SUPREME COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 4923, 3 January 1877, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

CIRC GIT SITTINGS. (Before his Honor the Chief Justice.) The circuit sittings of the Supreme Court opened yesterday. His Honor took his seat at 10 o’clock. Mr. Bell appeared as prosecutor on behalf of the Crown. THE GRAND JURY. The following gentlemen were sworn in as a Grand Jury :—Messrs. W. Waring Taylor (foreman), W. Hester, H. Willcox, E. W. Mills, J. Burue, J. Paul, T. K. Macdonald. T. J. Ladd, K. J. Duncan, J. Martin, A. Baker, C. White, T. J. Mountain, C. Capper, A. E. Bowden, E. H. Hunt, G. E. Tolhnrst, B. Port, W. H. Meek, G. Crawford, B. Levy, and L. Levy. THE CHARGE. His Honor, in charging the Grand Jury, remarked that the cases in the calendar were more numerous than had been usual of late in that Court, and they presented an aspect which perhaps was worthy of consideration. The great majority of the crimes were of a serious character. Regarding that aspect of the calendar, it should be born in nrnd that the course of recent legislation had been to throw on the Resident Magistrates’ Courts the power and duty of disposing summarily of many cases which, until recently, came to the Supreme Court for trial, and that would account for the cases on the calendar being less numerous than they had been, and also for the fact that the cases were generally serious, the miner charges being few in number. His Honor then referred to several of the cases on the list, upon which he deemed it necessary to direct the j«ryTRUE BILLS. True bills wove found by the Grand Jury in every case. BURGLARY. James Kay was charged with the above offence. He pleaded guilty, but desired to call the prosecutor to speak as to his character. David Duck was called, but could say nothing in prisoner’s favor, having had no personal acquaintance with him prior to the offence. His Honor ordered prisoner to be brought up at 10 o’clock on the morning following (this morning). LARCENY. John Freeman, charged with stealing from a dwelling, pleaded guilty. His Honor reserved judgment till to-day. ADJOURNED CASE. Owen Cummings was charged with an attempt to commit an unnatural offence. Prisoner, who was not represented by counsel, applied to the Court for postponement of the case, in order to admit of his obtaining certain testimony from Greytown. Mr. Read explained that prisoner had not had an opportunity of sending for the witnesses. The case was therefore adjourned till Friday next. THEFT. John Tray nor was charged with that he did, on the 17th October, steal, take, and carry away from the boarding-house of George Smart, in Wellington, the sum of £ls, the property of Archibald McCaffer. Mr. Barton appeared to defend prisoner. Archibald McCaffer was examined. The sovereigns alleged to have been stolen were produced by Detective Farrell, who found them on the person of the prisoner. Mr. Barton cross-examined the witness at considerable length. Smart, the proprietor of the City Cafe, and Constable Smart, who searched the prisoner, were examined. Under cross-examination by Mr. Barton, Constable Smart stated that McCaffer told him that prisoner had been out of the room in which he, With a number of others, had slept on the (night of the alleged theft, since McCaffer had missed the money. No evidence was called for the defence, and Mr Barton then addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoner. His Honor summed up, directing particular at f cut ion to the question as to whether there was sufficient evidence to trace the property which had been' lost to prisoner’s possession. Fifteen pounds had been lost, but only £7 had been found in the possession of the prisoner, the only fact in support of the theory of the prosecution being that while prosecutor had lost gold the money found upon prisoner was in gold. The jury must consider whether this fact, coupled with the circumstances that prisoner had had access to the property, and that money had been found on his person immediately after his denial of the possession of money, was sufficient to satisfy their minds of the prisoner’s guilt. After an absence of half an hour, the jury 'returned into Court with a verdict of guilty, and the prisoner was remanded for sentence. The Court at 4 p.m. adjourned till 10 o’clock next (this) morning.