The Nelson Evening Mail. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 1867.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume II, Issue 273, 18 November 1867, Page 2

The Nelson Evening Mail. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 1867.

SUPREME COURT. Monday, November 18th, 1867. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Richmond.) The Judge took his seat in the bench at 10 o'clock, and the jury having been sworn, Kiptne Paramatta, a Maori, was charged with having on the 29th July last, wilfully assaulted a half-caste child named Arthur Pilkington. The prisoner pleaded * JNot Guilty.' Mr Nairn acting as Interpreter. The circumstances of this case have already been narrated in there columns. A party cf natives were assembled at one ofthe Maori houses on the Beach -road on the evening in question, and a European came in and asked the prisoner's wife to accompany him to a publichouse near. On her complying, and returning some time afterwards, the prisoner tried to eject the European, but fell down at the door ot the house, upon which the other Maoris laughed at him, and amongst others Marara Poromona, the mother of the child, and the prisoner in kicking her, struck the child, which she was holding at the time. Dr Cusack stated that the child had been brought to hira the evening on which the assault was committed, and was afterwards sent to the Hospital. It appeared to bave received a blow on the back of the head with some blunt instrument, and the skull was fractured, but the skin was not cut. The blow vtas such as would not probably have inflicted much injury on an adult. The child was paralysed and in a state of insensibility, but after being in the Hospital for three or four weeks, it recovered. The blow was such as might have been inflicted by a kick from a thick hoot or shoe. The Judge addressed the jury, stating that the offence was one of a slight nature, which, but for the fact that the child's life was for some time in danger, might have heen dealt with summarily in the Resident Magistrate's Court. The jury without retiring, found the prisoner Guilty, with a recommendation of mercy. The Judge, in passing sentence, explained tothe prisoner that a light punishment would be awarded him because no malicious intention had been proved against him, and sentenced him to three months' imprisonment with hard labor. Francis Duncan, on bail, was charged with having committed wilful and corrupt perjury at Westport on the 24th July last. The prisoner pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr Kingdon. The case was opened by the Provincial Solicitor, wbo stated that a case had been heard at the Warden's Court at Westport, before Mr Commissioner Kynnersley. on the 24th of July last, in which Mr Patrick Comiski, a merchant at Greymouth, was the complainant. The prisoner was charged with being in illegal possession of a certain section of land at the corner of Kennedy and Wharf-Streets, being No. 18 on the Government plan of Westport, of which the complainant sought to obtain repossession, on the ground that the prisoner had bought the section in question from the late Mr Yates, the agent of Mr Comiski, for 275/, and had refused to fulfil his contract. The prisoner had paid a deposit of ..0/ an account of the purchase money, and Mr Yates had given him occupation ofthe section, and the remainder of the money was to be paid within a certain specified time, which had elapsed. The prisoner, having been duly sworn, gave as his defence that he had paid 50/ for the section, and denied that he had ever told anyone that he had given more than that sum for it. Mr Henry Down, the Clerk of the Westport Court, gave evidence as to the proceedings in question, and was cross-examined hy Mr Kingdon with a view to prove that ,£SO would have been a fair price at the time for the land, which was liable to be resumed by the Government at 12 months' notice. . The witness however considered this sum (.£SO) not equal to the value of a corner section such adthat under dispute. Mr Comiski pt oduced his business license under ■which the land was held, and said that he had' seen the prisoner on the 23rd July relative to the transaction, and that he had then stated to him that all the arrangements between him and Mr Yates were ih black and wliite at the Bank of New South Wales, and tried to evade answering any

further questions. Mr Comiski had given 200/ on the 24th May for the allotment, and had taken out a license previously^ The only proof of the contract between Mr Yates and the prisoner was a letter written by Mr Yates to Mr Houghton, Mr Comisko's agent at Greymouth, which stated that he had disposed of the section for 275/ to the prisoner on the 23rd June. Mr John Horsey, agent of the Bank of New South Wales, stated that the prisoner had sworn in the Court that he had purchased the allotment for 50/, and that no further balance was due. The prisoner also said, when asked if he had not given a higher price than 50/ for the section, that it was not usual to 'gas' about such things, or to tell people about the prices given in such transactions, but that he had given a higher price. At the request of Mr Yates, only a lew hours before liis death, Mr Horsey went to the prisoner, and meeting him in the street, asked him for the balance owing for the land. He replied that it was not yet due. The witness had heard the prisoner offer Mr Yates, who died on the Bth July, 275/ for the purchase of the land. Mr John Leslie, agent of the Bank of New Zealand at Westport, deposed to the prisoner going to the Bank of New Zealand with Mr Yates, and to hearing them speak of some section, on which occasion the prisoner paid Mr Yates 50/, the latter observing that if the prisoner did not take the section he would forfeit the 50/. Mr Robert Hope, contractor at Westport, stated that he had conversed with the prisoner about a fortnight before the action in the Waiden's Court, when he told him that he had bought the section for 275/, and paid a deposit of 50/. He had previously consulted the witness as to whether the section was worth that sum. It was also proved from the evidence of a person named Thomas Johnston, of Westport, who objected to be sworn, and made the usual declaration, that the prisoner had told him that he had bought the section for 275/. The Provincial Secretary having produced the original delegation of jurisdiction over the goldfields from the Governor to the Superindent, The Provincial Solicitor recapitulated and commented on the evidence, arguing that the prisoner had agreed to pay the sum of 27. / for the purchase of the section, and that 50/ had been paid as a deposit on the purchase money. Mr Kingdon, for the defence, urged that there was really no record, through Mr JFates' death, of the transaction, and that the property at the time was not really worth the sum alleged to be due by the prisouer. The judge having summed up unfavorably to the prisoner, The jury retired for a few minutes and returned into Court with a verdict of Guilty against the prisoner — and the prisoner having briefly addressed the Court in palliation of his crime, The Judge, in passing sentence, said that the crime of perjury had unhappily bee. nie rife in the colony of late, and it was well that convictions had been secured in several instances, which might tend to hinder the increase of such offences. The prisoner wished the Court to consider him a liar, but he stood there a convicted perjurer, and he thoroughly believed the verdict of the jury to be a righteous one.. The prisoner was then sentenced to one year's imprisonment with hard labor. The Court then adjourned, until 10 o'clock to-morrow.