SUPREME COURT.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2576, 10 July 1882, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SESSIONS. This Day. [Before his Honor Mr Justice Williams.] The criminal sessions of the Supreme Court opened at 11 a.m. to-day. The following gentlemen were sworn as the Grand Jury, viz.:—Messrs A. Scott, H. B. Sorensen, T. H. Johnson, M, Lewin, F. Ronalds, C. O. Aikman, W. P. Olaßborn, E. Strouts, H. Adams, H. J. Wood, T. P. Baber, J. Bmbling, 8. H. Seager, J. T. Fisher, J. J. Taylor, A. J, Eadclyffe, A. B. Pavitt, O, D. Oroasley, Charles Clark, and E. A. Bishop, Mr J. T, Fisher wag chosen foreman of the Grand Jury. His Honor proceeded to deliver the usual charge to the jury. E[e said that the calendar was of the ordinary kind, containing only one crime of a grave nature. There were three cases of forgery', a crime which always came before the Courts of the colony ; there was also a case of embezzlement by a Government servant; then there was a case of false pretences, which, under the Act of 1874, could have been dealt with summarily, as the goods obtained were of trifling value. No doubt the Act of 1874, by which the jurisdiction or the Justices had been extended, had escaped the notice of the Justices, as had been the case at Timaru, There was a case of fraudulent bankruptcy, in which the debtor had valued bis assets at £lO, but that he had disposed of a large amount of property prior to his bankruptcy, which he had not disclosed to his trustee. Then they came to offences against the person, and there were throe oases of indecent assault, one of which seemed to amount to a rape. There were charges of unlawfully wounding with a knife and shooting with intent in Christchurch. From - the depositions it did not appear that a prima facie case of intent could be made ont, but the jury would have the witnesses before them. The gravest case in the calendar was one of shooting with intent to murder, which oame from the Chatham Islands. la this one there appeared, from the depositions, to be a prima facie ease made out, but the depositions he noticed were hindered with a largo amount of hearsay evidence, the witnesr.es having told not only their own story, but that of every one on the island. He mentioned this to the Grand Jury, in order that they might keep the witnesses before them to a statement of what happened within their own oognisanoo. He did not think the jury would have any difficulty in dealing with the esses before them, but if they required any assistance he should be glad to give it to them. The bills would now be sent into their room. The Grand Jury then retired. PERSONATION. Edward Thomas was brought up and discharged, under arrest of judgment by the Court of Appeal. LARCENY PROM THB PERSON. William John Sitnmonds was indicted for having on the 18 ih April stolen one watch from the person of George Macaulay. The prisoner, who was undefended, pleaded not guilty. Mr Duncan prosecuted on behalf of the Crown. The facts of the ease were that the prisoner and prosecutor were drinking together at Tinwald, when the prisoner noticed that the prosecutor had a watch, took it from him, saying that he wanted to have a lark with it, and afterwards sold it at Ashburton, Mr Duncan ledfevidenoe to prove his case, Hia Honor, when the case for the Crown had closed,Mr Duncan asked whether there was evidence sufficient to sustain a charge of stealing from the person, seeing that the prosecutor did not object to the watch being taken for a lark. Mr Duncan submitted thatif the goods were obtained by trick or artifice it was compound larceny. His Honor said that there was ample evidence to prove simple larceny. Mr Duncan said that be would not press the charge of compound larceny, but aak the jury to commit the prisoner for simple larceny. The prisoner addressed the jury, asserting that the case was a concocted one, as the prosecutor had given him the watch of his own accord. His Honor having summed up, the jury returned a verdict of Guilty of simple larceny.” Hia Honor said ho would defer passing sentence. The prisoner asked his Honor to sentence him at once, and put him out of his misery. His Honor said it was misery he seemed to have endured many times before. POEQBHY. Thomas Ooffey was indicted for having forged an order for £42 15i, and uttered the same knowing it to be forged, The prisoner pleaded “ Guilty.” Mr Izard appeared for the prisoner, and spoke in mitigation of sentence. His Honor sentenced the prisoner to nine months’ imprisonment with hard labor. UNLAWFULLY-WOUNDING. James Young was indicted for having, ou 20tb April, unlawfully wounded one J. W. Horne, with intent to kill the said J. W. Horne. The prisoner, who was defended by Mr Izird, pleaded “Not Guilty.” The case for the prosecution was that cn the night of the 20tu April the prosecutor was near the house of the prisoner. Heating screams from the house, ho went thither and broke open the doot of an inner room, where he found the prisoner and his wife (lister of prosecutor) engaged in e struggle. The prisoner knocked the prosecutor down, but was ultimately got away. After this he followed the prosecutor and stabbed him. [Left sitting.] SIR JULIUS VOGEL. MEETING AT INVERCARGILL. INVERCARGILL. July 8. On Saturday the Mayor was requisitioned to convene a public meeting to consider what steps should be taken to receive Sir J. Vogel on hia arrival at the Bluff on Monday morning. The meeting came off at night, and was fairly attended, and it was decided upon appointing a committee to carry out its wishes, which were evidently in the direction of simply meeting Sir Julius on hia arrival and giving him o cordial welcome, ft bauqur-t being generolly considered superfluous, and not in accord with the probable wishes of thelate Agent-General. The proceedings wore enlivened by a speech from Mr Colin Maokay, a member of the Town Council, In the course of which he strongly denounced Sir J. Vogel’s career in this colony, stating that it was simply contemptible. If ho again entered the political arena it would bo a groat calamity for New Zealand. As a member of the Corporation he would object to expense being incurred in connection with the reception. Messrs Mclvor and J. W. Mitchell combatted Mr Maokay’s statement ; the former pointing out how well Sir Julius had served Southland in connection with immigration ; and the latter praising his scheme of Government life insurance, which alone would entitle him to their gratitude, NON-ARRIVAL OF SIR JULIUS, INVERCARGILL, July 10. The members of the committee appointed on Saturday were in waiting this morning at i the station, hot Sir Julius Vogel did not , arrive.