SUPREME COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 4846, 3 October 1876, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS.

(Before Hia Honor the Chief Justice.) The circuit sittings of the Supreme Court opened yesterday at 10 o’clock. Mr. H. D. Bell appeared to prosecute on behalf of the Crown. The following gentlemen were svom in as a Grand Jury :—Messrs. T. Kebbell (foreman), C. Tringham, V 7. H. Levin, J. R. George, J. Martin, T; Buchanan, A. P. Stuart, N. Marchant, W. Hester, J. E. Blair, G. Crawford, J. Watts, T. Turnbull, R. G. Clifford, T. J. Ladd,'A. Baker, R. Port, G. S. Sellars, T. Mason, H. Willcox, Major Paul, Captains Holt and Williams. Mr. E. W. Mills was excused on the score of illness. ,7 . CHABOE* ■His Honor, in charging the jury, said the number of cases that would be brought before the Court appeared to be somewhat fewer than had been hitherto the case ; but there were amongst them some of a very serious nature. • He then referred to each case in the calendar. In the first place, there was a charge against a man i named Donnelly for house-breaking. He pointed ; out that the evidence in this case was’ strong, prisoner having admitted to a friend of his that he was the person who had forcibly : entered the house and taken the According,to the evidence as they found it, however, he could be brought in guilty of either larceny or burglary, and the Grand Jury would do better to find for the greater offence, leaving it to the petty Jury ta make further investigation. He interpreted the law touching on the various cases to which the jury had to give their consideration, and remarked - upon the gr avity of the offences with which Haughtou and Laurent stood charged. True bills were found as follows :—William Donnelly, felony; Peter Bonne], felony; Alfred Minifie, misdemeanor; Charles Edward Haughton, misdemeanor; Hakopu Te Puni, cutting and wounding. The case of Rudolph Laurent, charged with rape, was postponed till next sessions in consequence of the Chief Justice deciding, after examining the little girl Kate Meech, that she was not qualified to give evidence. Has Honor consented to this course on the application of Mr. Bell, and pointed out the authority lor it. The child will in the meantime be instructed' to enable her to understand the responsibility of a witness in a court of law. I The Grand Jury found no bill against Frederick Young, who had been charged with felony. HOUSE-BEEAKING. - ) John Donnelly was charged with the above’ offence at Wakataki, the indictment containing three distinct charges, namely, burglary, house-breaking, andlarcenyj but the charge of burglary was abandoned. The jury having been sworn in, Mr. James Lockie was elected foreman.

Prisoner, who was without counsel, pleaded not guilty. Mr. Bell having briefly addressed the jury, called—

Alexander McHutcheon, who deposed that the house which prisoner entered belonged to Mrs. Guthrie, and the goods in the store belonged to her. On Thursday, 3rd of August, he remembered leaving the store, having locked the doors before leaving. He was in charge of the store. He went to Tenui,' and returned on Friday, going over to the store from his own house at about two o’clock. He found a glass door broken. Witness saw a pick lying in the passage, and the marks on the door were such as might have been made by the pick. On entering the store, he missed two coats, two waistcoats, some boots, laces, and two shawls. That was all he missed at that time, but subsequently-discovered that other property had been taken. He saw some of the missing articles afterwards on the beach. They had been done up in a bundle and buried in the sand, but the wind had disturbed the sand, disclosing the bundle. It did not contain all the things he missed. The coat produced was very much like one he missed from the store, : and which he saw at the policestation.

Neil O’Kane, who had at one timebeen prisoner’s mate, deposed that he saw prisoner on the 3rd of August going from Castle Point in the direction of Wakataki, Witness wan living at Castle Point at an accommodation house kept by his brother. Prisoner was stopping there also. He returned next night from Wakataki. When he came in prisoner made some remark, but witness did not hear. On getting up next - morning he ' asked, prisoner, who was lying in a bed, what had kept him so late; and he replied that he had been sleeping on the beach, and that he had lost his money at the Wakataki Hotel. Shortly afterwards prisoner called witness into the room, saying he was going to tell him a secret. He then pulled from under the bed a coat, which he said he would give to witness, and in answer to the question, “Where did yon get the coat ?” prisoner said, “ I was in the store, and took the coat out of it.” He said also, “I have got some more things on the beach tied in a bundle,” and that he had taken them out of the store. He enumerated some of the articles, such as shawls, flannels, and coats. He admitted to witness that he had broken the door of the store with a pick. He disclosed the direction in which he had left the clothes, saying they were on the beach near a now road, and expressed an intention to plant the articles of clothing in the end of the store belonging to witness’s brother. Witness did not see any of the articles except the coat particularly mentioned. Witness assumed that prisoner was sober on the night he came from Wakataki.

In reply to his Honor, witness said prisoner, in speaking of .the store from which he had taken the clothing, mentioned distinctly that it was Mrs. Guthrie's store.

Constable Scale deposed to arresting the prisoner, and finding a coat in the garden, which was subsequently identified by Mr. McHutoheon. Prisoner when charged said he knew, nothing about it. . By Prisoner: The boots you wore when arrested did not correspond with the footprints in the mud outside the store. By the Court: The boots he had on were half worn.,

Prisoner pleaded innocence of the offence with which he was charged, and said those who had endeavored to make out a case against him had been prompted by a feeling of spite. His Honor, in summing up, explained to the jury the effect of the evidence, and that they could only find prisoner guilty on the third count, viz., larceny. The jury then retired, and after a short consultation found the prisoner guilty of larceny. His Honor announced that he would deliver judgment next (this) morning. THE HUTT ASSAULT CABE._ _ Hakopu Te Puni was charged with having assaulted Watene, cutting and wounding him with an axe, on Friday, the 15lh ult. Mr. Barton appeared on behalf of prisoner. Watene was in attendance, and gave a clear statement of the case, the facts in connection with which were published in our report of the Resident Magistrate’s Court proceedings on Saturday last. Epiha was also called, and gave a description of the scene which took place in the whare after the first-blow had been struck, the which act of prisoner’s caused witness to wake, and he saw him strike the second blow, after which he prevented prisoner from again striking Watene, Witness was examined at length by Mr. Barton, but nothing was elicited to weaken the case for the Crown.

Epi Haka corroborated : Bpiha’s statement. She was in the whare at the time the assault was committed..- She also stated that no spirits had been drunk by the parties differently concerned in the affair. There had been no drinking for three days, and there had been no quarrel between Watene and the prisoner. Dr. Wilford deposed that he was a duly qualified medical practitioner, residing at the Hutt, and testified to the condition in which he had discovered Watene when called in to attend him. The wounds might have been inflicted by an axe. He considered it doubtful whether Watene would recover the use of his arm, injury to the nerves having paralysed it. This concluded the case for the prosecution. Mr. Barton , addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoner, and contended that his fellowcountrymen must have kept something back in connection with the case from motives best known to themselves; for he considered it ridiculous to suppose that there could have been, no provocation, no difference preceding the assault, and not a word spoken by any one of the people in the whare. The whole truth had not been told—-that, was evident. Mr. Barton then proceeded to say that he purposed producing European and Maori witnesses in order to show that prisoner was a lunatic at the time he assaulted Watene, and that as a matter of fact it was known before that he was out of his mind, being accustomed to go mad occasionally, and he was sent to Watene’a house in consequence, and was virtually under the guardianship of Watene. He should moreover be able to prove that at the time prisoner struck Watene he was using expressions which showed him to be under the impression that somebody was striking him ; yet both Watene and his wife had declared that he never opened his lips—never, in fact, said a word to anybody—which was highly improbable. Therefore he would ask the jury to believe with,him that the witnesses fpr the prosecution had purposely concealed or kept back certain facte in connection with the case which would tell in prisoner’s favor. By finding that the prisoner was insane whan he committed the assault, they would be doing no wrong to society, because they would thus clear him from the stain of having committed a serious crime, while at the same time he -would be placed in the asylum, to remain there during the pleasure of the Governor. He quoted a case heard in England, in which the defendant was sane eight hours after the occurrence ; and it was held to be immaterial so long as it \yas proved that he had been out of his mind at the time. He then called William Bassett, who repeated the statement which he previously made in the lower court as to the frantic conduct of the prisoner in the paddock. He was talking rapidly and gesticulating wildly. On witness endeavoring to approach him, he ran away; but witness followed him, and on overtaking him prisoner said somebody wanted to kill him. Witness .afterwards got prisoner into his house, and there he behaved in a most extraordinary manner, being still under the impression that he was being pursued by some one, and refusing to keep on any clothing. Witness had had some experience of lunatics, having been engaged. in private lunatic asylums in England, and his mother having had the charge of-a .few patients who had ! been discharged from the asylums incurable. On the day ;he saw the .-prisoner the. latter betrayed, some of the symptoms he had noticed in the lunatics he had referred to.

-Mr. Baker said, he had visited prisoner in the cell, and considered from his conversation and general bearing; that he was insane. He said he was terrified; because Watene’s gods would come and destroy him. Wiremu Te Puni gave evidence to the effect that Watene had told him , that he would be Hakopu's doctor—would look after him; and told witness to send prisoner to him. Witness then gave a description ef the scene in the whare. Prisoner was mad about a month ago at the pilot station, and two Maoris named Roka and Hori brought him home. Cross-examined by Mr. Bell: Prisoner was making a great noise at the time he had the axe in his hand. Epi Haka and Epiha were not asleep, and their statements to the contrary were false.'• Prisoner ‘ said the gods would kill him and Epiha and witness. The latter did not take the axe from prisoner because he was so -much younger and smaller. Prisoner was not addicted to drink, and had not been drinking before he struck Watene. ' By the Court: Prisoner was drunk about four days before the day on which he assaulted Watene.

Hr. Diver was called for the purpose of ascertaining his opinion on the evidence, as it disclosed facts which appeared to indicate that prisoner was not sane at the time. He thought prisoner could not have known what he was doing. At this stage, the Court adjourned at halfpast five o’clock.