SUPREME COURT.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 942, 2 July 1877, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. Monday, July 2nd, 1877. [Before his Honor Mr Justice Johnston.] Ihe quarterly sittings of the Supreme Court opened at 10 a.m. The following gentlemen were sworn as THE GRAND JURY. Messrs D. Davis, John James Henderson, W, F. Hubbard, T. M. Hassal, Fredk. Mason, R- II- Wood, C. Newton, John Strangman, C. W. Turner, B. W. Mountfort, T. D Triphook, Edwin Fowler, Robert Y. Beaton, 0. Bain, F. M. Rickman, F. A. Bishop, D. G. Ward, G. Tayler, J. B. Sheath, E. W. Roper! Charles D’Auvergne, A. Hornhrook, E, Harman, W. G. Brittan, C. R. Blakiston. Mr ihomas M. Hassal was chosen foreman of the Grand Jury.

THE JUDGE’S CHARGE. His Honor then proceeded to deliver his charge to the Grand Jury. He congratulated the Grand Jury upon the lightness of the calendar, which, considering the increase of population, was one upon which they had reason to be congratulated. Neither the number of cases on the calendar, nor the crimes committed, were such as to induce any fears of the prevalence of crime to any extent. His Honor then proceeded to comment on the cases in the calendar. In the case of Regina v. Adams, the Crown Prosecutor had determined not to proceed with the bill, and after looking over the evidence he (the Judge) agreed with him, as the evidence would not be sufficient to support the charge. The Crown Prosecutor had also decided not to proceed in the case of Regina v. Craig, for passing a valueless cheque. The Grand Jury then retired. HOUSEBREAKING. Peter Christie was indicated for having on the 17th April last broken into the house of one James Little, situate at Merivale, with intent to steal certain property therefrom. Mr Duncan prosecuted on behalf of the Crown. Mr Izard appeared to defend the prisoner, who pleaded “Not Guilty.” The case, as stated by the Crown, was that on the date mentioned in the indictment a person named Jewell lodged with Little. On this day they left for their work, Jewell leaving in his room a box containing money. The house was locked up, and on returning to it in the evening they found that the window had been broken, the house entered, and the money stolen. The prisoner was seen near the place during the day, and had also been living with the prosecutor and Little. On being arrested the prisoner was found to have £B, although before this he was hard up. Evidence was led by t iie Crown to prove the case, comprising Detective Walker, who deposed to arresting the prisoner on a charge of housebreaking, and finding £8 in notes, together with some silver in his possession. James Little also gave evidence as to the state in which the house was left on the day mentioned in the indictment. The evidence of the latter was exceedingly amusing. In describing how he manoeuvred to get the prisoner to the police depot, to make the charge against him, he stated that when he got as far as the A 1 Hotel he saw a policeman. The prisoner had gone into the hotel to drink, and, on coming out, witness introduced prisoner to the constable as a friend of his who had broken into his house, and stolen £9 or £lO. Detective Neill gave evidence as to obtaining a pair of boots and a swag from Ann Delany, residing in Colombo street. Witness also detailed the measuring of the bootmarks near the house broken into, and then* agreeing with the footmarks made by the boots produced. Ann Delany deposed to the prisoner bringing the swag and boots produced to her place. James Sewell deposed to having the money in his box, and finding the footmarks near the window corresponding to the boots worn by the prisoner. Frances Hind gave evidence as to seeing the prisoner pass her house on the day mentioned in the indictment, going towards the house of Little. Her house was about ten yards from Little’s. Prisoner passed her quite close —only about three yards off. This closed the case for the Crown, Mr Duncan did not address the jury. Mr Izard addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoner. After a short consultation, the jury returned a verdict of “ Not Guilty.” LARCENY OE A VALUABLE SECURITY. Anthony Ferrick was indicted for having, on the 23rd June, feloniously appropriated a cheque for £65 17s, drawn by Messrs Haunter and Harper in favor of one Lee. The prisoner, who was undefended, pleaded not guilty. Mr G. W. Geddes was chosen foreman of the jury. The case, as put by the Crown, was, that Messrs Haumer and Harper drew a cheque on Saturday week last, in favour of one Lee, which was lost on the same afternoon. The prisoner presented the cheque at the drapery establishment of Messrs Hobday and Co., and purchased some goods, tendering, in payment, a cheque for £65 17s, drawn by Messrs Hanmer and Harper. The shopman asked the prisoner to endorse the cheque, and he did so in the name of Thomas Lee. The prisoner, on the shopman going out to make enquiries, went away, leaving the cheque, and Mr Hobday sent for a policemen and gave him in charge. Mr Duncan led evidence to prove the facts above stated.

[His Honor sentenced the prisoner to two months’ imprisonent with hard labor.] [Left sitting.]