SUPREME COURT.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume V, Issue 222, 3 February 1865, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

Criminal Sitting. (Before His Honor Mr. Justice Johnston.) ’ WEDNESDAY, Ist FEBRUARY, 1865. Mr Wilson acted as Crown Prosecutor. The following jury were impannelled :—Janies Shirley, John Villers, Henry Alley, Wm. Anderson, Henry Sargeant, Chas. Dolbel, Geo. Peebles, David E. Lindsay, Andrew Thompson, BosweU D. Danvers, John Pritchard, Michael Griffin. FORGING AND UTTERING CHEQUES. James Grant was charged with forging a cheque on the Bank of New Zealand. There was a second count charging him with uttering a forged cheque knowing it to be forged. The prisoner was undefended. The prisoner pleaded guilty, and said he had nothing to say why sentence should not be passed upon him. His Honor then required any person in the Court who knew anything about the prisoner to come forward and state what he knew; in answer to which, Frederick Dyett came forward, and being sworn, said —I know the prisoner. He came to me about six weeks ago, and said he was going to Napier to get married. I live at Clive, nine miles off. I afterwards saw him going back. He said he was going to sell a race-horse. He afterwards came back again. He said he had sold the horse, was going to town to spend the money. Francis Grant was then called, but not appearing, was ordered to forfeit £SO. > His Honor then addressed the prisoner. Ho said that from the appearance of the cheques he concluded that he (the prisoner) was not accustomed to such frauds. The signature, “ Sandy Grant,” for Alexander Grant, and the general clumsy manner in which the cheques were done, was sufficient to prove this. He wondered how any sane person could take such cheques as good ones. It showed a great want of caution. The forgeries being both executed on the same day, and other circumstances, were also in his favor. Had he (His Honor) believed that he gained his livelihood by such frauds, he should have sentenced him to penal servitude for a long period of his life. However, taking all the circumstances into consideration, he would pass upon him the very lenient sentence that he should be imprisoned and kept to hard labor for the term of two years. OBTAINING MONET UNDER RAISE PRETENCES. William M‘ Who, was charged with obtaining the sum of 15s from Newton, Irvine and Co., under false pretences.

The prisoner, who was undefended, pleaded not guilty. . Alexander Irvine deposed—l am a storekeeper m this place, m partnership with Mr T. K. Newton. I know the prisoner. I have known him about twelve or thirteen months. Ho was in the Colonial Defence Force. Previous to November last we had a claim against him of £l2. I remember the 14th November. On that day he came and asked how he was to arrange about his debt. He stated that he wished to pay it, and that he had a horse running at Mr. Maney’s. He wished to give delivery of the horse in payment. ,He signed the agreement produced in my presence. It describes the horse as a grey pony, aged 5 or 6 years, with a crown brand on near shoulder. I drew it out. He then told me that he was lame, and that in order to obtain the horse he would have to ride up, and should require 10s. or 15s. to pay his ’bus fare, and Mr. Maney for 12 or 14 days’ feed. I gave him 15s- My reason for giving it was to obtain delivery of the horse. I would not have given him the money had he not signed the paper, nor even then, if he had not represented that he was the owner of the horse. I did not get the horse. I have not seen the prisoner since, except at the Fesident Magistrate’s Court, until now. I afterwards saw a grey pony answering the description (but I did not see the brand) in possession of Mr. Marshall’s man. The prisoner told mo that he would deliver the horse in the evening. Cross-examined by prisoner—You were in my store on the 12tb November. I cannot say that you were the worse for liquor. You were rather shaken. I gave you half a glass of brandy. I gave it to you to steady your nerves, not to induce you to sign the document. I have already sworn that you were not drunk.

By the Judge—He appeared to have ’ been drinking the night before. John Marshall, on oath, said—l am a publican. I have known the prisoner about 18 months. On the 18th of November he sold me a grey aged 5 or 6 years, witli crown brand on near shoulder, for £9. The horse was at Taylor and Campbell’s stables. I bought it on the 18th ;it was delivered on the morning of the 19th. He did not speak of any horse but one. I did not ask him for security. I did not ask him what property ho had. There was no conversation except about the horse. 1 asked him if he had the horse. He said ho had. I went to the stables to see him, and bought him. His Honor then pointed out to the jury that the evidence was incomplete. There was one link in the chain missing—that was the proof that the horse the defendant sold to Mr. Marshall was the only one he had. If the plaintiffs had proved that the prisoner iiad no horse running near Maney’s at the time, the evidence would have been sufficient. But this had not been done, and he was obliged to dismiss the ease for want of sufficient evidence.

His Honor then informed the prisoner that he hud had a very narrow escape, and that had the prosecutors taken a little more trouble, it would have been almost impossible that he could have escaped. The prisoner was then discharged. criminal assault. George Ellson was charged with committing a criminal assault on the body of Ann Nation, a child of tender years. The prisoner, who was defended fay Mr. Lee, pleaded not guilty. The Court having been cleared of boys and women, William Nation said—l am a sergeant in 2nd battalion, I4th Regiment. I have a daughter; her name is Ann. She is five years four months old. I live outside the barracks. I know the prisoner, and recollect the sth of August. On that day a man named Hamfred called at my whare and gave mo information which caused me to go to the child, who was in bed, and she then made a complaint to me. The time was about halfpast seven in the evening, I did not see the prisoner after till I saw him in Court. Hamfred, private, 14th Regiment, gave evidence as to having witnessed the assault, and not having interfered, although he could have done so. The evidence of this witness is unfit for publication. His Honor remarked that he would not pain the audience by a recapitulation of the evidence, but would adjourn the Court for half an hour to allow the jury to deliberate. The Court having again sat, the jury found the prisoner Guilty of an attempt. His Honor in passing sentence remarked that the jury had taken a very lenient view of the case. Had he been found guilty of the felony, his sentence would have been such as effectually to deter others from committing the like offence, and such it should be should such a case occur. The sentence he should pais was the highest the law allowed for an attempt, but wholly incommensurate with the atrocity of the crime—viz., imprisonment, with hard labor, for two years. Court adjourned for half an hour. Court resumed at 2.40 p.m. , The following jury were sworn in:—Andrew Thomson, Geo. Peebles, John J. Pritchard, Michael Griffin, John Heslop, James S. Large, William Tiler, Thomas Brighouse, Fred. Dyett, John ViUars, Boswell D. Danvers, Wm. Anderson. RAPE. Hoard Ngarara, an aboriginal [native, was charged with committing a criminal assault upon the body of Tauri, a native woman; and Petera aud Tamati , two other natives, were charged with aiding and abetting in the same. The prisoners, who were defended by Mr. Lee, oleaded not guilty. Mr Hamlin was sworn in interpreter. Prosecutor deposed—My name is Tauri. I reside at Pohui, and know the prisoners. Was at the Karamu on one day. Saw the prisoners in a store at James Bradshaw and I started to go from Napier to Pakowai by the white road, and were followed by the three prisoners on horseback. The witness thereafter proceeded to detail the particulars of the assault committed on her by the two prisoners Hoani and Petera in turn, while in turn they also secured

and held the •witness’s husband by the throat. Her husband escaped from them and ran towards Napier. The other prisoner, Tamati, took charge of the three horses, and was prevented from followtheir example by the approach of another white man. Petera also robbed her of some silver while in his power. Witness continued— My clothes were torn and my arm sprained in the struggle. I still feel the sprain. The white man that came up wiped the dust from me with my handkerchief, and tied my shawl round me. Mr Lee cross-examined the witness at some length, but failed to shake her testimony in any point. J

James Bradshaw corroborated the evidence of the last witness, and described how the Maories forcibly took the woman from his protection and held him by the throat and by his (witness’s) arm during the perpetration of the deed. As soon as he got free, he came to town and laid information. Never quarrelled or disputed with one of the prisoners. Had not touched any drink that day.

George May hew deposed—l am a military settler. Recollect the 20th January. WaV coming from Puketapu along the White Road on the afternoon of that day. Saw the prisoners near Tarea’s Bridge, and two horses by the roadside, and Tamati on horseback trying to catch them. Met the others and the native woman Tauri. She made a complaint to roe of the outrage, and shewed me her torn dress. Wished me to bring them and their horses to Napier. The natives tried to take the .woman away with them on one of their horses. Said she was drunk. I saw that she was sober. She was covered with dust and was crying. Mr Lee examined several witnesses, who tried to prove the woman Tauri to be of bad character, but failed to do so. One of them (Heta) said, “ The Catholic Priest told me to come here today ; it was because the prisoners wished to have evidence against the character of Tauri. Petera is a Roman Catholic.” Tauri—“ I am a Wesleyan.” Another witness (Matin), father of the prisoner Petera, also gave evidence tending to damage the character of Tauri. The jury (having retired a short time for consultation) returned a verdict of guilty against the two prisoners Hoani and Peteia. His Honor sentenced each of them to penal servitude for the term of four years. The Court adjourned till ten o’clock next morning. THURSDAY, 2kd FEBRUARY. His Honor took his seat on the bench at ten o’clock. Mr Izard acted as Crown Prosecutor. The folio whig jury were sworn in : Thos. Bibbv, James Shirley, Henry Parker, Jas. S. Large, Michael Griffin, Geo. Hammond, Riehcl. Farrell. Win. Anderson, John Villers, John J. Pritchard’ E. D. Danvers, Henry Powdrell. FOUOEUV. Thomas Edmund King was charged with forging a certain cheque on the Union Bank of Australia 0 The prisoner was defended by Mr Lee. Henry Hartshorn said—T am a carrier, residing at le Ante. In the month of September last I had an account in the Union Bank of Australia. I did not draw any check for £l5O. This cheque (marked A) is not in my haudwvrting; it is an imitation. On tin; -1-th September I drew the cheque niarked B for £lO. I paid that cheque to Mr Avison. Can swear to mv own handwriting. Am perfectly sure I signed no cheque for £l5O. James B. Brathwaite said—l am Manager of the Napier branch of the Union Bank of°Australia. Prisoner was teller and accountant. As teller he received and paid deposits and cheques across the counter. As accountant, he made entries of these transactions. Early in the month of October rust, something called my attention to the prisoner’s accounts, and I suspended him. By Mr. Lee—l took him into my private office. Will not swear whetherthe windowwas open or shut. I know 1 shut the door. To the best of my belief the window was open, and the prisoner had his back to the door, and I mine to the window. I said it would be well for him to make a full confession before he left. [His Honor said that his confession was no evidence. A long discussion here took place between His Honor and Mr Izard as to this point, His Honor ultimately ruling that it was not evidence.] I sent the prisoner away from the bank. I found the cheque A in the proper place for the vouchers of the bank. I know the handwriting of the cheque, except the signature, to be the prisoner’s. Would not know that the signature was forged handwriting without a comparison with a true one. The endorsement was “ self,” and in the handwriting of the prisoner. It is customary for the teller to endorse the cheque, with the species of money in which it is paid. It is not the custom in the Bank to endorse the name of the drawer. It was the prisoner’s duty to enter all payments. I examined the book, and found the cheque entered. Hartshorn had not much in the Bank over £l5O. The cheque marked B was given to me by the ledger-keeper, James Torre. I referred to Hartshorn’s account] and found his funds insufficient. The cheque had not been cashed. I did not see him receive it from any one else. I placed it to Hartshorn’s debit account. I held the cheque B in the Bank. Have examined all the books kept by prisoner, and found no entry of this cheque. Hartshorn had previously drawn several cheques on the Bank on his account. I have not often seen him at the Bank himself. I think that one of the two signatures is more cramped than the other. The party presenting a cheque usually writes his name on it. After it is paid it is posted, and then removed to the vouchers. J. J. Torre is ledgerkeeper. It would afterwards come before me. This cheque came before me in the ordinary course of business. 1 took this as being in the handwriting of Mr Hartshorn, not having any suspicion. It is not unusual for the teller to fill in the body of a cheque if requested to do so. It is otherwise unusual. Torre had posted it, and it was marked with his initials. The cheque is usually passed to the ledger-keeper, that both teller and he should see that the signature is genuine. The prisoner has held a situation in the

Bazik since July, 1856, and great confidence was placed in him. The office was frequently left to the prisoner and ledger-keeper. There wore not funds to meet the cheque B. John Jamea Torre—l am ledger-keeper in the Union Bank of Australia. I was so in October last. It was my duty to keep the ledger. I recollect the suspension of the prisoner. .1 see a cheque A. Prisoner gave me this cheque on the 10th October, the same day on which he was suspended, at 2 o’clock a.m. He said he had omitted giving it to Mr Brathwaite the morning before. The body of the cheque and the endorsement are both in the prisoner’s handwriting. It was his duty to cash it. I entered it in the ledger. I received it at the end of a day from prisoner. I don’t know how the cheque came into the hands of the prisoner. I did not receive the cheque Bto enter. There was another ledgerkeeper at the bank beside me.

Sergeant-Major Scully said—The prisoner was brought before the Resident Magistrate’s Court. I was then present. I arrested the prisoner on or about the 15th October. I produced a warrant and read part of it when I apprehended him. I brought him from his house to the Court. Ho was remanded for three days. On the first day and on the way to the gaol I asked him if there was any other person connected with the affair, and he replied that he alone was guilty. I said nothing whatever to induce him to confess. This reply related to the forgery. When I arrested him I told him it was for forgery. Am certain that when T arrested him I read that part of the warrant charging him with the commission of the crime. He may have said, “ I’m in a mess.” I am not sure of this; if so, it might have reference to matters in general, and not particularly to the forgery. I do not recollect speaking of the forgery at that time. Hartshorn recalled—l am not in the habit of going to the Bank. I have not drawn many cheques. J Mr. Lee addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoner. . Bis Bcnor having summed up, the jury retired for-a short time, and returned a verdict of not guilty. EMBEZZLEMENT. Thomas Edmund King was charged with embezzling certain sums of money, the properties of Ihomus noan, Tlios.Powdreli, and Andrew Thomnson. 1 The prisoner was defended by Mr Lee. ■ T t,t o3- . Foa “ said ~ l am a whitesmith residing in Napier. In the month of June last I had an account with the Union Bank of Australia. The signature of A is in my handwriting ; the body ot it is in that of the prisoner. On the 13tn June ! paid into the Bank £l2O. I g ayo it into the hands of the prisoner. Thus. Powdrcll I am a settler, residing at lutaekuri. Had an account with tiie Union Hank of Australia in July last. On the 2:;»d of that month I paid in £6O. The signature to this document is my handwriting. I don’t know who filled it up. i paid the £6O to the prisoner. Andrew Thompson said—l am a schoolmaster residing iu Napier. 1 had an account with the Lmon Bank of Australia in October last. 1 recollect the 3rd of that month. I was at the Union Bank on that day. 1 saw the prisoner and paid niui I had paid in £iOU previously. I reccived this slip (marked C). I iiave never authorized the withdrawal of the deposit. I looked at the body of the document and remarked that there was no account of the interest. He then added the endorsement. I have never authorized the withdrawal of the deposit. J. B. Brathweite gave evidence as to the prisoner’s situation and duties as above, and continued : I know the handwriting iu the body of this document (A) to be the prisoner’s. I produce the book in which this document should have been entered. It is not entered there. I have looked through all the books of the bank relating to the 13th June, and find no account of this £l2O in the name of Thomas Foau. I find none m the name of Thomas Powdreil, or of the document B, on the 23rd September. The document (L) is not the proper form for money received to be at interest- On receiving the cash, the prisoner should fill up the receipt, sign it, and hand it to me. He did not do this. I have in each of these cases examined all the boobs of the bank Have not received either of these monies, nor any account of them. There is a deficiency in the accounts of the bank sufficiently large to include them there. The prisoner denied receiving these monies. He has assigned property to me by conveyance and bill of sale. It was on the 10th October. Ho owed me no private debt His securities were taken on behalf of the sureties.

Bjr the Judge—His sureties were bound in a sum of two thousand pounds, to be forfeitdd. The -conveyance, &c., was made at my request to the bank in my name. By Mr Lee 1 do not know how many davs it was after this that 1 laid information against tuo prisoner. ° behalf L ° e addressed the J u *y on t!l ° prisoner’s His Honor charged the jury at some length and the jury retired for about half an hour and returned a verdict of guilty. ’ His Honor then sentenced prisoner to four years penal servitude. As tins closed the criminal sittings, the iurv and the ° OUrt •‘•ku?