Supreme Court.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVII, Issue 7853, 20 June 1905, Page 2

Supreme Court.

MONDAY, J I'NE 10, 1905. j I nii'h.ie Ilis Honour Mr Justice Edwards.) —Grand Jury.— ' l i, e following were sworn as tho 'iJn.nd Jury Henry Cray, A/ E. Kikes, J. C. Webstor, F. F. Fabian, 0. M. Arrowsmith, G. Kiddle, Hobcrt Herd, A. H. Steeds, K, Snowball (foreman), A. Ambury, L. MoK. Monteath, F. Watson, J. 0. George, A. E. Fletcher, E. H. Tribe, Jus. Hawkins, J. W, Wilson, B. Wells, H. Ward, J. 0. Waddy, C. E. Baker.

—The Charge.— His Honour, in charging the Grand Jury, said he had to congratulate them on the extreme lightness of thi j calendar, showing the evident prosperity of tho district und the wellbeing of the people. In tho charge of carnally knowing a girl under 10 years of age. tho evidence showed that the case was perfectly clear, and if they believed that' evidence and thut the girl was under 16 years [old, it was their duty to return a |true bill. There might be defence that accused believed the girl wa# over 16. but tha't did not concern the Grand Jury, as it wan a matter for the petty jury to cortsideV. HU Honour then remitted the Grand Jury to their dutks. At 11.30 they returned into Court with a, true bill. They were thaaked by His Honour for their services and discharged. —Breaking and Entering.—

Whakaruru Whatitiri, a native, wis brought up for sentence on a charge of breaking and, lentcifiig and theft at Eltham and Inglewood.

On being asked through all interpreter what he had to say, prisoner admitted his guilt. I His Honour said prisoner had already served a sentence of two years for a similar offence. On the present charge prisoner tewl pleaded guilty to 'breaking and entering ttt.'e.>. different shops. He was liablo to a sentence of foureeen years on oath charge. The sentence of the Court would be that prisoner be imprisoned for four years with hawl labour on each charge, the sentences to be concurrent.

Prisoner asked if lie ojuld not pay a line, but His Honour baid sentence had been passed and the case was done with. —A Serious Offence.— Jonathan Adams, a well-dressel young man, was indicted withi unlawfully carnally knowing a girl under the age* of 16, at Mangatoki. Mr Kerr prosecuted, ond Mr FitzHerbert defended tho accused. The following were the jury W. H. l'hipps, John E. Russell, G. Swan, John' Fraser, Robert Evans, K. A. Wood, Ernest J,. Sole, Fred. Asher, Gustavo Tisch (Foreman), Fijank S. Johns, W. J. Honoyfiold, Robert Thomas.

Mr Kerr outlined the facta ofi the case, and called the girl' 'on whom tho offence was committed. She sta ted that she was ,15 years of age. Witness stated what occurred, and that next day she told her father.

To Mr Fitzherbert : Denied having told accused she would nuke it hot for him. To His Honour : Accused had com initted the olfence on three occasions. A younger sister of last witness gave corroborative evidence. The father of the girl handed S«i a certificate of her birth, showing that she was 15 years and /4 montlb old last April. Ho slated that accused was in his employ. His daughter complained to him of accused's conduct on the night of April 25. After this witness waited up ever) •night to keep watch, and on the following Saturday week tho accused again came into the bedroom, and witness called out: "Hands up, or I'll shoot you." Accused promptly cleared out of thei window, and witness went straight away for a clonstable, and madu a charge against prisoner, who was arrested about 11 a.jii. on Sunday. Prisoner then denied that lie was in the house. Chas. H. Wake, a medical practitioner at Eltham, gave evidence ol tho result of his examination of the girl.

To Mr FltzherbeH : Tor her age the girl was well developed. Constablo Kedigan testified to arresting prisoner on May 7 on a charge of indecent assault. At tfas station accused said thai fcis previous statement as to' not being in the girl's room was not true, and he had only made it to save the girl's I tion.

Mr Fitzherbert said ho did not propose to call any evidence on u<<cused's part. He submitted that the evidence was mainly of a hearsay nature and should be treated gingerly. He was proceeding to state the law on the case when His Honour interrupted and pointed out that it was for the prisoner to prove that he was deceived as to the gift's age. Mr Fitzherbert then called Jonathan Adams, the who stated that in a conversion with the girl sho stated her ago was 16 last December. He could neither read nor write.

To Mr Kerr : Denied admitting to Constable Hedigan that he had been in the girl's room. To His Honour: All that the constable had sworn to was false. The constable told him that if he pleaded guilty he would save his character and lawyer's costs. . Had never been near the girl's room. All that the father had stated was false,

Hiß Honour ;Do you really expect the jury to believe you ? Witness: What I havo stated is true. lamon my oath. ' To "Mr FiteheiiUert : The girl had threatened witness on one occasion to pay him out. It arose over a quarrol about another girl. To His Honour : Considered tho girl 'brought the charge against him on account t>f jealousy.

Mr Fitzherbert then addressed the jury for the defence, contending that if the evidence of the younger Sister was to be believed there was no offence committed on the occasion. His Honour summed up, pointing out the duty .in»posgd on tho jury of protecting young girls from such serious offences as that with -which the prisoner was charged. At 2.1 (> the jury returned with the verdict of "Guilty." Prisoner, asked if he had anything to say, made no reply. I Mr Fitzherbert asked for leniency |on account of the accused's youth. H« pointed out that there had beep I nothing previously aguinst the nccused.

His Honour said the. offence was beyond all doubt a very serious one. It was an outrage upon morality, the laws of hospitality, and every feeling of decency, Of course, tho present case was not one of the worst of this class of cases because the girl was not sp young as, unfortupately, stomp who were sometimes exposed to attacks of persons like the accufcjd. Still the case was: a bad one, and he would Impose a sentence sufficiently long to lot persons of depraved disponition» understand that this sort of thing "Would be severely put down. Accused was sentenced to two years' imprisonment with hard labour.

CIVH, CASES,

—Actlbn Settled W, Foolo v. W. Hiif^hoy—This was | a claim for £319 9s fid on a promissory note, and a counter, claim by Hughes for £9OO and £lO2. Mr Samuel, with him Mr Qufllinm appeared for tHo plaintiff, an® Mc T, S. Weston for tho Hefenßdanfc. Mr Samuel stated that as a (rarfult of a conference between counsel a settlement had been arrive.! at, tb',' defendant urnx'scrvedly with-

imputations of j uh.ch tho counter' claims «eeu:e3 to' imply. Defendant bad also fl*tlalleil ' the plaintiff's claim in (ull Mr Wilton conßrmaj the terms o( tho settlement, and stated that had the (ull facts of the esse b&m known ( earlier the ucUon would not huvo ] been brought. ( A verdict was then entwed in cc j cjniiince with tlie terms ot tiw sevtWinent. I —A Compromise.— I In the Cane of L. ltundall v. H. It. I'.rewir, a claim (or £250 damages fur breach of an agrumitnt to purchase, Mr QuiUiani, who apitcnred inr thu plaintiff, stated that a settlement had been arrived at by \vhm.h tho defendant agreed to Judgment for . £9O, with £6 W* costs. Mr Rich, tnond appeared on behalf of the de- • fendunt.

His Honour entered Judgment accordingly. —Adjournments.— On the application of Mr Wilson, tho case of M, C. Valentine v. A. H. Aitkcn, a claim for specific performance and damage*?. '"'as adjourned to iho next sitting of tha Court. The case of McGregor v: Van Asch (a claim for damages for alleged slanderl was, on the application of Mr Quilliam (on behalf of Mr Roy) j set at the bottom of the list in ni- : der that Mr, Roy might communicate with Mr Harnicoat, of Wungnnui, to ascertain whether the cost. shall be gone on with this sitting. Mr Fitzheitbcrt. for the' plaintiff,, asked that the case of F, IW, Watts v. J. Hawkins, a claim for comiiuxsion (removed from the 8.11. Court, Now Plymouth), Ue> at* down fo> Thursday morning. Mr O. Samuel, for the defendant, agreed to the adjournment, which was made accordingly. In the action Alfred Bayly v. Alex. Campbell, a claim for specific performance, Mr T. S. Weston asked for an adjournment' to the following day, Mr Malone, for the plaintiff) said be was prepared to proceed and asked for tho costs of the day, which were allowed.

—Motion for Judgment.— Mr Quilliam moved for Judgment in the ' case of, Weddol and Co. v. A. Fantbam and F, Bayly, in the. terms of an agreement fitod, by which Fantham and Bayly agreed to pay the plaintiffs the sum of £1350. On--ly £IOO hod (been paid, and under the terms of the agreement it waa set out that plaintiffs coulff move for judgment for the balance. The Egmont Fanners' Union, who had agreed ip pay £350 under the same, deed, had dischargod tholr HaWlitJ'* The motion bding unopposed, His Honour entered Judgment against the defendants for £llffiO, with £5 8s costs.

The Court at 2.45 p.m. ndjounred to 10 a.m. the following day. IN CHAMBBHS,

On the motion of Mr Kerr, .an order was made under "The Unclaimed Ijands Act, 1894," vesting section 263, Inglewood townshfp, in the IHiblic Trustee. ,

Mr J. B. Boy moved fat and obtained orders granting pfobate aa tollows:—He Mlohael Stleller. doceased. probate to Hose Stieller, executrix ; re William Edmund James Bullock, deceased, late of New' Plymouth, settler, projjnte to Elizabeth Ann llullock, executrine ; ro Wlilliaut (iribbon, deceased, late of Awakino, retired slorekeeper, probate to John Barton Roy, solicitor. New Plymouth, executor. Under "Tho Chattels Transfer Act. 1880," Mr Govett, on behalf of Mr H. Caplen, Mawera, obtained an extension of time to Juno 20, within which tii register a certain ■ instrument dated May 12, 1905, made between Alex. Denbam and the Awatuna Co-operative Dairy Factory Co. (lAd.)