SUPREME COURT.—CRIMINAL SITTINGS.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5311, 3 April 1878, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.—CRIMINAL SITTINGS.

Tuesday, April 2. (Before His Honor Mr. Justice Richmond.) OBTAINING GOODS Oif FALSE PRETENCES. Robert Jacobson, alias Count Mouravieff, was indicted for having on the sth March, 1878, unlawfully obtained from Louisa Catherine Hillen, wife of the proprietor of the Pahautanui Hotel, Pahautanui, £5, by means of false pretences. Prisoner, who was defended by Mr. Barton, pleaded not guilty. The Crown Prosecutor having stated the case, called witnesses. Louisa Catherine Hillen deposed that her husband kept the Pahautanui Hotel. In February last accused went to the hotel and stayed there some time, living in a very expensive style. He purchased her pony for £2O, and stayed until the sth March. For his first fortnight’s board he paid cash, and at the end of the second fortnight when, he was leaving, he paid her by a cheque, receiving £5 cash from her as change. He represented himself to be a Russian count travelling to get information for his Government, and further said that he had £2OO to his credit in the bank at Wellington, and £2OO in the bank at Auckland. She saw him sign the cheques produced, both of which had been dishonored by the bank. Witness got the cheque-book herself from the Union Bank by prisoner’s direction.

Alfred Godfrey Martelli, teller to the Union Bank, Wellington, stated that accused had no funds in the bank to meet the cheque produced.

Mr, Barton asked if the bank ever met cheques on overdrawn accounts? Witness declined to answer the question, and his Honor ruling it to be an irrelevant one, Mr. Barton said he had no witnesses to call, and proceeded to address the jury. He contended that there was nothing in the evidence to show that he was not Count Mouravieff, and there was nothing to support the charge of false pretences. If the accounts of fourfifths of the wealthy people in New Zealand were looked at, it would bo found that they had all overdrawn their accounts from time to time.

His Honor, in summing up, said that any one was liable by accident to overdraw his account without knowing it, but in this case the prisoner was charged with having been guilty of intentional fraud. It jvas sufficient for them to he satisfied that prisoner knew at the time that the cheque would not and could not be paid. That would constitute the offence. If they were satisfied that he had no account in tho name of Count Mouravieff, and he issued a cheque iu that name, that would justify them in convicting him. The man who signed a cheque in a name that did not belong to him committed forgery, although he used the name of no other person. The uttering of such a cheque might also bo an ingredient in the offence of false pretences. The mere uttering of a cheque was not sufficient, It must be with intent to defraud.

The jury brought in a verdict of guilty. There was a second indictment charging prisoner with obtaining, goods to the value of £3l 2s. sd. from Thomas Robinson, of Pahautanui, by means of false pretences. Mr. Barton said he had advised accused to plead guilty. Prisoner was remanded until 10 o’clock the following morning for sentence.

INDECENT ABSAUI/T. Frederick Cattling was indicted for having committed an indecent assault on Ann Celina Franklin, tho daughter of a settler at the Hutt. Mr. Gordon Allan appeared for accused.

The 1 drown Prosecutor ' shortly ' recounted the circumstances* of"'thb'"case,"which" were" briefly to the effect that prisoner was employed! as-a-waiter at -Valentine’s Hotel at - the Hutt,; and that on the evening of-til© 10th February! prosecutrix and another little'girl were sent to 1 the Hotel for some beer. Tt was in the even-: ing, and when returning prisoner followed; them, and attempted to commit the offence with which he was charged. ' i Witnesses were called; who corroborated the! facts stated. Mr. Allan, for the defence, suggested that the girl encouraged prisoner; but counsel called no witnesses. The jury found prisoner guilty of indecent assault, aud -he was remanded for sentence until next morning.

SHEEP-STEALING.' Jansen Berquist was indicted for having at Awapuni, near Palmerston, on or about the. 19th of February, stolen five sheep, the property of Te Kera and Kauerau, two Maoris. Prisoner pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr. Maclean, of Bull’s. The Maoris, who were examined through Mr. Baker, interpreter,, gave evidence to the effect that they missed the sheep in question from the paddock in which they were put to graze. On making search far the animals some, marks of blood were found in prisoner’s hut,, aad a sheepskin was discovered burning on a log lying in hjs yard. Witnesses recognised the brands on the skin as their brands. For the defence, a settler in the district named Mansen, and a young girl, the daughter of the accused, were called. They deposed that the sheep were worried by dogs, and the accused burned the skins to get rid of them. His Honor having summed up, the jury retired to consider their verdict. Prisoner was found not guilty, and on a second indictment against him the prosecution decided not to adduce evidence, and he was accordingly acquitted on both charges. THE GRAND JOEY. True bills were found by the Grand Jury against ,Tan..eu Berquist for sheep-stealing and Patrick Shine and Robert Maher for felony. The bill against Robert Ockenden for robbery was thrown out.