SUPREME COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5004, 7 April 1877, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. (Before his Honor Mr. Justice Richmond.) The Court sat at 10 o’clock yesterday; FELONY. Thomas Hawkins was charged with feloniously entering the premises of George Matthew Snelson, of Palmerston, and stealing therefrom seven silver watches,sundry cheques, and money. Prisoner, who was undefended, pleaded not guilty. George Mathew Snelson deposed: I am a a storekeeper at Palmerston. On the 7th January (Sunday) I went to church in the morning, and returned at about half-past one o’clock. Before going to church the safe was as I had left it on Saturday night. I went out in the afternoon, and returned at about six o’clock. I then observed that the back door, which had been locked when I went out, was unlocked, and the key missing. I went out in the evening with my wife and children, and came back about half-past nine o'clock. No one was left in the house during our absence. The key now produced is I believe the key of the back door, which I missed on returning home about six o’clock bn the day in question. It had been left in the porch. I went to bed about ten o’clock that night, and rose next morning at about seven. On examing the safe two cash boxes were missing. One of them belonged to me, and the other to Mr. Keeling. About £ls in notes and some silver and gold coin were missing ; also a cheque drawn by Henry Akers. There were also missing sundry 1.0.U.’5, promissory notes, a £1 Bank of Scotland note, and nine £S notes of the Bank of Australia. Amongst the documents was a cheque belonging to me drawn by Mr. George Richardson for £1 4s. The document produced is the one. [Witness identified sundry articles of property produced], Mr. Bell stated that the cheque mentioned for £74 was not proved. That so called cheque happened to be a bill of exchange. His Honor remarked that the nine £5-notcs on the Bank of Australasia were laid in the depositions before the magistrate as belonging to Mr. Snelson. Mr. Bell : Everything was laid originally as the property of Mr. Snelson, and the ownership had to be fished up afterwards. His Honor remarked that this should not have been so. The indictment was amended by permission of the Court. Robert North Keeling, a commission agent and accountant, living at Palmerston, deposed that he had an office in Mr. Snelson’h auction room, and kept any valuable property he had in a safe in Mr. Suelson’s housfe. Oij the 6th January, deposited his cash-box in thrf safe, and previously to that he had left a containing some watches which belonged to him. In the cash-box there was a cheque for £47 10s., and Mr. Snelson had put in a cheque for £1 4s. 2d. [Witness identified the cheque for £47 10s.] He knew the number of one of the watches, 864 ; and recognised from their general appearance two others. James Farrell, detective officer, deposed to arresting the prisoner at 8 o’clock on the night of the 17th of January, at the Central Hotel. Asked him if he had any watches for sale. He replied in the negatived. Witness then took him to the police station, and searched him. Found on the prisoner two watches produced, a door key, 18s. fid. in silver, and three foreign coins ; also, a pawn ticket, the one produced, and issued by Mr. Cohen to Stevenson. Went

to Cohen’s, and received a silver watch, that produced, No. 213. The cheque for £47 10s. Witness found in prisoner’s pocket, and the smaller one, for £1 4s. 2d., he received from Mr. George Smart on the day following the arrest of the prisoner. The note on the Koval Bank of Scotland witness received from Mr.

Perry, a boarding-house keeper. By Prisoner : I did ask you whether you came from Dunedin when I took you outside the Central Hotel. I found other property on you than that mentioned. I found a bill of exchange for £74 16s. 6d. By the Court : I identify the bill of exchange produced as the one I found on the prisoner.

By the Prisoner: I found a revolver on you. Joseph Perry, a boardinghouse-keeper in Wellington, deposed that prisoner had been at his house five or six times. Remembered prisoner paying a bank-note on the 13th January last. He gave the same note (that produced) to Sergeant Farrell. Benjamin Cohen, a pawnbroker, deposed that he had seen the prisoner on the 17th of January. He brought a watch and asked witness to advance money on it. That was the ticket, produced, that he gave prisoner when the latter lodged it with him. Witness identified the watch. This concluded the case for the Crown. Prisoner, in defence, said all he had to say was that he received the things from a man who was going away to Australia. He was not aware they were stolen property. On the day the robbery was committed he was seven or eight miles away from the place. The man he received the property from was a dealer in horses, and he told witness he had been spending the Christmas in Palmerston. The things were presented to prisoner in a swag. One of the watches produced in Court was his own property, a silver chain having been attached to it when it was taken from him. Prisoner had nothing further to say than this, that the man who gave him the property expressed his intention of going to the Palmer. His Honor then summed up, pointing out that the proof against prisoner consisted in his being found in possession of the stolen property, there being no actual proof of the taking. The jury retired to consider their verdict, and on returning, found him guilty of larceny in a dwelling-house. The Court deferred passing sentence. FORGERY.

John Alexander Gordon was charged with forging and uttering a promissory note for £SO. Mr. Gordon Allan appeared for the prisoner, and pnt in a plea that the prisoner having been tried the day before, and acquitted, therefore he could not be tried again for the same offence. A plea of not guilty was also added, after some argument as to whether this was necessary or not in a case where autrefois acquit was pleaded. A jury was sworn in to try the issue raised, his Honor remarking that this was the first case of the kind he had had to deal with, such issues generally coming before the Court in the form of reserved cases. Mr. Allan was proceeding to argue on behalf of the production of evidence, when Mr. Bell admitted that the evidence proposed to be given in the former case, and that which went before the jury to prove the indictment, was the same as in the previous case. His Honor then directed the jury on the point at issue, explaining that to support the plea it was necessary there should be proof that under the first indictment the prisoner stood in peril. The jury found for the Crown as against the prisoner in the plea of autrefois acquit. Prisoner was then charged in the ordinary way with forging and uttering. The note purported to be drawn by Par Svensson, a bush carpenter, and was presented by prisoner at the Bank of New Zealand at Carterton, where the manager discounted it. Mr. Svensson deposed that he never signed the note produced. He never spelt his name “ Par," as it was spelt in the note. The signature was a forgery. The bank manager and other witnesses were called. His Honor summed up very minutely. The jury retired, and after a short absence returned into Court with a verdict of guilty against the prisoner, who was sentenced to four years hard labor. HAWKINS SENTENCED. Thomas Hawkins was then brought up for sentence. He was ordered to be imprisoned and kept to hard labor for three years. The Court adjourned till 10 o'clock next morning, when the case of Bonnell, for forgery, the only case remaining on the calendar, will be proceeded with.