SUPREME COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 256, 8 March 1911, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTING. TUESDAY.. Al Altai 7, 1911. The Supreme Court sessions opened yesterday morning before Air. Justice Edwards. GRAND JURY. The following were empanelled for tin. Grand Jury: George Varey Tate, Arthur Ambury, Alexander James Aklntosh, Walter Ainhury, James Clarke, Robert James Deare, Robert Owen Ellis, Leonard Bernard Grimstone, Charles Oetavius Ilawke, Frank Messenger Michael llealy, Frederick Joseph Morris, Donald Kenneth Morrison. William Charles Nixon, William George lteid, James Thomas Mannix, Alex. McHardy, It. VV. D'Arcy Robertson, Minchin Rudd, James D. Sole, Harry Stocker, Charles H. uStott, Win. Lichfield Newman. Mr. Newman was chosen foreman of the jury. HIS HONOR'S CHARGE. His' Honor, in addressing the jury, said there would be presented bills against seven persons. None of the offences called lor special comment except one. The offences were of the usual sort, such as unfortunately were only too frequent in New Zealand. There was a case of carnally knowing a girl under sixteen years; a Maori named Martha Tainui was charged with theft; there was a c«9e of cattle-stealing; another case of theft from a dwelling; and also two charges of false pretences. None of these involved any difficulty—in point of law, which was all'he coulu direct them upon. The last was against, a man of hitherto good character, named George Gedge, who had been irritated by some young men and had discharged a gun at them. In various forms the indictment would be presented, and the question of intent would require to be proved. But the undisputed circumstances were such that it was their duty to return a true bill in the case. Even the question of intent was not their concern; they heard only one side, and they had to decide on that whether there was a case for further enquiry.

True bills were returned against Fredcrick Cooper, charged with theft from a dwelling; Cornelius Allen,- charged with two charges of false pretences; Martha Tainui, charged with theft from a dwelling; against George Gedge on the last count, of assault causing actual bodily harm (no bill was returned on each of the first three counts); and against Lewis John Pepperell, charged with carnally knowing a girl under sixteen years of age. The Grand Jury brought in a true bill against Albert Edward Miv'-rwick, charged with cattle stealing, and nfter His Honor had thanked them for their services, they were discharged. THEFT FROM DWELLING. Frederick Cooper was charged that on 10th January, 1911, he did steal seven shillings from the dwelling-house of George Howard Carrington, Inglewood, and also on an alternative count to a charge of common theft of the said seven shillings. Accused pleaded guilty. Asked if he had anything to say, prisoner said that he was charged before two Justices with theft of 7s, but when brought before the Magistrate's Court lie was charged with stealing £1 10s.' He was ready to plead guilty to the theft of 7s, which be had handed back, but not to the charge of theft of £1 10s.

His Honor read a list of convictions, which prisoner admitted to be correct, and which showed that from 1903 onwards accused had been convicted of eight offences, three being for breaking and entering, two theft, two vagrancy, and one illegally on the premises. The last convictions were recorded on February 3, 1908, when on two charges of breaking and entering Cooper was sentenced to three years' imprisonment with hard labor. "Why. you have only recently come out of gaol," said His Honor. Accused said he had been bushfalling for five months before he went to Inglewood.

His Honor: Well, why didn't you go on bushfalling, and leave the man's till alone.

The prisoner was sentenced to six months' imprisonment in New Plymouth gaol, and on the expiration of that term he will be detained for reformatory purposes for a period not exceeding three years. FALSE PRETENCES. Cornelius Allen pleaded not guilty to charges of having obtained £5 us from John Blair Crossan, by false pretences, to wit, by means of a valueless cheque, purporting to be drawn on the Bank of New Zealand, Tiuiaru, at Kaponga on January 2nd last; and of having obtained 4.i 3d from, and professed to pay au account due by him to, Allen Bros., by means of a valueless cheque for £2 lis, also purporting to be drawn on the Bank of New Zealand, Tiniaru, at Kaponga, on January 19, 1911. Mr. X. S. Weston, Crown Prosecutor, conducted the case for the Crown. Accused was not represented by counsel. The jury consisted of James Ilayden, Nicholas Greincr, John Goddard, I. G. B. Forrester, P. H. Butler, Alfred Howe, H. F. Russell, >S. Robottom, W. G. Calender. C. T. Rundle. Wm. Fraser, Jas. Smith. Mr. Russell was chosen foreman.

Arthur John Richards, wheelwright, Okato, said that on January 2 he met the accused, who said he wanted a cheque as the bank was closed, and he gave him a blank cheque, which was Idled in by witness and handed to the accused. He fold accused he had better get some one from Stratford who know him to endorse it. Accused was sober. John Blair Crossan, laborer, said he met accused in Stratford, and on visiting three hotels had a drink at each. The cheque (produced), which he recognised, was refused in the hotel, and on coming out witness said there would be no difficulty in cashing it if it was all right, and accused replied, "ft is as right as rain." Witness got the cheque cashed at On Kee's shop. Accused gave witness 4s out of the money. The Chinaman handed the cheque back to witness in a fortnight's time. To accused: Never knew him by name until after he gave the cheque. They went into three hotels. When told that it was Davis' (the stableman's) name on the back be was quite satisfied, as he know the man.

The prisoner pointed mil tliat the offence was alleged in the indictment as having been committed at Kapon«a, whereas the incident nnw appeared to have occurred in Stratford.

His Honor thereupon amended tlie indictment.

Witness said accused was sober at the, time. Tie gave the cheque to the sergeant because lie was told it was no pood. Cliinjr Chonjf, storekeeper, Stratford, said lie had known Mr. Crossan for some years, and cashed the cheque (produced) for him. The cheque "was sent back from his bank as valueless. Detective Boddam, New Plymouth, said that when he arrested accused on 20th January, he replied, "I know nothing about it. T was drunk at the time." Witness escorted accused to

New Plymouth next day, and on reading over the charge again, accused said, "1. have been trying to remember, but the whole thing is a blank to me. I was in delirium tremens at the time. As far as the bank at Timaru is concerned, you need not bother about witnesses from there, as I have no banking account there or anywhere else." He added that since the affair he had been in New Plymouth prison for medical treatment.

Harold Allen, storekeeper, Kaponga, said that on Kith January witness gave accused a blank cheque at his request so that he might square accounts, and ho filled it in for £2 lis. Witness told him he heard his cheques were valueless. Accused said it was all right, as his people had paid more money into his account at the bank at Timaru. The cheque was given in payment of the account, and witness gave him 4s 3d change. On 21st January it was paid into the bank at Kaponga, and on the 28th was returned as valueless.

Constable Wade, Eltham, said that the accused when charged with the offence said the writing on the cheque was in Allen's handwriting, and that he thought he had given an order on his previous employer. He also said he did not know why he had written the cheque, as he had no account in any bnnk, and must have been mad. This closed the case for the Crown. Accused elected to give evidence on his own behalf. Regarding giving the i cheque to Crossan, he remembered leaving Kaponga and drinking at Eltham, but did not remember being in Stratford or meeting Richards. He had been drinking heavily ever since Christmas. As to the other cheques, he went to Allen Bros, to tell them he was going back to his old employer. Did not remember signing the cheque, and was astonished when charged by Constable Wade with the offence. He had been under medical treatment before being arrested. 'To Mr. Weston: I can't make out how I could be sober when I did such tilings. His Honor: If you were not sober,how could that signature look like it is? Do you deny that the writing is yours? —When I saw it I denied it was my writing. Accused: I wasn't drunk when I gave Mr. Allen the cheque, but I had no recollection of doing it. I don't wish the jury to disbelieve Mr. Allen in what he said.

In summing up, His Honor' said it was perfectly clear that the. cheques had not been signed by a man suffering from delirium tremens. If the jury found that accused was drunk when he signed the cheques they would acquit him; if not, they would find him guilty. The jury retired for only two or three minutes, and then brought' in a verdict of guilty. , ,i Prisoner, who had nothing to say, was then sentenced. His Honor 'maid prisoner had given a great, deal of trouble one way and another with drunkenness.

Prisoner: That was some years ago, your Honor.

His Honor: No, it isn't years ago. .You began this sort of thing in 1904 not passing valueless cheques, but getting drunk-. For drunkenness and breaches of prohibition orders several convictions "had been ■'recorded against the prisoner since 1004 1 , 'While in July, 1009, at Rangiora, he had received seven days' imprisonment for theft. Apparently, if prisoner kept sober he would be honest—he eould not say that about everyone. Prisoner was obviously going from bad to worse. He would be sentenced to three years' reformative treatment, which meant that at any time up to the period the Prison Board might release him if they were satisfied he was on the wav to reform.

In reply, to accused, His Honor said accused would be kept at haTd laborwhicli would be good for him—until he satisfied the Prisons Board that he should be liberated. THEFT FROM DWELLING. Martha Tainui, a half-caste, was charged that on Bth November, 1910, she did steal several articles, the property of Euphemia Mcllvride, Opunake, of the value of £27, and also certain bedding and household linen of the value of £4 12s Gd, the property of Thomas Knowlgg.

Accused pleaded not guilty, and was undefended. Mr. T. S. Weston, Crown Prosecutor, appeared for the Crown.

The following jury was empanelled: Jamea T. Collins, John Press, W. J. Penn, A. W. Bullot, It. 0. Steffenson, A. H. Steeds, 0. W. Sole, W. G. Cullender, James Smith, P. D. Butler,' E. Beekbessinger, James Hayden. Mr. Penn was chosen foreman.

Mr, Weston called George Mcllvridc, clerk, who deposed to his mother being too ill to appear at court, being attended by Dr. Collins in Wellington. His Honor allowed the depositions oi Mrs. Mcllvridc to be put in which contained inter alia:

Euphemia Mcllvride, wife of Mr. Mcllvridc, late licensee of the Opunake Hotel, deposed to her personal'property being packed and sent to Wanganui, and on opening the boxes she found that some underclothing was missing. The property produced in court she identified as her own. Some of the articles were being worn by the accused when she saw her at the gaol. The value of the property lost was estimated at about .130, and that of the articles in accused's possession at about £24.

Constable Hickman, Opunake, said he told accused at the hotel when enquiry was being made into the easu that some things were missing, and she said there were some things which she had kept in her room to look after. She gave up a blouse, a petticoat, ana a few other things which were hanging on tlie wall. She said there was noticing else. A wicker basket and two trunks attracted his attention, and in reply to a question accused said all the things in the trunks belonged to her, that they were her property, that the trunks had never been opened since, she left Urenui, and there was no occasion to look at them. On looking through them, however, witness found most of the articles missed by Mrs. Mcllvride. Accused said the property belonged to her. Some of the,property was being worn by her when she was taken into custody.

The constable was subjected to (i bairiing cross-examination by accused as to where he found the goods, the blouse, petticoat, and so on, being taken article by article, to the amusement of the public and the mystification of the witness. His Honor referred scleral times lo_f.be mixed-up state of (he exhibits and of the case at this stage. Thomas Knowles, hotelkeeper. Opunake, said one of his. predecessors in the hotel was a man han'iod Black, and some of the articles referred to in the charge were marked "Black." Accused admitted that some of the articles belonged to him. If the articles were his, as accused said., witness did not give them to her. He had not given permission to her to take anything away. To accused: Tho condition of the hotel when he took it over was "not too good." Accused's behaviour while in his house was very 'good. She had the run of the. house, and had lie™ a very good girl. George Mellvride was recalled. When he said lis identified certain articles as being found in accused's box, she exclaimed excitedly: "That's a lie; I

accuse George Alcllvride of perjury." Accused to witness; What did you try to do to me on Friday? I .accuse you of assault. Also V accuse you ol assault on a girl under lfl years of,age at Opumike. You thought you could do what you liked with me.(.speaking to the jury): I have only been before the court for drunkenness, and i was not drinking then.

To witness: Did yon not send someone to bribe me?— No.

Did you not hear there was a case pending, and did not want me to go on with it?—No, 1 am prepared to stand here on any case.

Do you deny, Constable Hickman, that you ordered the man away?—l told him he could not talk to you, and ordered you inside. Accused: Because George Alcllvride could not do with me as he liked, I am here on a charge of theft. He gave me the articles as presents, and I took them as such. His Honor advised the accused to confine herself to questions. She was not improving her case, by conducting it in that manner.

Margaret O'Grady, matron at New Plymouth gaol, gave evidence as to the clothing accused was wearing at the time of her arrest. The accused's depositions at the lower court were put in. Accused elected to give evidence. She said she did not ask for favors, but only justice at their hands. Some of the articles were given her by the AlcHvride's. The foreman said'.the jury wished to know how accused accounted for the photograph being in the box which had not. been opened since leaving Urenui. —Accused: The box that-was in was not one of those she referred to as not having been opened.

In a lengthy statement to the jury accused drew the attention of :the court to the fact that there was no motive shown for taking the goods. It was not likely she would leave -stolen clothing hanging up in her room. Some of the articles were given to her by George Mcllvride.

His Honor said lie never saw greater confusion in a matter like this in the court. Probably the jury were more capable of understanding the mysteries of the various articles of drapery than His Honor was. In answer to the foreman, Constable Hickman said the information acted upon came from Mrs. Mcllvride, who wrote to her son.

After a short retirement, the jury returned a verdict of "Not Guilty," and Tainui was discharged from custody after a few words of advice from His Honor, for which she said "Thank you." ' A SHOOTING AFFRAY. George Gedge was charged that on 17th February, 1011, on the Toko road, he caused actual bodily harm to Lionel W. Kirkby by shooting. Mr. T. *S. Weston appeared for the Crown,' and defendant, who pleaded guilty, was represented by Mr. R. Spence (Stratford). George William Gedge. laborer, living near Douglas, eleven miles from Stratford, said he had lived about eighteen years in the Stratford district. He was living with four of a family, but had six daughters an* one son altogether. The tents were quite close to the road. He went there to work as a farm laborer in February 1010, and took his children with him, as he eould not get a bouse near by. Accused gave instances of annoyance which he had been submitted to'for the past twelve months, stonethrowing, hooting, yelling, dirty talk, and filthy language." During the Christmas and New Year holidays the annoyance was worse. Witness said the ages of the girls at home were 23, I(i, and 14 years, and the boy was twtlve vcars old. The eldest girl- complained that on February 1") a man came and made improper proposals to her;, the same man called again, and enquired for the eldest girl. On the Wtli two boys'went to Douglas about 8 o'clock. One of • them made a squeaking noise as they passed. They returned about 11.30. lie was not asleep, as he was worried; he heard vile expressions from one voice calling at him; he jumped up and got. his gun, and fired towards the road, pointing the gun to> wards the ground, to frighten them. He did not fire at them, as if he did he must have shot them dead. The shot must have glanced from the wires on the fence. Accused was considerably affected at -this stage, and expressed his sorrow that the boy Kirkby should have been the one to be hurt. He was in a small house close to the spot before he lived in the tent, and had never been molested. He had now. struck camp and gone to Stratford. He. left.because he did not care to have his children remain alone in the tent, supposing tie was put away from them. To Mr. Weston: He had not seen the two boys before, but he recognised the voice as one who had been calling out often before. He never had a quarrel with either of them. He would swear the language mentioned by him was used by the party... He had no intention of hurting the bo.vs when iie fired. The gun was a double-barrelled one. but he discharged only one barrel. He did not know until' Sunday (two days later) Unit In: li;ul hi; the young man.

deorg'ma Eliza Co!'-.' daughter of Hie accused, gave evidence a* to larrikinisni annoying 'them v.liilc at the camp, and also of having complained to her father of the conduct of a .man who had called at the camp p.nd made an improper proposal. On the night of the 1 7th one of the boys, mi pacing, used bad language. Evidence as to accused's character was th»n called.

Frank St. George, fanner, reading at Douglas, said lie had known the prisoner for about seven years a* a i|iiiet. industrious, hard-working and most inoffensive man. On several occasions- witness hail noticed instances of htrrikinism opposite the camp. Gedge had worked for witness two or three times during the year, and laid complained to him, but he had advised liini ;o take no notice. He was about the last person in the world he should suspect of shooting at anyone. Edwin Walter, farmer. r.-.-idnng near Douglas for seventeen year-, said he knew fledge very well, end had always known him as a s'eady, sober and industrious man, not quarrelsome, and decidedly not the sort to injure another. Mr. Spenee said he had another witness to call as to character, and asked that she might be heard ne\i morning. Ilis Honor agreed, and the Court adjourned until 1(1 o'clock this morning, the accused being libera f.-tt without bail until that boor.