WESTLAND SUPREME COURT ’

Hokitika Guardian, 18 June 1920, Page 2

WESTLAND SUPREME COURT ’

SITTINGS AT HOKITIKA. (Before His Honour Mr Justice Herdman.) His Honour took his seat at 11 a.m. GRAND JURY. The following Grand Jury was em-panelled.-—A. Parkhill, C. J. .Nightingale, G .A. Perry, P. H. Renton, P.„ Stephens, A. W. Yarrall, P. R. Stewart, D. Stevenson, G. H. Blank, W. G. Keller-, E. J. Lloyd, J. T: -Lloyd, J. C. Macfarlane, J. J. Mclntosh, V. W. Bonar, It. Wild, E. H. Wethey, T. Stopi'prth, W. F. Warren, H. A. Thomp son, B. Tbiern, S. J. Preston, T. A. Keown. Mr R, Wild was chosen foreman. W. Jeffries, a witness in a case for hearing was struck off the list, t HIS HONOUR’S CHARGE. His Honour addressing the Grand Jury stated their duty this morning was extremely light, only one bill being for their consideration, a man named Shaw being charged with theft of sack* from one Wm Jeffries in whose 'employ the accused was at the time. The accused had admitted taking some sacks, but not’ all of them. They had to consider the case that the Crown would put before them and if they found that a prima facie case had been made out, they would return a true '& bill. If they found that there was not sufficient evidence before them, which he doubted in this case, they would return no bill. He would ask them to retire and consider their finding. The Grand Jury retired at 11.45 a.m. COMMON JURY. The Common Jury were called and were duly sworn. ’ : Win. O’Connor, (deafness), Win. Gooch, (witness on a' ease), and K. Wal lace,, (fireman), were excused attend-" - ance. GRAND jury returns’ The Grand Jury returned at 11.30 a.m. with a true bill against Jolip Edwin Shaw, The Grand Jury also made the following recommendation: —This Grand Jury submits that the present high , standard of education, the liberty of the press, and the trustworthiness of the Magistracy have done away with the necessity of Grand Juries, and recommends that steps should be taken to - amend the jury system so that if not done away with altogether, grand juries should not be summoned excepting for offences the punishment for which may bo death. His Honour thanked the Jury for their recommendation which would be conveyed to the proper authorities. He thanked the Jury for their attendance and discharged them. CHARGE OF THEFT, Rex. v. John Edwin Shaw, a charge of theft of 10 doz, sacks, the property of Wm, Jeffries, at Hokitika on 4th day of December, 1919, further on divers dates of the theft of 10 doz, sacks the property of Wm Jeffries, valued at £4. Mr C. J. Sellers appeared for accused who pleaded “not guilty,” I Mr Park appeared for the Crown. I The following jury.wa s empanelled:--W. Shand, R. Stewart, W. Rae, J. A. Stoop, J, Myers; T, A. Crough juur. J. J .Breeze, W. Crash, F. W, Feddersen, Wallace Martin, A. E. Hansford, E. Howat. Mr Breeze wag chosen foreman, The accused ehaleinged— T, Kelly, G, - Trippner, T. W. Duff. , Tiie Crown ordered to stand by—B, J. Rddden, T. K. Ingram. Mr Park opened the case for the Crown, stating the charge wni of theft of sacks belonging to William JeffrSs., When obarged with the theft the accused stated he had only taken a- dozen sacks, and he asked the Jury to believe if he took one dozen that he took nhe lot, which were in his charge. Evidence was led as follows:--Joseph Quinn, c° ns table at Hokitika deposed he knew the accused. Un December sth. lie interviewed accused. Witness asked him if he had sold any , sacks recently, Shaw said he had. That he had sold 12 sacks to Mr Houston the day previously; In reply to a' . question lie said he had bought the • ‘sacks from a man named White. Could not find who he had bought the sacks from and again interviewed Shaw. Pin accused then admitted stealing 12 of Mr Jeffries’ sacks. Accused said lie had not sold any other sacks to Houston. He said he took the sacs two days previously. Accused said he could not account for the- other. sacks. He had only taken twelve sacks. He sold them to Wilson a clerk for Mr Houston. Took a statement from accused stating that .lie took twelve sacks from Jeffries store and sold them at Houston’s store which accused signed. He refused to say anything about the ether missing sacks.

To-Mr Sellers. —The day before he interviewed Shaw, Jeffries was uncertain lis to ■ how many sacks were missing. When he saw Mr Woolhouse at Houston's, lie stated" Shay had .gold 8 to 10 dozen sacks there at various times. He told Air Jeffries this. JLe could not say that the actual number missing vvas

then fixed by Jeffries. William Jeffries, auctioneer, Hokitika,. deposed on December 4fh. of hist year he found a shortage qf sacks

, about 10 or 11 dozen being missing. ! Shaw had the principal handling of the j sacks. Accused was the storeman and j had the handling of 'thiem. Valued j the missing sacks at between £4 and ; £5. Was present when Constable Quinn I interviewed Shaw. Shaw stated that j the sacks he had sold to Houston and Co., he got from White. Later in the afternoon again saw Quinn and Shaw when the Constable stilted that Shaw had acknowledged having stolen from the store the dozen sacks lie Had sold to Houston and Co., and had previqjusly stated he had obtained from White. The statement (produced) was read over to Shaw and he said the signature was his. :

To Mr Sellers—About the first weak in December he found out . the loss. .After. Shad had acknowledged the theft Witness told him he could not employ him further and he handed in his keys that night. Shaw and witness were the onlv ones that handled the sacks.

The number of sacks misßing was ap-

proximately 10 or 11 dozen. ■ Albert Woolhouse, storeman for M. Houston and Co., denosed the accused Shaw sold, about 8 to' 10 dozen sacks during the twelve months before December last. Shaw came into +hp store on December 9th and asked witness how many sacks were at the police station. Witness teplied, “ a dozen,” and Shaw ask- - 5 od if that were all he had sold. "Witness

replied, ‘‘No, and that he was not going to get' into trouble for him.” To Mr Sellers: It was possible that Shaw asked witness, was that all he had sold on that day, (when the dozen sacks were sold). He answered at once, and went on with his work. William Alexander Wilson, clerk for M. Houston and Co., deposed he remembered Shpw coming into the office on December 4th, Asked him what was up, and Shaw replied, “a dozen sacks.” Then paid him Bsrior the dozen sacks. William White deposed he Was a resident of Hpkitika. He did not sell any sacks to Shaw at any time. This was the case for the Crown. W No evidence was offered for the de- ? fence.

Mr Park elected not to address the jury.

Mr Sellers, addressing the jury, said accused was indicted on two charges of stealing ten dozen sacks. He reviewed the evidence, and held there was nothing to connect the accused with the theft of more than the dozen sacks that he had acknowledged to have taken. His Honour said this was a very simple case. There were two counts. He advised them to consider the second count. Accused was the storeman, who was responsible for the sacks. It was () uite clear that ten dozen sacks had disappeared from the store. The accused ' had admitted stealing a dozen sacks. That was evidence which entitled them to infer that he was also guilty of having stolen the other nine dozen. Then there was the evidence of Woolhouse, who stated Shaw had sold 8 to 10 dozen to him during the year. - It was for the jury to say if the accused'was guilty of the theft. If they had any doubt they should acquit the man, hut they must bear in mind that the man had admitted the theft of a dozen sacks. If they found him guilty on the second count they need not consider the first count. The jury retired at 12.30 p.m., and returned at 12.4.5 p.m. with a verdict of “guilty of stealing one dozen sacks.” Mr Sellers asked for consideration under the Probation Act. His Honour said he intended to accede to counsel’s request. It was a pity that accused-had not allowed the Magistrate to deal with the case. He gave a warning for future behaviour. The probation report was favourable. Accused would lie sentenced to probation for twelve months. -•

This was the only criminal, charge on the calendar. IN BANKRUPTCY. In re Timothy Edward Hansbury, a bankrupt (Mr Sellers), application order of discharge. Order granted. The Court adjourned at 12.50 p.m., until 2 p.m,