SUPREME COURT.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume 13, Issue 680, 10 May 1869, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

SATURDAY, MAY 8.

CHIMINAL SITTINGS.

[Before His Honor Mr Justice Johnston.J

The Supreme Court, in its criminal jurisdiction, was opened on Saturday last, Bth May, at 10 o'clock. The sitting had beea notified to take place in the Oddfellows* Hall, but for somo reason was first opened in the Council Chamber, and at once adjourned to the other building —an arrange* ment which caused much perplexity to jurors and others in attendance. The following Grand Jury were empanelled :—A. Alexander, S. Begg, J. Chambers, G\ T. Fannin, M. Hill, W. Jamieson, J. G. Kinross, T. Lowry, T. K. Newton, G. A. Oliver, E. Pnlford, J. Robjohns, J. A. Smith, F. Sutton, H. S. Tiffen, H. Troutbeck, J H. Vautier, J. Wilkinson, J. H. Williams, and C. J. Wi3hart. J. B. Brathwaite, J. R. Duncan, and J. M. Stuart, who did not appear, were excused, the former gentleman having madearrangements to leave the Province in a steamer prior to being summoned ; the second being absent in the Forty-mi) 3 Bush* at the time, out of the reach of communication ; and the latter being absent from the Province. James Wood. Esq , also obtained exemption on the ground of being; a member of the Provincial Council in session.

Before proceeding with the business of the Court, the Crown Prosecutor applied for an adjournment to next circuit sittingsof a case against two natives of high treason, on the ground that the necessary witnesses had been unable to arrive from Poverty Bay. His Honor ordered that an* affidavit to that effect should be translated into Maori and given to the prisoners. His Honor then delivered his charge tothe Grand Jury. He briefly alluded tothe disturbed state of this district, and said that he could still see grounds of hope that, under Providence, we might emerge from our difficulties. He then described thecases which would occupy the jury, and explained the various points of law which they involved. The Grand Jury then- retired, and shortly* afterwards brought in a true bill against James Wilkes for felony. LARCENY. James Wilkes, was charged with having,, on or about the 13th April, stolen 2 tame sows, with 11 young pigs, the property of John Patrick Donnelly. A second count charged him with receiving the said property, well knowing the same to be stolen. The prisoner pleaded not guilty. The following jury was empannelled:— John M'Kenzie, W. Vbars, Thomas Gilpin, W. M'Glashan, E. Cashmore, John Caulton, W. Schultze, John Davidson, J_ Neagle, John Bray, John Brewer, and James Allen. His Honor complained of the slovenly manner in which the depositions in thiscase had been prepared. They were unauthenticated by any signatures, and would, therefore, be useless if required by the prosecution. John P. Donnelly, settler, Waipawa, deposed that he haa bought two sows, with other pigs, from Mr Lambert, about the--Ist of April last; that they shortly afterfarrowed, producing 11 young ones ; and that they were not removed from the station where he had bought them. Thesows were both marked in the left ear. Hemissed them about the 10th April, and after several days' search found them shut up in a shed belonging to the prisoner. On the following day he went with a policeman and a search warrant, and got thepigs. The prisoner told the policeman that Donnelly might have had them if hehad asked for them. The ears of both the sows were cut off. The prisoner said also that the pigs had come to his house and he had given them food. Wilkes' place wa» about half-a mile from the paddock where the pigs had been left, and was divided from it by a stream. He valued them at £ls. The pigs were in a much poorer condition than when he lost them. Mr Cuff cross-examined the witness at some length, but without eliciting any further information. The evidence of Farmer, the policeman,, was then taken, and entirely corroborated that of the former witness. Mr Cuff, for the defence, argued that there was no felonious intent in the case—that the animals had strayed into the paddock of the prisoner, who had simply taken charge of them till the owner should comefor them. His Honor, in summing up, said that the Counsel in defence had forgotten on© important particular,—the ears being cut off. It was nonsenso, under the circumstances, to argue that the prisoner had merely taken the pigs in charge. They

did not deliver themselves up, and cut their own ears off. The jury after a brief consultation, found the prisoner guilty. A person named Edward Caldwell who had a slight acquaintance with the prisoner, having spoken in his favor, his Honor passed sentence. He said that this was not simple larceny that there was a kind of treachery involved in a case like this, of one neighbor stealing from another. He should, however, treat it as a first offence, warning the prisoner that should he ever be found guilty again of such a crime he would be sentenced to a long term of penal servitude. The sentence of the Court was that he should be imprisoned and kept to hard labor for the term of six calendar months. BOKGXAKY AND I.ATCCENY. John Dahin and James Powell (& halfcaste) were charged with breaking into Mr M'Hardy's house, Havelock, and stealing property to the value of £3O. Dakin pleaded guilty to both charges; Powoll to the charge of larceny. In answer to inquiry by his IToner as to the previous character of the prisoner. Mr Inspector Scully stated that Dakin had been guilty of stealing five head of li rned rattle from theWaikato district. —BiehardHogan, of Havelock. deposed that he had known the prisoner Powell 18 months, and knew nothing against him. His Honor said in this case he believed that morally both prisoners were equally guilty, but he felt bound to make a distinction in their sentences. The prisoner Powell appeared to be a young man who had been led away by bad associates, until he had been induced to assist the other prisoner in the commission of a most impudent burglary. The punishment he would inflict was a heavy one for simple larceny, but light considering the circumstances of the present case, —that he should be imprisoned and kept to hard labor for the space of twelve calendar months. The prisoner Pskin, lie suspected, did not belong to the best class of settlers —he feared he was one of those who made a practice of preying upon their neighbors He would sentence him to imprisonment with hard labor for two years. ASSAULT UPON A MAORI. John Sicifl, carpenter, was charged with having, in February last, cut and wounded a native named Puru, with a certain iustrumeiit called an axe. The following jury was empanelled: Thomas Gilpin, Hendrirk Beukers, John Eimes, Nathaniel Bishop, Peter Coe, F. Scarrot, John Davidson, John Brewer, Thomas Ede, Edwin N. Smith, William Schultz-*, Charles Sanders. Mr Hamlin was sworn in as interpreter. Puru, being sworn, dt posed that on a Sunday in February last a quarrel arose between him and the prisoner, through the latter arousing him of spilling some water on the fljor of Karaitiana's house. The prisoner got an axe and threatened him with it. He (Puru) then seized the axe and struggled with prisoner, who got it from him and aimed a blow at his chest with the edge. lie turned away and received the blow on his shoulder, where it cut through his shirt and caused blood to flow. He showed pi'isoner the blood and asked him what kind of work this was. He then turned prisoner out. He had had no previous quarrel. There were two other Maoris present, who took no part in the quarrel. two Maoris were also examined, and their evidence agreed in every particular with the foregoing. The only additional details elicited were that the wound was half-an-inch long, rather less than a quarter of an inch deep, and that it occasioned an immense loss of blood. The axe was produced, and one of the natives pointed out the upper corner of the edge as being the particular part which inflicted the wound. The prisoner here pleaded guilty to a common assault. E. Goldfinch, carpent?r, and D. E. Lindsay, builder, both gave the prisoner the character of being a quiet and inoffensive man. The prisoner made a statement in defence, from which it appeared that he first took the axe in a kind of panic from the fierce looks of the Maoris ; but did not intend to strike. He denied that the blow was inflicted by the edge of the axe. Mr Inspector Scully said that he had gone to Pa Whakairo on the day of the assault to see the native, whom he understood from the native account to be nearly killed. He found him lying with a wet rag ou his shoulder, on which there was a severe triangular bruise such as might have been inflicted by the back corner of an axe, one angle of which had penetrated the skin, forming a wound such us described by the native witness. He did not believe it possible that such a blow could have beeu inflicted with the edge of an aie. The injury was such aa might perhaps disable him for a week. His Honor said that the law had been vindicated by the prisoner pleading guilty, and taking the aggravation into account, he bad a great objection to sending him to prison. He would fine him i's, at the same time advising him to make some trifling recompense to the Maori, who otherwise would have ground for a civil action against him for damages. ASSAULT. Richard Hogan was charged with having, on the 24th April, beat, wounded, and illtreated one Frances Hague. [The charge was one of assault only, the Grand Jury having thrown out the charge of burglary.] Frances Ha2ue deposed that she was 18 years of age, and daughter of Mr William Hague, butcher, of Clive; and that she had charge of a branch shop at Havelock. Her brother William and sister Caroline, both about 10 years of age, lived with her. On the evening of the 23th April she bad

shut up the shop and bolted the door, as well aa the door from the shop into the house. At about half-past 9 her brother William was in bed, and she was hearing her sister Caroline her lessons before going to bed herself, when she heard the prisoner in the verandah call out, " Frances, have you any dog's meat ? " She said, " No." He ask d if her brother Willie was in. She said " Yes, in bed and asleep." He asked, "Is Caroline in ? " She said, "Yes, and she and I are going to bed," He said, ''l want to speak to you." She told him to come at a respectable time to-morrow. He then got his hand through an opening between the shutters, and unbolted the front door and got into the shop; he then tried the inner door, but could get no further. He asked her to open the other door, saying he wanted to see Willie. She said it was too late to see Willie ; let him come in the morning ; and askdd what he wanted him for. He said he would not tell hor, and wanted Willie to go out. She said Willie could not go out, and prisoner said he had ten shillings to give him. She said "If you have so many ten shillings to give away, come in the morning." He remained quiet so long that she thought he had gone, until she heard him cough. She said, "Areyou theie still? " He said, ''Yes." She said, " I wish you would go." He said he was just going to Thompson's—the next house. He pretended to go oil*, and she then unfastened the inner shop door, and went in to bolt the outer door again. She then saw him in the doorway. He said, "Your brother Jim told me to watch you." She said, "My brother knows me better than that." [His Honor: How old is your brother? V\ itness : Twenty-four years.] He then came in and struck her a severe blow on the head with his arm, which he swung round side-ways. She said "You are a blackguard." Ho said "I am not." She said " You are." He said " You are a liar." She screamed when he struck her, and Mr Thompson and two others came ont of his place. When Hogan saw them he went away, and she sat on the stop. John Evans then came up and spoke to her. The witness here sustained a severe cross- . examination from his Honor, as to whether the prisoner had been paying her his addresses, or had ever taken any liberties with her, both of which she denied. lu answer to the prisoner she admitted that he hid on one occasion offered her hisporiraitin a brooch, which she refused to accept, unci that the same evening in his presence she had burnt the portrait of another young man. She denied the prisoner had ev<.r kissed her. Caroline Hague, being sworn, deposed that she was ten years of age, and went to liavelock school. In answer to the pri soner she said that she had never seen him kissing her sister or sitting with her. John Evans deposed that on the 28fh April, about 9.30 p.m., he heard high words between Frances Hague and the prisoner, but could not distinguish what was said. He heard prisoner call her a liar, and then heard her cry out. He ran lo the spot, and saw the prisoner going behind another house, and Frances Hague si*ting crying on the step with her hand to her head. He asked her what was the matter, and she said that Hogan had struck her. In hs defence, the prisoner called the prisoner James Powell, who, being sworn, deposed: —On the night of the 28th I heard Frances Hague call my name. I ran out of Mr Thompson's house, and saw Hogan half-way between the two houses. Frances Hague was running towards him ; he turned his back to her, and she knocked hi* hat oif. Wi.liam Schultze, sworn, deposed, in answer to the prisoner, that he had supposed him to be paying his addresses to Frances Hague. He had known them visit at each other's houses, and had seen them playing like children. The prisoner said he had nothing more to say in his delence. liis Honor them summed up. He laid great stress on the first witness stating positively on oath that the prisoner had not been paying her his addresses, and afterwards admitting, when pressed, that he had offered her his portrait; from which they might conclude that they had not heard the whole truth. He thought that her evidence showed a great want of ingenuousness, and dwelt upon the fact of her account of the assault resting on her unsupported evidence. In conclusion he said the case was pre-eminently one for a jury. The jury, after some deliberation, returned a verdict of not guilty, and the prisoner was discharged. LAItCENT. James Evans was charged with stealing 80fts of tobacco. It is unneccessary to go into the particulars of the case, as they have so recently been before our readers. The jury found a verdict of guilty, with a recommendation to mercy. His Honor, taking into consideration the fact thit the prisoner was now undergoing six months' imprisonment with hard labor for a breach of the Customs liegulations in the same matter, as well as the recommendation of the jury, inflicted the nominal penalty of oue day's imprisonment with hard labor. The Court then adjourned.