The Nelson Evening Mail. WEDNESDAY, JULY 1, 1868. SUPREME COURT.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume III, Issue 153, 1 July 1868, Page 2

The Nelson Evening Mail. WEDNESDAY, JULY 1, 1868. SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. (Before his Honor Mr. Justice Richmond.) Wednesday, July 1, 1368. His Honor Mr Justice Richmond took his seat ■ a few minutes after 10 o'clock, when the following gentlemen were sworn as grand jurors: — J. Burnett, H. Davis,, J. 11. Dodson, T. li. Fisher, N. Goulston, YY. C. Hodgson, A. G. Jenkins, F. Kelling, R. Levien, J. T. Lowe, D. M. Luckie, P. M'Tavish, J. G. Miles, S. Pike, il. Pollock, D. Sclanders, A. J. Richmond, W. S. Mortimer, N. Edwards, foreman. His Honor the Judge then addressed the grand jury:— Gentlemen of the Jury, — There is only one case on the present calendar which calls for any remark from me for your guidance. It is a charge against a man at Westport, for personating another voter at a late election by claiming to vote under a miner's right issued, it is alleged, to another man. You will remember that a miner's right entitles the holder to the franchise, provided it has been in the possession of the elector for a period of six months. This question amongst others is put by the Returning Officer, • Are you the person whose name appears as A. B, on this miner's right ?' and it is alleged that the person prosecuted was not the person -whose name appeared on the miner's right. It may be that some evidence will be brought forward tending to prove that the individual who tendered the vote, had himself takf n out the miner's right under an assumed name. If so that would not amount to a case of personation' for he might, under such circumstances, truly answer the question put to him by the Returning Officer. If you think this proved, there wilf. obviously, be no case to^go to a jury, but if the reverse, you must send the case for trial. The disturbances on the West Coast, which have lately occupied so large a space in.'public attention, happily require from me no further notice. Butiu relation to those disturbances there have been certain official proceedings within this district on which I feel bound to make some short comment, because those proceedings have betrayed grave misapprehension of the law respecting the conservation of the peace, which it is my duty to correct. In these islands his Excellency the Governor is the supreme conservator of the Queen's peace ; under him— immediately under him (gentlemen, I emphasize the word immediately) — are the Justices of the Peace. Superintendents of provinces, as such, have no duties whatever in relation to the conservation of the peace, save so far as the Superintendent's departmental authority over the police gives him some responsibility and concern in the matter. But the duties of a Superintendent are mere duties of police, and in all considerable emergencies, nay, even in common tumults, the police, in this country as is England, by whomsoever appointed and departmentally controlled, are bound to act under the orders of the magistracy. Where the Superintendent is on the commission of the peace, as he commonly is, his brother magistrates would be likely in an emergency to tr<.at him, if present, as their chief, even though he were not their senior on the commission; but when acting in virtue of his magistracy, the Superintendent could have no authority whatever independeat of the General Executive Government of the colony. Now I find that the local representative of the Provincial Government at Westport has been assuming that he was entitled in that capacity to adopt an independent policy in relation to assemblages of a seditious character within the district; to determine, of his own authority, whether Crown prosecutions shall or shall not be instituted against persons charged with taking part in such assemblages, and with uttering speeches of a seditims character expressive of sympathy with the Fenian couspiracy; and even, seemingly, to reflect upon the adoption in a neighboring district, under the authority of the Colonial Government, of a policy supposed to be in some respects different from that which he himself had thought it expedient to follow. All these assumptions are mistaken in point of law. As I have shown, even the ordinary duties of the conservation of the peace do not rest with the Provincial Government, much less the direction of the policy of the country in regard to it, at critical times. Much of what Mr Kynnersley' did at Westport, he was undoubtedly empowered and required to do, as holding the commission of the peace, but whatever he did in that capacity he should have done in subordination to the General Executive Government, to which it was his duty to refer for instructions. It makes not the least difference that a magistrate is a stipendiary, whose salary is provided for on the Provincial Estimates. Departmental arrangements may exist which pretend to subordinate the. magistrate to the Provincial Government, and prescribe correspondence with the Superintendent. All I can say is, that such arrangements, if they exist, contravene the law of the land. I make these observations purely with a view to point out to the gentlemen on the Commission of the Peace their true relations to the Government of the country, and in order to remove a misapprehension which might obviously lead to very bad results. And now, gentlemen, in concluding this address, I must congratulate you upon the issue of the colony from these once menacing dangers— a happy result which we owe' to the combined, fearlessness and cautior with Jjwhieh our affairs have been handled, and above all, to the strong

instinct of social order which influences the vast majority of our people. Gentlemen, I may now dismiss you to your duties. N. Halford was indicted for stealing a horse from W. N. Eyes, Esq., in the province of Marlborough. W. N. Eyes, examined: I. am Superintendent of the province of Marlborough. 1 lost a brown mare, branded XZ on near shoulder, about the middle ot 1864. The mare was running out at the time. I had lent the mare to aMr Butt, who did not return her to me, but turned her out on his father's property, ajjoining my run. In consequence of information given me that the mare had been turned out, I caused search to be made for her on several occasions. Nearly -a year after I saw the nuire in Picton, running loose. 1 took no steps then. I went afterwards to Picton to look i'or her, and again saw her running loose. I saw the mare was being used, and went to the police to ascertain who claimed her. I next saw her at the door of a butcher named Webster, and claimed her, when Webster said he had bought her. I have seen the mare since. I saw her this morning, in Webster's possession. Cross-examined by the Court: It was in 1865 I first saw the mare in Picton. Cross-examined by prisoner: I lent the mare to Mr Butt, and while in his possession she ran in the neighborhood of Blenheim. T. Webster called: lama butcher residing at Picton. I know tiie prisoner, ;and bought the mare from him for £15 on August 3, 1864; she was brauderl XZ on near shoulder. The mare has since been claimed by Mr Eyes. Prisoner said he had made money at the diggings with which he had purchased the mare. It was nine months after I purchased the mare that she was claimed by Mr Eyes. The prisoner did not tell me of whom he had purchased the mare. J. Emmerson, examined: I am Inspector of Police at Blenheim. I arrested the prisoner on this charge on the 14th of May last. I had the warrant for his apprehension for 2 or 3 years, but could not meet with him. The prisoner, who was undefended, said he had purchased the mare from a man named Johnson, who came down from the Wakamarina, and he shortly afterwards sold her to the witness Webster. The prisoner put in Avhat purported to be a declaration of the sale of the mare to him on the part of Johnson. The Judge, in summing up explained the nature of the law as to holding stolen property. When once stolen property was found in the possession of any person at a recent date after the theft, the holder may be presumed to have stolen it. At the distance of time which had elapsed, it was difficult to fix the theft on the prisoner, and it was probably equally difficult for him to substantiate the statements made by him as to the manner in which he had come by the animal. Although the case presented some difficulties, it was properly one which should go to a jury. The jury then retired, and after an absence of about a quarter of an hour, returned into Court with a verdict of Not Guilty, and the prisoner was discharged. The Grand Jury having ignored the bills against Thomas Wade and Thomas Cave, they were discharged from custody. Edward Piowden was charged with stealing at the Kaikouras, on the 24th of March last, a horse, the property of a Maori, named Hoani Paratene. The prisoner pleaded Not Guilty, and was undefended. A question having arisen as to the jurisdiction of the Judge in this case, the alleged offence having been committed in the province of Canterbury, his Honor adjourned the Court at halfpast 12, until 2 o'clock, in order to consider the point. On the Court reassemVing at 2 o'clock, his Honor stated that, after considering the question at issue, he was clearly of opinion that, under the Indictable Offences Act, IS6B, he had jurisdiction in the case, and that, moreover, the committing magistrate had acted in conformity with the provisions of that Act. On the prisoner being again placed at the bar, he expressed his desire to recall his former plea of Not Guilty, and was therefore remanded for sentence until 10 o'clock to-morrow morning. The trial of James M'Culloch, for stealing £12. a miner's right, gold-bag," etc., at Collingwood, the property of James Flynn, on the 15th January last, was proceeding when we went to press, the prisoner having pleaded Not guilty.