SUPREME COURT.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 867, 5 April 1877, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. Wednesday, April 4. [Before his Honor Mr Justice Johnson.] LARCENY. Diinicl Hamer, alias Jones, was indicted for having on the 14th February last stolen from the hotel of Jacob S. Wagner, known as the Clarendon, a cash-box containing £3O. The prisoner, who was undefended, pleaded “Not Guilty.” Mr Duncaii prosecuted on behalf of the Crown. The facts of the case for the Crown were as follows :—On the date mentioned in the indictment the prosecutor had behind his bar in the hotel kept by him a cashbox containing certain marked coins. The prisoner was in the hotel that day, and shortly after the box was missed. On the prisoner being arrested some of the marked coins were found in the possession of the prisoner. The Crown led the evidence of Detective Neil, Mr J. S. Wagner (who identified the .coins found on the prisoner as having been marked by him), Joseph Hannam (who deposed to finding the cashbox identified by Mr Wagner, on the 20th February on Park terrace), Inspector Feast, A. Walker, clothier, Colombo street, and Detective Walker. The prisoner stated in defence that the money had been received by him from England in the shape of a £lO Bank of England note, which lie had got changed. The money thus obtained was that found upon him at the time of his arrest. His Honor having summed up to the jury, The jury returned a verdict of “ Guilty.” The prisoner was further indicted for having been twice previously convicted in the Resident Magistrate’s Court, Christchurch, of felony. Mr Inspector Feast gave evidence as to the convictions being for robbing the till at the Public Library, and for stealing a telescope. The prisoner had, since Ibis arrival in the colony, been living by thieving. His Honor sentenced the prisoner to ten years’ penal servitude, remarking that if the prisoner were allowed at large lie would soon form a gang of a criminal class around him, and the colony coidd not afford at this early stage of its career to allow this to be done. It was utterly useless trifling with justice by giving small sentences. STEALING- POST LETREKS. Thomas Hester Knibbs was brought up to receive sentence on a charge of stealing post letters from the box of Mr 11. J. Hall. The sentence in this case was respited, as will be recollected, in order that a point of law raised by prisoner’s counsel as to the letters being the property of the Postmaster-General might be argued. It was so argued before their Honors the Chief Justice and Mr Justice Johnston, and the conviction of the Court below affirmed. The prisoner, who was undergoing a sentence of three years’ penal servitude for coining, was now brought up to receive sentence on the charge of stealing the letters. His Honor said that taking the fact into consideration that the prisoner had already received a sentence, he thought that the case would be met by passing a nominal sentence. The prisoner would be sentenced to three years’ penal servitude concurrent with the sentence on the coining case. Ho did this in the hope that tiio prisoner would yet timi out a useful member of society. ARSON. John Cameron Carson was indicted with having, on the 25th February, wilfully and maliciously set fire to a stable belonging to Thomas Lemon and others, and situate at Ashburton. The prisoner pleaded “ Not Guilty.” The case for the Crown was that the prisoner was in the employ of the prosecutors, and that, on the day in question, there was some dispute between them as to the retention of the services of the prisoner. About 2 p.m. they all went to the Ashburton, and on returning the prosecutors put the horses in the stable and retired to the hut. Tho prisoner, however, did not go in with them, and in a short time an alarm of fire was given, and it was found that the stable was on fire. The prisoner, who was standing by, offered no assistance, and ultimately went away and secreted himself. The evidence for the Crown went to shew that tho prisoner was the only one who could have fired the premises. Evidence having been led by the Crown, The prisoner strongly denied any connection with the fire, and stated that lie was a\yokp by the fire breaking out around him. Ill's itonqr then summed up. The jury, after a short retirement, returned a verdict of “Not Guilty.” Tho prisoner was then discharged. TRUE DILLS.

The Grand Jury during the day returned true bills in the following eases : —Bogina v Tredk. Oaklands —Forgery and uttering : Bogina y P. C. Jfewington —Obtaining money under false pretences; Bogina v Daniel Hamer alias Jones —Larceny ; Bogina v James Davis —Housebreaking ; Bogina v J. C. Carsiu—Arson ; Kegiua v_Chaiio3 Sutton—

Forgery; Regina v Robt. A. Buchanan — Embezzlement; Regina v Frank Messitcr — Stealing'post letters (two indictments). Thursday, April 5. The Court resumed at 10 a-m. EMBEZZLEMENT. Edwin Wadman was indicted for having, on the 30th December last, then acting as clerk to the Road Board of the Heathcoto district, feloniously embezzled a cheque of the value of £32 8s fid on the Bank of New Zealand, The prisoner pleaded “ Guilty.” The prisoner was then indicted on a second count for having, on the 20th September, 1870, and 3rd day of October, while employed as aforesaid, embezzled two sums of £4 1.7 s Gd and £5 8s 4d respectively. The prisoner pleaded “Guilty” to the second indictment. ’Mr Joynt applied that the case might stand over, in order that ho might have an opportunity to produce evidence as to former good character. His Honor said that in all cases of fraud in the calendar he intended deferring passing sentence until after the conclusion of all of them, so as to see how to apportion the various sentences. The prisoner was then remanded for sentence. LARCENY OF POST LETTERS. Frank Messitcr was indicted for having whije employed as a Post-office clerk, on the 28th October, 1874, stolon a post letter directed to Mr Richards, South Rakaia, the same being the property of Her Majesty’s Postmaster-General for New Zealand. Two other counts in the same indictment charged the prisoner with having stolen certain other letters on the 9th March, 1875, and Ist April, 1875. His Honor said that perhaps it would be as well to examine whether the indictment containing three counts, would be likely to bo upset, as no provision was made in the Postoffice Act under which it was laid. It was as well to go cautiously in this matter, and then to examine the whole circumstances. After examination into authorities, His Honor decided that the indictment might go. The prisoner pleaded “ Not Guilty.” The same prisoner was then charged on two further counts of the indictment for having stolen post letters on the 2nd of March, 1875, and 11th of September, 1874. To these charges the prisoner also pleaded “Not Guilty.” The case stood over until later in the day for the attendance of a witness for the defence. TRUE BILLS. True bills were returned by the Grand Jury in the following cases: —Regina v. Edwin Wadman, embezzlement (two indictments) ; Regina v. John Stewart, obtaining money under false pretences (two indictments) ; Regina v. George Mussen, larceny in a dwell-ing-house ; Regina v. P. C. Newington (new indictments), obtaining money under false pretences; Regina v. Thomas King, arson; Regina v. W. Sykes and W. J. Falloon, forgery and uttering; Regina v. Nathan Powell, horse stealing; Regina v. W. C. Jacobson, embezzlement; Regina v. Edward Pooley and Albert Bramliall, wilful destruction of property ; Regina v. John Hcudley, unmentionable offence. PRESENTMENT. The Foreman of the Grand Jury said they had a presentment to make as follows : —“ The Grand Jury beg to thank your Honor for your address and also for your remarks bearing upon several of the cases which have come before them. The Grand Jury concur with your Honor in regretting the great prevalence of cases of fraud and of obtaining money by false pretences and passing false and valueless cheques. They are aware that apart from other considerations, great expense must be entailed on the colony in the detection and punishment of this description of crime, but they cannot suggest any method whereby crime of this nature can be lessened, unless publicans, shopkeepers, and others follow your Honor’s recommendation and exercise more care and caution in receiving and cashing cheques and money orders generally. The Grand Jury further present that from the evidence before them it would appear that some efficient check should be kept on the system of account keeping between the bailiffs and the clerks of the Stipendiary Magistrates’ Courts. “ T. M. Hassal, Foreman, “Christchurch, April sth, 1877.” His Honor—Mr Foreman and gentlemen, I thank you for the presentment you have just made. I will take care that it shall be recorded and a copy forwarded to his Excellency’s Government. I have no doubt that this public expression of your opinion as to the causes of the prevalence of particular crimes, and the checks to be used to prevent their commission, will receive consideration. Your suggestion as to the officers of a public department will, I have no doubt, receive due attention, and I hope that your remarks cautioning the public as to the taking of cheques, which have also so often been made from the Bench, will go forth to the public and cause steps to be taken to prevent the facilities being given which now exist, for the commission of crime of this character. Gentlemen I have now pleasure in discharging you with the thanks of the Queen and country. OBTAINING MONEY UNDER FALSE PRETENCES. John Stewart was indicted for having on the 3rd January obtained from one Lavinia Ashton £lO by means of false pretences. The prisoner pleaded “ Not Guilty,” and was defended by Mr Izard, Mr Duncan prosecuted on behalf of the Crown, The facts of the case for the Crown were that the prisoner was at the Pigeon Bay Hotel on the d.ite mentioned in the indictment. The landlord of the hotel, one Ashton, went to Lyttelton on that day, leaving word with his wife that she might give prisoner credit for his meals. Soon after the landlord went away, prisoner came to Mrs Ashton and told her that he had given her husband a cheque on the Bank of New Zealand for £OO, that be was a member of the firm of Miles, Hassal and Co. He then told her that her husband had told him to got money from her. On the strength of this representation she advanced him the sum of £l6. The evidence of Mrs Ashton disclosed a very bad state of things. Slic deposed to having given the prisoner money to the amount of £l6 in two days which as fast as she gave to him was handed back for drink. This drink was consumed by the prisoner and other men whom he invited into the hotel.

Evidence was led by Mr Duncan in support of the charge.

At the conclusion of the ease for the Crown,

Mr Izard raised an objection to the indictment, that it did [not state whose money it

His Honor hold that it was not necessary to state more than that money was obtained by false pretences. Mr Izard then called evidence as to the state of the prisoner when brought before the Magistrate in Akaroa.

Mr Aylmer, R.M., of Akaroa, and Sergeant Ramsay, gave evidence as to the prisoner being in a state of delirium tremens when brought up on the present charge, and that ho was remanded for eight clays fer medical treatment.

Mr Izard addressed the jury, commenting severely upon the manner in which the hotel was conducted, and contended that the prisoner was in that state that he knew nothing of what be was doing. Mr Duncan did not address the jury. His Honor having summed up, the jury, after a short consultation, returned a verdict of “ Guilty.” His Honor said there was a strong temptation to men of idle habits, when they found they could obtain drink and money so easily, to commit crime. He went even further than the Grand Jury in their presentment when he said that the conduct of the publican’s wife was such as to create crime, and therefore should be strongly reprehended. The publican himself, if the description of bis wife were correct, was totally unfit to hold a license, for they found him on a mere paper promise giving money, which was spent in drink. Such conduct as this, tended to the formation and encouragement of crime, and steps should be taken to put a stop to it. He should treat the prisoner as a first offender, and give him a more lenient sentence than he deserved on account of the reprehensible conduct of the prosecutor and his wife. The sentence was that the prisoner be imprisoned tor two years with hard labour. STEALING TOST LETTERS. Frank Mcssiter was indicted for having on the 20th October, 1874 ; March 9th, 1875 ; Ist April, 1875, stolen post letters, the property of the Postmaster-General of New Zealand. The prisoner, who was undefended, pleaded “Not Guilty.” The case tor the Crown was, that the prisoner was the postmaster at South Rakaia, and was afterwards transferred to Timaru. Subsequently ho left for the North Island. Some time after ho left the hotel where ho had been staying in Timaru, a number of letters, some of them registered, were found in the room occupied by the prisoner, having the postmarks of South Rakaia, where the prisoner had been postmostcr. The number of letters found amounted to 74. Evidence was led by the Crown in support of the indictment. Mr Inspector Pender deposed to the finding of the letters in a box produced. Air dagger, of the Timaru Postoffice, gave evidence as to taking charge of the box from Air D. AlcLcnnan, of the Club Hotel, Timaru. The Chief Postmaster, Air Fitz Gibbon, and Air Donald AlcLennan, of the Club Hotel, also gave evidence. The former deposed that the prisoner had not accounted for the registration fee of the letters produced. The whole benefit the prisoner could derive from detaining the two letters was Is 6d, viz., Is in one case and 6d in another. The prisoner was in the telegraph office as well as the post office. In country offices they very often disregarded the forwarding to Christchurch of letters left at the post office and unclaimed. The post office officials were not supposed to take money from the public except for sale of stamps. [Left Sitting.]