AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT.

Te Aroha News, Volume V, Issue 207, 18 June 1887, Page 1

AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT.

Auckland, Juno 13. The quarterly criminal sessions of the Supreme Court were opened this morning, His Honor taking 1 hid seat upon the Bench at 11 o'clock sharp.

The Grand Jury. The follow ing^entlemen wereemp.innolled as the Gmnd Jury :— lSdinund Bell, Hermann Brown, Win. Dixon Buddie, Aitken Carrick, Rebt. Thomas ChaUield, Louis Adolplms Dmrieu, John Edson, AVilliam Gauliner, Henry Rees George, Thomas Holder, How aid Ilutton, Robert William Koals, George Schwartz Ki&sling, James Buchanan Macfarlane, Joseph Mackie, Heimann XashcHd, Fred. Lambert Piime, George Paliick Pierce, John Reid, Evelyn Aithur Rich, Alexander Saunders, Andrew Stewart and Joseph Liston Wilson. Mr Kis&ling was chosen as foreman. Hermann Brown and George P. Pierce were called for the panel, but failed to appear, while Louis Adolphous Durrieu, and Alexander launders were excused from service.

His Honor's Charge. His Honor delncrcd the following charge : -Mr Foreman, and gentlemen, — I regret, that 1 can hold cub to you no prospect of any diminution of 3'our usual labours, the number of indictments to be laid before you being even larger than usual. Comparatively few of the cases are of the most serious character, but I fear that many will require a consideiable amount of time and attention afc your hands. The iirst and moat important case on the list is that of Regina v. O'Neil, for manslaughter. In this case the husband is charged with the manslaughter of his w ife by gi oss and wilful neglect. It appeals from the evidence given at the coroner's inquest that the unfortunate wife had taken poibon in a state of distraction through the ill-treatment of her husband ; that lie was fully aware of her having done so, and delibeiately withheld from her all proper care, attendance and nourishment, until it was too late for them to be of any avail. The physician who attended her stated that with careful nursing and proper treatment and diet she would have ieco"vered, but she was utterly neglected. No one was with her ; and she seems to have died from exhaustion caused partly by the poison she had taken and partly through want of proper diet and care and medicine. With these last it was her husband's duty to furnish her, and if the evidence proves to you that he failed in his duty, and that the death of hib wife was caused or accelerated thereby, you uill finJ a true bill. The next case, a chaige of rape against a man named Wight, is somewhat peculiar. The case seems, perfectly clear if the Maori witnesses are to be believed. The accusing party and her hiibband appear to have had grave doubts as to their powers of memory, inasmuch ass according to her statement after the commission of the crime they cut off a piece of the ravi&her's ear in order that they might know him again. This ear-marking forms the basis of a charge against the husband Mimiha, and as in the second case you will have the opportunity of hearing the story of the accused, Wight, it may perhaps be as well for you to study both sides of the transaction before leturning a true bill against either of the parties charged. The next case is one of attempted suicide, which appears to have been committed under the influence of drink. Another case, of a more serious character, is that of Regina v. Lawry for attempted murder. It appears that prisoner, after an absence of three years went to his wife's house, having previously declared his intention of murdering her. He armed himself with an iron bar, and was apparently about to carry out his intention, when a settler named Bassett interfered. While the two men were struggling the wife came between them and was felled to the ground by her husband ! and severely injured with a blow from the iron bar. If these facts are laid before you, you will find no difficulty in this case. The next case is one of indecent assault by a boy of 15 on a child of 3, the daughter of his employer. There is another case of a similar character, in which the charge is admitted by the prisoner. The case of Regina v. Eggerton appears to have been a very unprovoked assault, in which the prosecutor's leg was broken by a kick from prisoner. There is a charge against a man named Storey of assault with intent to rob. The prisoner is charged, with violently assaulting a Chinaman. The prosecutor appears to have been very severely injured, and from the depositions the evidence seems conclusive. In Regina v, Lacey, the prosecutor, Butler, appears to have seduced the wife of the prosecutor seven years ago, and on the two men meeting Lacey challenged prosecutor to fight. Butler refused, and Lacey wounded him slightly in the arm with a gum spear. The case is not a serious one. There is one case from the Old Men's Refuge, viz., Regina v. Peter Finn. Prisoner and prosecutor were both inmates of the Refuge. Bell, the prosecutor, threw some water over Finn's boots, and Finn subsequently assaulted him with a stick, wounding him seriously on the head. The case is one that might have been dealt with by the magistrate. The next case is Regina v. Lowndes. The prosecutor, Streem, while at the Ellerslie races, received from behind a violent blow which broke his jaw. Two constables saw the blow delivered by the person. There will be some evidence in contradiction to them, but if all the witnesses whose names are on the deposition are < called before you, you will probably deem the case one which the prisoner may fairly be called upon to answer. In the case of Regina v. Patterson, the evidence is very clear. The prisoner appeal's to have followed a former paramour in the street, and to have thrown some vitriol over her j cloak. Assaults of this character are very unusual in this colony, and must be summarily dealt with. His Honor then went on to say that another serious case was that of Regina v. Mrs McPhee on a charge of arson. He recounted the particulars of tho case, and remarked Mr Main's promptitude in giving the alarm upon discovering the outbreak. It would be for the jury to say after hearing the cvi-

donee — Ist, whether such fives were not purposely light, and 2nd, whether according 1 to all reasonable probabilities, it was not the accused who lit them. There were charges of arson and false pretences preferred against a Maori. Ho was accused of having attained money by personation and forgery, and with setting fire to the office when the deed containing the forged name was placed. Tho evidence as to the false pretences was very clear, but that as to the arson was very cloudy. There were two other cases of false pretences against Maoris, and in both of them the evidence was very clear. There were only two charges of the colonial crime of forgery of cheques, and in each the evidence was clear, and tho cheques appeared to have been readily cashed by tradesmen. There were two charges of larceny against one Shelly, in which the true thefts Avere confebscd. There was another charge of larceny against Watson, Gray and Wallace, viz., the larceny of a parcel of clothes left in a railway carriage. Regina v, Durrieu was a case of breaking into and entering ashed and stealing gum and a ring, which prisoner was found wearing when arrested. There were two cases of larceny against a man named Tilly, who admitted the thefts to the arresting constable. There was also a charge of larcency against a man named Blake. The prosecutor had been drinking, and prisoner was found in possession of the stolen articles. There were five charges of laicency against a man named Atkins, but they called for no special remark. A case of laicency as a bailer against Heywood, employed as handy-man at theßritomartHotel, was clear, while two cases of forcible entry against a man named Vincent were somewhat more difficult. They arose out of a dispute with a building contractor. If it were shown that the entry was effected either by violence to the person of the man in possession, or by any kind of violence to the house itself, the jury would have no difficulty in coming to a decision. He was sorry to say that there were two cases of perjury, the first being against a man named Campbell. It appeared that Mrs Ann Robeitson, having brought an action against the executors of the late Robert Graham for LI, OOO damages on account af her alleged illegal ejectment from an hotel at Ohinemutu, it became material to the case to ascertain whether Campbell, who was engaged in this ejectment, was then employed by the late Robert Graham or not. Campbell swore that he was not, and on this averment a charge of perjury was laid. There seemed little doubt that he made this statement, and tho chief point for the jury was whether it was true or not. Ample evidence would be laid before them, and if they deemed Campbells averment false they would find a true bill. The second case of perjury was Regina v. Conrad. Theindictmentwas quashed on a technical ground at the last sessions, and as the facts were the same now as then, it was unnecessary to trouble the jury with a second edition of the narrative. His Honor concluded by remarking that in all there were 40 indictments upon the calendar. The Grand Jury then withdrew. No bill was found in the case of Thomas Moore, and he was accordingly discharged. Assault. — Peter Finn, an inmate of the Refuge, was charged with assaulting one Alexander Bell, on the 18th of March, at j Auckland, with intent to do previous bodily harm. — Prisoner pleaded not guilty. — Mr Hudson Williamson conducted the prosecution on behalf of the Crown. — Alexander Bell deposed that he was an inmate of the Refuge. On the 18th of March last he was emptying the water in which he had washed himself Some of tho water went over the prisoner's boots, who at once abused him. The prisoner then concealed himself in the passage and rushed out and assaulted witness with a stick (produced.) Witness's head was cut in two places. A man named Ryan came to witness's rescue. Witness was paralysed on the left side. Hewaslaidup for several days, and was attended by l)r. Franklin, at the Hospital. — Thomas Walker, master of the Lower Refuge, deposed to peeing the two men fighting. He saw the prisoner on the top of Bell and another inmate trying to pull him off. Bell was bleeding profusely from the head. Finn said that Bell had bit him on the hand. — By the prisoner : He had never said that he would never forgive prisoner for reporting him about the case of Peter Moore. —John Ryan, another inmate, deposed to pulling the prisoner off Alexander Bell. — Dr. Franklyi, late house-surgeon at the Hospital, deposed to the nature of Bell's injuries. He had two scalp wounds.— The prisoner said that on the day in question he was at the tap getting a drink, when Bell asked him if he was going to stay there all day, and then rushed at him and struck him. Whatever happened afterwards was done in self-defence. He was now in his 78th year, and thought that he should not be treated in fchab manner.— The jury returned a verdict of not guilty, and the prisoner was accordingly discharged. Uttering. — Samuel Falkiner was charged with uttering a forged cheque on the 14th May, with intent to defraud. — Prisoner pleaded guilty.— Mr Cotter, on behalf of the prisoner, pleaded that His Honor would in this case deal with the prisoner under the provisions of the First Offenders Act, 1886. He might state fchafc the money had since been refunded to Mr Humphreys. He would therefore ask that the prisoner should be leniently dealt with.— His Honor said that the probation officer's report stated that there was hopes that the prisoner would reform if allowed the opportunity, more f especially as he had been promised a situation, and also had agreed to take the pledge. Under the circumstances, and taking into consideration the statement of Mr Cotter, he thought that the prisoner might bo released on probation. But for 18 months he would be on his probation, and would require to fulfil his promise about taking the pledge. He would also pay costs of the prosecution by instalments of L 2 per month. He trusted not to see him there again, and if he did it would certainly bo worse for him.

Assault with Intent.— Walter Egger- J ton was charged that he did on the Ist •February, unlawfully assault with intent to do bodily harm one John Scott, at'

Papakura. — John Scott depobed that on the 31sb of March he was at Papakura gum field when he was assaulted by the prisoners, who tried to throttle him, and broke both bones in his leg. He was taken to the Hospital, and had remained there ever since. Constable McKnighb rescued him, — Byprisoner : He did not oifer to fight witne&s, and abuse him. Assault. — The trial of Walter Eggcr ton on the charge of assaulting John Scott at Papakura on 21st February last, closed yesterday afternoon. After evidence had been given, the prisonerstated that the prosecutor started first upon him. — His Honor summed up briefly, after which the jury retired for a considerable time and returned a verdict of not guilty, stating that there was not sufficient evidence to prove that the prisoner had broken Scott's leg. The prisoner was accordingly discharged. Lyrceny. — Alexander "Watson, William Gicy, and Robert Wallace weie charged with the larceny of certain wearing apparel, the properly of John Pond, on lGth April. Alexander Watson pleaded guilty and the other prisoners not guilty. The evidence disclosed that Mr John Pond, of Karangahapo Road, travelled by the Helensville train to Waitukciei. lie had a parcel with him, containing an overcoat, one coat and vest, and two pairs of troupers. His Honor pointed out to the jury that evidently the two prisoners Avere concerned in pawning the stolen articles. The jury, after retiring for some time, returned a verdict of guilty, bnt recommended the prisoners to the leniency of the Court. — Each pri&oner was sentenced to six months' hard labour. Larceny from a Dwelling. — Henry Gecge Shelly pleaded guilty to the larceny of certain articles the property of Mr R. W. Logan of Devon port. The same prisoner also pleaded guilty to the larceny of certain articles from the dwelling house of the Rev. IT. Dcwsbury of Devonport. — Mr J P. Campbell addressed the Court on behalf of the prisoner, pointing out that these Averc his first offences and he had nob yet attained the age of 21 years. — The prisoner was remanded until 10 o'clock to-morrow, in order that evidence as to his preAious chai actor might be adduced.— ln passing sentence, j His Honor said he Avould haA'e passed a , lighter sentence had not the witness OBrien stated that after his arrest the prisoner did not facilitate the receiving of the stolen property. Still ho Avould take into consideration to prisoner's preA'ious good character and inflict a sentence of six months imprisonment Avith haid labour, the sentences to run consecutively. Wholesale Larceny. — Henry Atkins pleaded guilty to the larceny of a necklet and barometer, Aalue L 5, the property of James Stewart ; also certain articles the propei ty of Alexander Jack ; of tAvo rings, A*alue LlO, the property of James Close ; one silver Avatch, the property of George Bryant Lilly, and two rings, the property of Alexander Saunders, A*alne LlO. The prisoner said that he was in great trouble Avhen he committed the thefts. He had also facilitated the recovery of the articles. — His Honor said that if the prisoner had only committed one theft because he Avas out of Avork and reckless there might have been some excuse, but he appeared to have made a perfect profession oi thieving. He would therefore be sentenced to six months hard labour for each offence, the sentences to run consecuth ely. Alleged Uttering. — James Joseph O'Connor Avas charged with uttering a forged cheque for L 22 12s to one Patrick Lynch on the 6th May, Avell knoAving the same to be forged and \ r alueless. — Prisoner pleaded not guilty. — Patrick Lynch deposed to accepting the cheque produced and giving Ll on account. He supplied the prisoner Avith tAvo drinks. He kneAv that the prisoner's name Avas O'Connor. William Lynch deposed to advancing the prisoner L 2 5s upon the cheque. Witness thought the prisoner was a respectable man. After retiring for about a quartec of an hour the jury returned a verdict of guilty. — The CroAvn Prosecutor AvithdreAv a second indictment for false pretences, which arose out of the same case. - The prisoner pleaded for the leniency of the Court, stating that he had held good positions in Australia, and also that this Avas his first offence.— His Honor sentenced the prisoner to two years' imprisonment with hard labour. Larceny from Davellings. — Arthur Tilly, alias Bartlett, pleaded guilty to haying on the 29th January 1886, stolen certain jeAvellery from the residence of William Lynch, also to the charge of having stolen one watch, the property of Sarah Norris. His Honor sentenced the prisoner to tAvo years' imprisonment with hard labour for each offence, the sentence to run concurrently. Larceny of a Bailee.— Arthur Haywood was charged Avith the larceny as a bailee of L 3, the money of Andrew Fernandez, on 14th April.— Mrs Johanna Fernandez, wife of AndreAV Fernandez, licensee of the Britomart Hotel, deposed that the accused was engaged afc the hotel as a handyman. On the day in question she gave tht accused three Ll notes to take to the Bank to get changed. He did not return. — "Detective Tuohy deposed to arresting prisoner, who stated that he hadspent the best part of the money for tlothes and drink. The prisoner then addressed the Court in his defence, and His Honor briefly summed up. The jury, Avithout retiring, returned a verdict of guilty, and the prisoner was sentenced to 18 months' hard labour. Assault.— James LoAvndes surrendered to his bail in ansAver to the charge of violently assaulting one Charles Streem. — Prisoner pleaded nob guilty. - Mr Williamson, prosecutor on behalf of the Crown, and Mr O'Meagher appeared for the defence. — His Honor said that had the injury been caused by a straightforward bIoAV in a face to face fight the sentence Avould have been lighter, but when a man followed another and struck him a severe bIoAV from behind, it was necessary that punishment should be inflicted. The prisoner Avould therefore be imprisoned for four months, Avith hard labour. Breaking and Entering.— John Duncan Avas charged Avith breaking and entering the dwelling houso of Carlo Spvanz, ab Brighams Creek, on tho 15bh day of April,

1887, and stealing therefrom certain property of the said Carlo Spranz. His Honor sentenced the prisoner to two yearn' imprisonment/ with hard labouf iik Charg e of Arson Against Rehutai. Mr Kissling, foreman of the ft rand Jury, said they had returned no bill in the ease of Teßehiitai, charged with arson. He did not know whether they had acted rightly, but they found that three of the witnesses whose names were on the indictment had not been summoned to give evidence, and the evidence before the Grand Jury was not suhicient to warrant their bringing in a true bill. — His Honor said that the jury were justified in acting in accordance with the evidence that was forthcoming. — His Honor said that as no bill had been returned it must be accepted, and the Ciown had better prepaie a fresh indictment for the next session of the Com I. The firand Jury were then discharged, and the Court rose. Unlawfully Wounding. —James Loui-ie was charged with the above offence at the Supreme Coiut yesterday. After the adjouvnment, Mr O'Men^her opened the case tor the deience, but His Honor ruled that he could call not medical testimony as to the state of the prisoner's mind, unless the whole facts of the case, as disclosed in the evidence, Avas lirst laid before them. Mr O'Meagher then proceeded to call witnesses to previous good character of the prisoner. Captain Burgess, Chief Harbour-master, and Captain Btaund both spoke in favour of the prisoner. — Ilis Honor sentenced the prisoner to two yeais' imprisonment with hard labour. Indecent Assault. — Henry Ernest L'crry, aged l(i, was charged with indecently assaulting one Helen Ruth Bilky, at Pukekoho, on tho 23 rd of March. -John Bilky deposed that he was a settler at Pukekohe. The prisoner did not call evidence for the defence, or address the jury. After a few minutes' consideration, the jury returned a ] vcidict of guilty. - His Honor sentenced the prisoner to two yeais' imprisonment with hard labour, also to receive 15 blows Avith a birch rod on the first day of each of the three lirst months of his term of imprisonment. Unlvwfully Wounding.— George Lacy Avas charged with unlawfully wounding one Alfied Butler on the Ist April. Mr Theo. Cooper stated that he appeared for the accused, and was prepared to plead guilty under extenuating circumstances. His Honor asked if it Avas proposed to call evidence as to accused's character. His Honor said to the prisoner that he appeared to have met his Avife's seducer and challenged him to fight, which was, of course, improper conduct, and upon his refusing had assaulted him, which Avas also improper ; but as there were mitigating circumstances, justice would be satisfied if he ordered him to remain in custody until the rising of the Court, and to give a surety of L5O to come up ior sentence Avhen requiied ; and if he behaved himself, he would never be- called upon to do ;«o. Assaulting a Chinaman. — Hugh Storey Avas chaigcd with assaulting one Peter Hong Hoy, in Albeit-strect, on the 2nd of May. — Tho prisoner pleaded not guilty. — Peter Hong Hoy deposed to being assaulted in Albert-street on the 2nd of May. He Avas knocked down by the prisoner and kickea upon the head. One man was sitting on his chest. He could not say who it Avas. He felt a hand in his pocket, and as he had money there, he held his pocket and screamed out for assistance. Honor then briefly summed up. He pointed out that the evidence of assault Avas perfectly clear.— The jury, without retiring, returned a verdict of guilty. - His Honor sentenced the prisoner to 12 months' imprisonment Avith hard labour. Indecent Assault. — Thompson McCallum Avas called to surrender to his bail, in answer to the charge of having committed an indecent assault at Devonport. As the accused did not appear he was formally called upon to save his recognisances. — The Crown Prosecutor then said that he had reason to believe that the accused would not appear ; in fact,he had been informed that he was now ] on his Avay from the colony. — His Honor said that he had no hesitation in ordering that the recognisances should be estreated. He- also drew attention to the small amount of the bail, remarking that the recognisances Avere scandalously insufficient. Here was a charge for which the accused was liable to receive seven years' imprisonment, besides several Avhippings, and the sum fixed by the justices was only L 25. He thought that the matter ought to be brought under the notice of the Minister of Justice in order that he might consider how far such men are fitted to retain their position. — Mr Williamson then applied for a warrant for the arrest of Thompson McCallum. — His Honor said of course ho would grant it, but he feared that it Avould be of little avail. He considered it a most disgraceful failure of justice, and he thought that the police, Avho knew about the smallness of the bail, should have brought the matter before the notice of the CroAvn Prosecutor in order that he might have attended to it. — Mr Williamson said that he had been informed that the sergeant Avho conducted the case in the Police Court had tried to get larger bail, but the justices had not granted his request.— His Honor : Well, all I have to say is that I trust that they will not again have the opportunity of acting in a similar manner. Labceny. —Henry Glasson was charged with the larceny of certain property belonging to Mr Henry Bridgman on the 11th June, to wit one pair of trousers, one necktie, and one ring. — Prisoner pleaded guilty. —His Honor remarked that in this case the prosecutor alloAved the prisoner to sleep in the same bedroom Avith him, and as a reAvard the prisoner had stolen his trousers and other articles. He thought that it Avould be better if for some time to come he had to Ayear garments about which it Avas not possible to make any mistake. He was sentenced to six months' imprisonment with hard labour.

The object of Mr Hodge's visit to Wellington has been disclosed. He is in the field as a candidate for tho new city seat.