SUPREME COURT.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XIII, Issue 89, 13 April 1878, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. [Before His Honor the Chief Justice.] Yesterday. : After we went to press yesterday, the jury, in the case of the Queen y; Alfred William Avery, retired, and after an hour and a ;half returned with a verdict of guilty of stealing from the person. His Honor recommended them to reconsider their verdict, as the evidence, as pointed out by him in his- summing up, tended to show that there had been simule larceny rather than larceny from the person. The jury then retired again, and in a short time brought in a verdict of guilty of simple larceny, and at the same time recommended the prisoner to mercy on the ground that ' this was his first offence, and also in consideration of his wife and family. At the request of Mr Pitt, who defended the prisoner, His Honor deferred sentence until To-Dat. Alfred William Avery was brought up for sentence. Mr Pitt said that he had asked that sentence might be reserved until this morning with a view to calling witnesses to speak to the prisoner's character, but, upon consideration, he thought it would be unnecessary, a3 His Honor would, no doubt, take into consideration the fact that nothiug whatever had been brought against him by the police. As the prisoner had not been found guilty of stealing from the person he trusted that the Court would look upon the offence as more of a foolish than a criminal act, borne out as this was by the after conduct of the prisoner at M'Gee's. He hoped a lenient sentence might be passed. His Honor said that he felt inclined to give weight to the recommendation of the jury, and that he also thought it was a fair matter for consideration that the police knew nothing against the man's character. He was inclined to take the same' view as Mr Pitt that it was possible, even probable, that under different circumstances the prisoner would not have committed such an act, and he would therefore pass what, otherwise, would certainly be an inadequate sentence, namely, imprisonment with hard labor; for four months. : RoBHERY FBOBI A POST OITICB. | Samuel Austin Green was brought up for sentence. The Crown Prosecutor stated that he had received the following telegram from the Postmaster-General:— "Ee the case of young Green now under remand for sentence for stealing a post office letter. I have no desire that you press for heavy sentence, seeing that the lad has already been six months in gaol awaiting, and that there is no proper classification of prisoners, and nomiual sentence would meet the case. — Signed, J. Ballance, Postmaster-General." ■ His Honor said, It would be wrong if in this case I were to sentence the boy to the kind of punishment usually given in these cases, but before I decide what is to be done I should like to be assured by his father that the lad will be under strict supervision either by himself or some other competent person. What I mean to say, Mr Green,— addressing the boy's father, who was present —is, if the boy is discharged, which 1 understand to be the meaning of the telegram, what do you propose to do with him? Mr Green stated that he was not prepared to make any suggestion. The boy could, not' have been more carefully brought up than he was up to the time he left home for Reefton. He had made up his mind on the lad being released to keep him at home under his own eye. ! His Honor: That being the case I feel that I can adopt the recommendation of ! the Postmaster General, as the Court usually does in such cases. The Postofficer with whom the boy was gives him a good character and I shall therefore in accordance with 1 the wishes of the Postmaster-General pass but a nominal sentence, namely, imprisonment for three days dating from Thursday last, which means in fact that he may be discharged; today. Sheep Stealing. Archibald George Green and John Tutty were charged with stealing two lamb 3, the property of Mr John Oldham, of Suburban North. Mr H. Adams appeared for Crown, Mr Bunny, with him Mr Sinclair, for Green, and Mr Pitt for Tutty. The jury consisted of Gardner Hunter (foreman), J. Goodman, Edward Challis, Henry Wendleborn, Frederick Cundy, F. j Lusty, S. Avery, H. Moore,. F. Pearce,

Christian Schvrass, J. Thompson, and Henry Lankovy. Robert Wallace and George Murray were challenged by the Crown, and C. Quick by Green, The evidence in this case has already been published in our columns. The jury, after an absence of tea minutes, acquitted both the accused, .