gentlemen, if you will retire to your room the bills will be laid before yon,

TRUE BILLS.

The Grand Jury returned true bills in the following oases .-—Robert Jas. Thomson, forgery; Charles Coleman, horse-stealing; Edward Gillott Bickerton, forgery; Stephen Tooney, alias McCarthy, robbery from the person; Arthur Robert Moule (two indictments) aiding to commit a forgery at Dune din, Riqhard Nelmes, horse-stealing at Palmcrston, do; John Mason, stealing from a dwelling.

NO BILL. The Grand Jury found "no bill" against James Prescofct, charged with; rape at Kajtoraj,.

pobos&t junji.vramsra. Robert Joa. Thomson vu indioted for forging a cheque at Ojunaru, on June 84* with intent to defraud. Prisoner ww charged, under a second count, trith utter* ing the cheque knowing it to be a forgery. He pleaded guilty; and his Honor deferred sentence till to-morrow.

HORSB STEALING.

Charles Coleman was charged with stealing a mare on May 11, the property of John Grant. Prisoner pleaded not guilty. Prosecutor, a maltster, residing in Castle street, tethered a pony in the old Botanical Garden on the day in question. When he went to recover the pony in the evening, it was gone. Prisoner sold the pony «the same evening to Thomas M'Naughton, a general dealer, living at the Water of Leith. The witnesses examined were:—John Grant, Thomas M'Naughton,- Benjamin Jones, and Sergt. Deane. The jury, after a short retirement, returned a verdict of "Guilty" with a recommendation to mercy on account of prisoner's youth. The Crown Prosecutor (Mr Haggitt): On account of his youth, but not on account of his innocence, because I hare about eleven convictions against him. The Foreman: But we know nothing of that.

His Honor: Of course not. The Crown Prosecutor : Mr Caldwell can identify prisoner. He has an immense number of aliases. Nearly all his convictions are under a separate name, so that it will be necessary for Mr Caldwell to identify him.

His Honor Bald he would past sentenoe to-morrow.

EMBEZZLEMENT.

Edward Gillott Bickerton was charged with receiving, at Oamaru, L 6 Is 6d, on 7th February, on account of John Milne, his employer, and with embezzling the same. Prisoner, who pleaded not guilty, wished to make an explanation regarding the indictment, but his Honor held that this was not the proper time. The Crown Prosecutor, in stating the case, said that prisoner was charged: with embezzling L 6 Is 6d, the money of James Milne, by whom he was' employed, and in the course of the employment of whom he received this jmoney. Mr Milne, the prosecutor, was an express-owner at.Oamaru, and employed prisoner to collect bis accounts and to ,keep his books. He was to be paid a commission-of five per cent on the amount collected, and to receive LI per month for keeping the books. Prisoner entered into that employment and he collected sums of money which prosecutor was still unable to discover. One amount collected was the sum of L 6 Is 6d, the subject of this indictment. It was received from one Fred. Every by prisoner, who gave a receipt for the amount. Prisoner never said anything to prosecutor about the money, and the Tatter was never able to get* settlement between himself and prosecutor. The prosecutor having heard Bomewhere about April 13 that the prisoner was clearing out for Oamaru went to make inquiries from him regarding* the state of his affairs. He went to hiß nouse and found, that prisoner was packing everything ready for a start in the mprining. Prosecutor endeavored to procure a settlement from him, but prisoner said it was not a proper hour of the night to make inquiries, and that he would find everything right in the morning. Prisoner left by the coach next morning and never made any settlement with prosecutor before leaving, and subsequent events showed that he never intended doing so. The evidence would show that the account books were bo mutilated and destroyed by prisoner as to render it impossible that prosecutor could actually learn what the state of his affairs was.; The ledgers kept by prisoner had the entries correctly kept, but the paged accounts had been leaving the marks of the pages there but nothing else to indicate the entries in the books. Prosecutor found the pages torn out in a stove, where they had evidently been thrown for the purpose of being burnt. The other book with the pages torn out was found behind the stove.

John Milne, the prosecutor, was subjected to a severe cross-examination by prisoner, in the course of which he said that he considered it a frightful thing for a man to run away from his creditors, but admitted that he had told prisoner some time ago that he would sell off his expresses, drive off to Timaru in a spring-cart, and give his creditors the slip. This was after an announcement had appeared in the paper that prisoner would settle all accounts duij lay him. Witness never looked after the cash-book; i prisoner would not allow, him.—By Mr [ Haggitt: He went through his books with j prisoner at the end of March, and found there was a balance of L2O to his credit. Prisoner complained that in the indictment and sworn complaint of Milne, the prosecutor, he was spoken of as Milne's servant. Now at the time of the committal of the alleged offence he (the prisoner) was carrying on business as an accountant and commission agent; and he considered he was in no way a servant of Milne. By a "servant'* he looked upon it as a person employed ex-v clusively by one party or a firm. His Honor said that a person need not be exclusively employed by one person to become his servant. That point had been decided in a number of cases. It was for the jury to say whether from the nature of the prisoner's services they considered him in the light of a servant or an agent. Had he not been paid Ll per month for keeping books, his contention that he was not a servant would probably have been correct, and that he was merely employed as a commission agent. The fact of his receiving Ll per month for keeping the books was sufficient evidence to goto the jury, and for them to consider whether, under the surrounding circumstances they regarded him as a servant or not.

Prisoner, who called no witnesses, then addressed the jury at considerable length. He-was doing a good business at Oamaru.' as commission agent and registry officer, and was perfectly satisfied that had he put his business in the market he could have realised Ll5O or L2OO for the good-will When he came to Dunedin it was at Dr Waite'a advice, who reoommended a change of air for his (prisoner's) wife, and he, was arrested two hours after arrival in Dunedin. He had been m gaol eve r since, and had « " a &J* opportunity of defending himself. Whoa la the Oamaru Police Court he gave lar O'Meagher L 25 to see him through tn© case, and on prisoner's wife wri ing to his solicitor to ask him if he would be in town during the hearing of the case Mp 0 Meagher replied " that if she would send him ISO more he would be happy to come aown. He eharacterised prosecutor's proceeding as a dastardly and cowardly action. The man had trumped up a ease believing that he was leaving the place. Was it to be said if a man in business went two or three miles from home that he was to be made a felon of? Before he was two and a naif-hours w Dunedin he was arrested No commission agent would be safe in leaving his own district for a single day if he wm thus summarily to be treated. The day after he received the L 6 Is 6d-the subject of this charge—from Mr Every he told prosecutor of it. Had it not been for his uniortunate arrest, which had resulted.in his ruination, he would have squared everything satisfactory with Milne. As it was, a very lucrative business In which he had been eon-

corned had been destroyed, and he would be compelled to leave the Colony. If the jury considered that he was innocent he asked for an acquittal; if they thought otherwise then they would do their duty. Hl3 Honor 3aid that if the jury did not come to the conclusion that the prisoner was a servant, they would acquit him. It was essential that they should find he was a servant before they could convict. Had it not been for the monthly salary, he (the learned Judge) would have directed an acquittal. on the ground that he was only an agent. But the fact of prisoner receiving a monthly salary was sufficient for him to leave the matter in the hands of the jury. The jury retired tp consider their verdict at 3.35 pan., and returned into Court at 4 p.m. with a verdict of " Not guilty." His Honor: Discharge the prisoner. Mr Caldwell: Prisoner is under a sentence of eighteen months' imprisonment. His Honor: I hen he must not be discharged The Court adjourned till 10 o'clock tomorrow morning.