A REVOLTING CASE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 185, 3 February 1912, Page 5

A REVOLTING CASE.

AN INHUMAN BRUTE. GETS TWENTY YEARS GAOL. .JUDGE'S STRONG REMARKS. By Telegraph— ¥vw Association. Wellington, Last Night. A most revolting case was unlolded in the Supreme Court to-day,, when Albert Henry Hughes, a man about twentysix years of age, was tried on a charge of, on December 9, 1911, at Petone, committing a serious offence against a girl nine years of age. Mr. Justice Chapman was on the bench, and Mr. H. H. Ostler, of the Crown Law Office, was Crown Prosecutor.

Prisoner, who pleaded not guilty, was defended by Mr. W.' Cracroft Wilson. The court was cleared during the hearing of the case. The jury retired shortly after 5 p.m., and returned in about ten minutes with a verdict of guilty. His Honor stated, in reply to prisoner's counsel, that he proposed to pass sentence immediately. Mr. Wilson thereupon said that he felt bound to mention the prisoner's weakness of character. His Honor: It is of no use in a case of this sort.

Mr. Wilson: He has had two kinds of fever, and has been under the doctor at Otaki on several occasions.

His Honor replied that that was entirely a matter for the gaol authorities. Mr. Wilson: I bow to your Honor's opinion, bin; 1 felt it my duty to mention this matter.

His.Honor: You are quite right to do so, Mr. Wilwi; ,

Addressing the prisoner, 'His- Honor said: "This is the very worst case I have ever had the misfortune to deal with; the most cruel and brutal outrage I ever heard of. You took this little girl away from her home and ruthlessly violated her in that lonely spbt. I have kpown 1 people in my time hanged for such of-' fences in the neighboring States, but the leniency of the law now allows me to pass a less severe sentence on vou. I do not think it necessary to pass sentence of life, although J may have some difficulty in giving my reasons for not. doing so. The sentence I am going to pass must, however, be a verw lon<* term indede, so long that I do not aleem it necessary to add the punishment of flogging, which I had done in some; cases that have come before me. The only sentence consistent with my duty that I can pass for this outrage is twenty years' imprisonment with hard l^jor. Addressing the jury, His Honor" continued: "This has been a painful case for you as well as for me. It may. be that many people may think excessive the sentence I have just passed,, but the law fixes the maximum penalty for, such an offence as hard labor for life.'*

His Honor repeated that he difficulty in giving reasons for imposing the sentence tSat he had; but it had been his endeavor to stamp out i such outrages on young girls, for the reason that publication of the details of these cases was frequently forbidden, and because the newspapers, for the sake of tire decency of their own columns, did not enlarge upon them, even when publication was not forbidden. /The public were not quite aware of the fact that the offences were so frequent. "Certainly," His Honor concluded, "Tihey are not often attended with such violence, but I'can inform you that in a few years T have tried over one hundred of these cases." His Honor thanked the- jury for their attention to the ease, and 'discharged them from further attendance.