SUPREME COURT.

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1604, 10 April 1879, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. Wednesday, Apbil 9. [Before his Honor Mr Justice Johnston.} The following cases were disposed of after we went to press :- IAECENY EEOM THE PEBSON. Samel Hoey was indicted for having on the sth March, stolen from the person of one William Wood goods and money to the value of £ls.

Prisoner, who was defended by Mr Neck, pleaded " Not Q-uilty." Mr Duncan prosecuted on behalf of the Crown.

The case for the prosecution was that the prosecutor and prisoner were together at the Bristish Hotel when the prosecutor was taken ill and laid down, afterwards going to sleep. Shortly after this he was conscious that the prisoner had his hands in his pockets, and that he had taken a £lO note and other moneys out of his pocket. Search was made for the prisoner, and he wai ultimately arrested at the Mitre Hotel, where he had changed a £lO note and paid the licensee £B. At the lock-up the next morning prisoner said that it was all right. Mr Wood had given him the £lO note to take care of. Mr Duncan led evidence to support the case for the Crown.

Mr Neck having addressed the jury, His Honor summed up, and the jury, after a short retirement, returned a verdict of " Guilty." His Honor sentenced the prisoner to two years' imprisonment with hard labor. IAECENY FBOM THE FEBSON. William Allen was indicted for having, on the 24th March, stolen £7 from the person of one John Eldridge. The case for the prosecution was that the prosecutor and prisoner were together on the night of the 24th March, and that the prosecutor missed a£s note from his pocket. On the same ovening the prisoner sent out from the house where he boarded, in Christchurch, for one shillingsworth of beer, tendering a £5 note in payment. The prisoner was arrested, and on him was found a statement of accounts which had been given to the prosecutor by his employer when settling up. Mr Duncan prosecuted on behalf of the Crown.

Mr Neck appeared for the prisoner, who pleaded "Not Guilty." Mr Duncan called evidence in support of the case for the prosecution. Mr Neck having addressed the jury, His Honor summed up, and the jury, after a short retirement, brought in a verdict of " Guilty." His Honor commented upon the fact that there were three previous convictions against the prisoner for larceny from the person. The prisoner would be put out of the way of committing crime for some time to como. The sentence would be that the prisoner undergo penal servitude for four years. INDECENT ABSATJIT. James Manders was indicted for indecently assaulting Annie Leigh, on 13th March last. The prisoner, who was undefended, pleaded "Not guilty." Mr Duncan prosecuted on behalf of the Crown.

The jury, without leaving the box, brought in a verdict of " Guilty." His Honor, after referring in the strongest possible terms to the disgusting nature of the case, and the necessity which existed for the protection of women and children, said that this was a case in which it was the duty of Judges to use the discretion confided to them of ordering corporal punishment when men forgot their better nature. The only way to repress such crimes as these was to order corporal punishment, and that it should be short and sharp. The sentence of the Court would be that the prisoner should be imprisoned for three calendar months with hard labor, that ten days after the commencement of this sentence the prisoner should receive twentyfive lashes with the cat-o'-nine tails, and that a fortnight before the expiration of the sentence a second twenty-five lashes be inflicted. He thought that this punishment would be found to be the most effectual that could be inflicted in cases of this character, where men degraded themselves far below the level of the beasts.

The prisoner was then removed. IkUCEXY FEOM THE PBBSON.

George Skaites and James Stevings were indicted for having, on the 20th January, stolen one gold watch and chain from the person of A. G. Reed. Prisoners, who were undefended, pleaded "Not guilty." The case for the prosecution was that the prosecutor went down to Lyttelton on the date named, and went to a private hotel and went to bed. About 3 a.m. he woke up and missed his watch and chain. He reported the matter to the police. The day after the watch was lost the prisoners were at Mr Stewart's pawnbroking establishment, and obtained 10s on a gold chain. Afterwardi both prisoners came back jand wanted to get some money on a gold watch, or to exchange it for a silver watch, with something to boot. Both watch and chain were identified subsequently by prosecutor as his property. Stewart having information of the loss of the watch, sent for a constable, and both prisoners were arrested. Mr Duncan called evidence in support of the case.

After the case had proceeded some way, His Honor said that there was no case against Stevings. The prisoner Skaites said that he had found the watch in Port Lyttelton at five o'clock in the morning, and had offered it for sale.

His Honor diroeted the jury to return a verdict of acquittal in the case of Stevings. The jury found Skaites " Guilty," and returned a verdict of " Not Guilty" in the case of Stevings.

His Honor sentenced the prisoner to fifteen months' imprisonment, with hard labour. The Court then adjourned until Wednesday next.