SUPREME COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 4924, 4 January 1877, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. (Before his Honor the Chief Justice.) Wednesday, January 3.

His Honor took his seat at 10 o’clock, when he delivered sentences in the three cases in which convictions were obtained on the previous day, as follows : SENTENCES. James Kay, who was convicted of breaking into the Clarendon Hotel, and stealing therefrom some bottles of porter, when asked whether he bad anything to say why sentence should not be passed upon him, replied that he had previously led an honest life, that he had been a number of years in the colony, and had never before been inside a gaol. His Honor said that his name appeared on the Court records as having been sentenced to imprisonment for stealing from a dwelling in the year 1876.

The prisoner said ho had been about to explain that on the occasion referred to he had committed himself out of pure necessity, in order to obtain shelter during the winter, being unable to earn a living in consequence of an accident he met with in Melbourne, and from which he had never recovered. On the last occasion he was not responsible for his actions, having been drinking heavily, and did not remember being arrested. When taken before the '.Resident Magistrate he was in such a bad state that he was unfit to be examined, and was consequently remanded for four or five days. He now begged the Court to regard him, not as a hardened criminal, but rather as one whom misfortune and disappointment had made more fit to be an inmate of a lunatic asylum than a ga°L . Inspector Atcheson, in reply to his Honor, said that prisoner had been brought up in the first piace, in company with a disreputable woman, on a charge of larceny. The woman was convicted, whilst he was discharged ; but he subsequently went to the Hutt, and there stole a

pair of blankets, and sold them, for which ho was sentenced to six mouths imprison men . His Honor asked whether any attempt was made to see what these men were going to do after they were discharged ? Mr Head said they obtained work almost immediately they were out of gaol. There was no difficulty in getting employment in V elliiicdou, and in cases where men had no means the” Government assisted them. Recently a case happened in which a man was assisted to proceed to Auckland. _ His Honor (addressing the prisoner) said his belief was that the prisoner was not one of the criminal class. Had his offence been one of the ordinary class—that was to say, had he been found breaking into a private house to the fear of the people, and for the purpose of stealing their property —ho should have given him a long term of penal servitude. In this case he was disposed to treat prisoner somewhat leniently, in the hope that on coming out of gaol ho would endeavor to get Ills living honestly. He warned him, however, that should ho bo brought before that Court again, the circumstances of this and the previous conviction would tell against him ; and the sentence of the Court would no doubt he a very long term of penal servitude. The sentence of the Court now was, that prisoner be kept for two years in the public prison in Wellington, and be kept to hard labor. J ohn Freeman (convicted of robbing the till of the Prince of Wales Hotel) next stood forward. Ho informed the Court that he had come to Wellington about eight months ago, and he was one of the best tradesmen in the colony, but was unable to work recently in consequence of an injury to his leg. He admitted having committed the robbery, and bad purposely done it, in order to get into gaol, as he could not gain admittance into the hospital. He did not go to a poor man to commit the offence, as he might have done. Mr. Read said he considered it right, after the statement just made, to inform the Court that Freeman had been in regular employment with Mr. McDonald, saddler; and that he might have been there still but for his intemperate habits, on account of which Mr. McDonald had to discharge him. Freeman stated that Mr. McDonald had cheated him ; that he left the shop three weeks ago, because lie could not obtain fair payment for his services.

His Honor regarded prisoner as ono. of thfise unwise persons who indulged in drink, and it was probable that at the time he committed the offence of which he stood convicted he would have done anything for drink. As the Court had no reason to know that this was other than the prisoner’s first offence, he would sentence him to throe calendar months’ imprisonment, with hard labor. Prisoner expressed a longing desire to get hack to Australia, whence he had come to New Zealand some eight weeks ago. He was highly respected there, he said, and was known to “ the Governor and all the nobility,” for whom he had worked. His Honor told him he would have very little difficulty in getting there after being released from gaol, if he showed a disposition to work for a living. John Traynor (convicted of stealing money from Archibald McCaffer) said he had been seventeen years in New Zealand, and had spent fourteen years of that time in the province of Wellington. He had never before stood as a prisoner in a court of law, except on one occasion in the police court, when he was fined A. for drunkenness. He expressed tho opinion that he would not have been convicted had he been able to summon witnesses on his behalf whilst the case was proceeding. His Honor said he would assume, in the absence of any record to the contrary, that prisoner came into Court with evidence of having previously born a gcud character, though it would have been quite competent for him, if he could, to call evidence aa to his character. The offence of which he had been found guilty was a very serious one, because in a house of the kind where the money was stolen, the property of boarders must necessarily be occasionally left unguarded, therefore cases of this sort should be treated with severity. He would sentence Traynor to twelve months’ imprisonment, with hard labor. FELONY. Rudolph Laurent was charged with criminally assaulting a little girl. He pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr. Barton. The case occupied a long time in hearing. The jury returned a verdict of guilty. His Honor deferred passing sentence till next day. The Court adjourned at 11.40 p.m. till 10 o’clock next morning.