DISTRICT COURT.

Oamaru Mail, Volume IV, Issue 1319, 7 September 1880, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTING.

THIS DAY. (Before His Honor District Judsre Ward.) FALSE PRETENCES. William Leigh, a respectable-looking middle-aged man, was indicted for that he did on the Bth day of July last, obtain from William Maitland the sum of LI by means of a false pretence, the said false pretence being that he (the prisoner) was a detective officer in the Constabulary Force of New and that he had money coming to him through Inspector Thompson, and that the false pretence was used for the purpose of defrauding the said William Maitland. The prisoner pleaded not guilty, and was undefended. Mr. White, Crown Prosecutor, conducted the case for the prosecution. The Crown Prosecutor having briefly opened the case, The evidence of Mr. William Maitland, landlord of the Globe Hotel, was taken. From this it appeared that on the 3rd of May last the prisoner went to live at the Globe Hotel. On the 8 th he applied to Mr. Maitland for the loan of LI, but was at first refused. Prisoner then said that, he was a detective in the police, but he was short of money, and that money was coming to hini from Bunedin through Inspector Thojpapson. Mr. Maitland then gave prisoner LI in the belief that his story was "true and that the money would be repaid when prisoner received the money said to be coming through Inspector Thompson. The prisoner cross-examined witness at some length, but without eliciting anything fresh. Inspector Thompson said he had known the accused about a year, No money for prisoner had ever come through his (witness'') hands on prisoner's behelf. He had no reason to have a bona fide belief that money would be coming to prisoner through witness' hands. Inspector Mallard stated that he had known the prisoner from the 17th April, 1879, or a few days afterwards., until the 30th April, 1880. Prisoner wast during that time in the polios force, and nearly the whole of th&t time was stationed in Dunedin, He had been discharged from i the foroe on the 30th April last, and had no connection with the force since. Prisoner called in his behalf George Grey Hogg and Mrs. Nowey, but their evidence was not material. Prisoner then, wanted a little time—just a,n hour—to obtain further evidence, to prove that some of the prosecutor's statements were false. ■ His Honor remarked that prisoner had had a month during which to obtain witnesses. Prisoner : But I-did not want to put a female in the box, His Honor ; \'ou have done so already. Prisoner : Yes, your Honor; but this is a poor girl. His Honor intimated that if prisoner had any statement to make he had better do so. Prisoner then in a painfully wearisome manner read a long and rambling statement, purporting to criticise and show the unreliable nature of the evidence. His Honor, in summing up, said that to bear out a,n indictment for fake pretences, i,t must be shown that the false pretence must be baa,ed oji, an existing fact. The pretence that prisoner had made out that h$ had money coming to him though inspector Thompson was not an existing fact, it was merely a pretence that he expected money. But the law laid down that while there were a number of false pretenoes, and an expectation was supported by a pretence of an existing fact the indictment could be supported. In this case, if they believed the evidence, the pretence of money expected to be received was supported by the pretended fact that prisoner was a detective.. The jury then returned to consider their verdict, and, after a short retirement, returned a verdict of Guilty, with a recommendation that the prisoner should be dealt with leniently. Honor said, while, taking into consideration the recommendation, he must say hp looked upon a person who had been in the police for<je, and who afterwards stood in prisoner's position, as a dangeroua person, He sentenced prisoner to six months* imprisonment, with hard labor, 1 ATTEMPTED LARCENY. John Bishop Hunter, a respectablydressed man, was indicted for haying on the 15th .Tuly last attempted to steal a mare, the property of Philip Mason. The prisoner pleaded not guilty, and; was undefended. . * Mr, WHi,te prosecuted, and in-opening the case seated that the charge of attempting to. commit a larceny was laid under the circumstance that the; prisoner had ; only attemnted, to sell the, : mage, and had not Hadhe been successful

he would have been indicted upon thd more serious charge of felony. The evidence went to show that on thd' evening of the 14th July the prisoner! went to the hotel kept by Mr. Mason and! asked for the loan of a horse, stating that he wished to go to Otepopo on particular business, and would return by 10 o'clock that night. Instead of doing so the prisoner rode to Humpden, and there, on the 15th July, twice, offered the mare for Bale to Mr. Wm. Stewart. Mr. Stewart declined to purchase the mare. The prisoner offered to sell the mare for LlO and said he had had her for about three or four months. Prisoner in his statement endeavored to show that , had he desired to sell the horse he might easily have done so, audi that he had been drinking all night and was under the influence of liquor. His Honor haviug briefly summoned up. • The jury retired and after some deliberation, returned with a verdict of guilty. In reply to Mr. White, His Honor said that he had set his face against taking evidence as to the previous career of a prisoner. The practice of laying before the Bench a statement of previous convictions as was done in Dunedia was unfair to the prisoner. Mr. White did not persevere. His Honor sentenced the prisoner to six months imprisonment with hard labor. LARCENY. May Mitchell was indicted with having on the 16th August stolen certain wearing' apparel, the property of Martha Lenihan. Mr. White prosecuted. The prisoner wa3 undefended wad pleaded not guilty. The facts of the case have already boon published, and are briefly as follow: The prisoner had left a box at the railway station and a few days afterward® called to have it removed to her lodgings, but instead of taking her own box had taken that belonging to the prosecutrix to her residence. She afterwards returnod it to the station, and on the box being opened by the prosecutrix it was found that the articles named in the indictment had been removed and some rags substituted. The boxes of the prisoner were searched at her residence, and therein were found nearly all the missing articles, the balance, a pair of gloves, being found on her person when searched at the police, station. The jury without retiring found th& prisoner guilty. Hia Honor sentenced her ,to three, months' imprisonment with hard labor.