SUPREME COURT.

Globe, Volume IX, Issue 1260, 2 April 1878, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SESSIONS. Monday, April 1. [Before His Honor Mr Justice Williams.] The following is a report of the proceedings of the Court after we went to press yesterday: — RAPE. Quam Tam was indicted for having on the 21th January at Opawa committed a rape upon one Alice Maud Oliver. Mr Wong Gye acted as interpreter. Mr Duncan prosecuted on behalf of the Crown. The prisoner, who was undefended, pleaded “ Not Guilty.” , The evidence was unfit for publication. The evidence of the various witnesses for the Crown having been taken, the prisoner, through the interpreter, addressed the Court. His Honor summed up, and the jury having retired, returned a verdict of “ Guilty.” His Honor deferred passing sentence. TRUE BILLS. During the day the Grand Jury returned true bills in the following cases : —Regina v John Jackson, forgery (two cases); Regina v Ellen Fitzgerald, larceny; Regina v Henry Richardson, forgery and uttering (two cases); Regina v Robert W. Jones, larceny from a dwelling; Regina v J. Levett, manslaughter; Regina v Quam Yam, rape; Regina v Stevens, la;ceny from a dwelling; Regina v D. McKie and A. Ross, larceny from the person; Regina v Rawiri Pape, rape. NO BILL. In the case of Regina v Alexander Fleming, unlawfully wounding a horse, the Grand Jury returned “ No Bill. y.The Court adjourned at 7 p.m. to 10 a.m. this day. Tuesday, April 2. [Before His Honor Mr Justice Williams.] The Court resumed at 10 a.m. CONSPIRACY. Mr Duncan said that he intended to enter a nolle prosequi in case of Regina v Mary O’Connell, fcilen Wanless, and William Tonkin. His Honor said that Mr Duncan was exercising a wise discretion, as there was every probability of the case breaking down had it gone to a jury. The prisoners were then brought up, and discharged. PERJURY. Mr Duncan intimated that he intended also to enter a nolle prosequi, in the case of Regina v Mary O’Connall for perjury. The prisoner was then discharged. SENTENCE. Quam Tam, who was found guilty of rape on a young girl, was brought up for sentence. Mr Wong Gye appeared as interpreter. The prisoner, in reply to the question if he had anything to say, said that he had not done what he was charged with, and that he had not been in the neighborhood of Opawa at all. His Honor sentenced the prisoner to ten years’ penal servitude, and to be twice privately whipped with a cat-o’-nine-tails, receiving twenty-five strokes at each. The first whipping to take place on the Bth April, and the second eight weeks’ after. The prisoner was then removed. REGINA V TUDBALL. In this case the Foreman of the Grand Jnry came into court and informed His Honor that M. Burns, one of the witnesses in Tudball’s case, had not made his appearance, and that though the police had sent up a cart for him. His Honor said that he would have the witness called on his recognisances, and if he did not answer they would be estreated. This was done, and no answer being given, His Honor endor.-ed the recognisances with the certificate of estreatment. Mr Duncan applied for a Bench warrant for the arrest of the witness. H is Hon r granted the application. At a later stage of the proceedings the witness appeared. LARCENY IN A DWELLING. William Rhli ji s was indicted for having on the 25th February stolen J6O, the property of one Moodie, iu the restaurant known as the Royal Oak.

The prisoner, who was undefended, pleaded Not Guilty. Mr Duncan prosecuted on behalf of the Crown. The case for the Crown was that the prosecutor, who was residing at the Boyiil Oak, went to bed on the night in question, haying the sum stolen in his trousers pocket. During the night he was awakened by the prisoner coming into his room, and fumbling about his pocket's. The prosecutor niistakiug "the prisoner for a man ffhp slept iu the same room, umde no effort to

detain him. In the morning the prosecutor found that £GO had gone from his pocket, and the prisoner, who previously had no money, hecame suddenly flush of money. He was arrested, and some money, consisting of notes on the Bank of Australasia, whence the prosecutor had drawn a large sum previous to his loss, was found on him. „ „ In support of the case for the Crown, Mr Duncan called Mr C. J. Barker, of the Bank of Australasia, who deposed to paying the prosecutor over <£loo in the notes of that Bank, in exchange for a cheque of Mr B. W. Boper. Several other witnesses were examined for the prosecution. At the close of the case for the Crown, His Honor po nted out to Mr that the indictment was for a stealing in a dwelling. Now the evidence was that the prosecutor placed the money in his trousers pocket, and put his trousers under his pillo w. It was laid down in “Russell on Crime” and in “ Roscoe ” that the placing of the stolen property under the body brought is under the protection of the person, and removed it from stealing in a dwelling. However, he would not remove the case from the jury, but allow it to go to them on the charge of simple larceny. T T The jury, after retiring, returned a verdict of “ Guilty of simple larceny,” and, sentence was deferred. INDECENT ASSAULT. Charles McGuinigle was indicted for having indecently assaulted one Edith Allsop, a child of tender years, on the 4th of March. The prisoner, who was defended by Mr H. H. Loughnan, pleaded “ Not guilty.” The evidence is of course unfit for publication. [Left sitting.]