SUPREME COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, 14 May 1918, Page 7

SUPREME COURT.

NEW PLYMOUTH QUARTERLY SESSION. (Before His Honor the Chief Justice Sir Robert Stout.) The quarterly session of the Supreme Court New (Plymouth was opened yesterday before his Honor the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout). THE GRAND JURY. The following constituted the Grand Jury:—Messrs L. M. M. Monteath, L. A. Nolan, W. J. Penn, T. M. Blackball, J. M. Auld, W. H. Cook, Win. Dingle, H. R. George, W. G. Reid, H. R. Cattley, W. E. Bendall, C. C. Ward, J. McNeill, H. B. Lepper, A. W. Webster, E. W. Garner, A. F. Mollison, H. Cocker, A. Ambury, F. W. Cornwall, G. A. Corney, T. C. List, H. Baily. Mr. W. J. Penn was chosen foreman. HIS HONOR'S CHARGES. In bis charge to the Grand Jury, his Honor said he could congratulate the district on the fact that the crime was not of a bad character, and the cases the jury had to deal with Were not of a serious character. Three men were charged with the theft of wool from a store, but he did not think the case would give much trouble. Two of the men had admitted the theft. They had said that the door of the building was found open, and at the suggestion of one of the men they went in and stole the wool. The man who had made no admission was, however, the owner of the building in which the wool was found, and in that case it was for him to prove how he came into possession of the wool. Considering the admission of the other two men, lie thought the case was so clear as to need no further comment.

The other cases were those in which a number of Maoris were charged with indecency, obstructing and assaulting the police and with taking part in a riot. The cases were not serious except in so far as every ease was serious that interfered with law and order. Law and order was the basis of every community. One Maori was charged with indecency. Instead of apologising to the constable he had become abusive and had used obscene language on a public road, and when the • constable had attempted to arrest him he had resisted and other natives had come to his assistance against the constable. That sort of conduct was always looked upon as serious in English law. In connection with the assault one of the men who had come to the assistance of the policeman had received a bite from one of the Maoris. It was unfortunate that the riot had taken place, and natives as well as Europeans must be made to keep the law. It was evident that some of the men had been drinking, and his Honor expressed himself in no uncertain terms on the question of waste on pleasures during the war. Proceeding, the Chief Justice said the riot might have been serious but for the help rendered by a number of Europeans. His Honor said he desired to state for the information of Justices of the Peace who may not be fully aware of the law, and for the public generally, that it was the duty of a JJP. to read the Riot Act in the case of such a disturbance, and if any one was found continuing the riot within an hour after the reading of the proclamation, such person rendered himself liable to serious punishment under the law, and if under such circumstances any one taking part in a riot was killed the responsibility was his own. If a J.P. had been present on the occasion in question he was probably unaware of the law on the point. It was not only that he could read the Act, but it was his duty to read it, and to call upon the people to disperse. His Honor hero read the clause of the Act relating to the duty and the proclamation required to be read. In the case for consideration the Act had not been read, and the crimes were therefore not so serious as "would otherwise have been the case. It was for the jury to say whether they considered any or all of the men should stand their trial before the Court on the charges preferred against them. The Grand Jury then retired and shortly after returned true bills in the following cases:— Herbert Longstaff, VVm. James Jones and Duncan McArthur, theft of wool. Nbho Te Whiti and 18 other Maoris, charges of a grossly indecent act, assaulting and resisting the police, and taking part in a riot. His Honor then thanked the Grand Jury for their services and discharged them.

PRISONERS TOR SENTENCE. The following prisoners, who had pleaded guilty i n the lower Court, appeared before his Honor for sentence:"— Osiwald Harris, for an unnatural offence. Mr. P. O'Dea (Hawera) appeared for accused, and asked that tho provisions of the First Offenders Proibation Act be extended to the prisoner. He recognised it was difficult to say anything in extenuation of so bestial an act, but he hoped tli&t the age of the prisoner, who was only 14 years of age, would be taken into consideration. Tho boy had been living and working away from home, and had been earning up to 12s per day. His parents were liighly re'&pectalble people, and his employers had expressed their willingness to take him back into their service. His Honor drew attention to the fact that the boy had passed only tho Third Standard. He considered it an injustice to the boy, both oh the part of his parents and the district, that lie should be allowed to make his start in life with such a handicap. He was not willing to send the boy to gaol, nor did ho think he should be allowed freely to mix up with other boys. He would only grant probation if there was someone who would undertake to act as a father to the boy. On that point. Mr. O'Dea explained that the boy could live at his home at Normawhy, where his father would he able to look after him. The boy's father was called, and, in :reply to a question by his Honor as to why the hoy had not been properly brought up. said he hafl bci>n taken R.wav from him by another Ind about IS voors of n<re without his parents' knowledge, find it hnd been a month before he was recovered in Auckland. He woii'd midfu-tfike to control him properly > *V f-iturp. Tv .T.ulw cp ,id fV W had rndorty - „■!!-• Vnn i,n.rV.t r .l Th\„ ~.„, l,: 5 },,,- + "- '1 ' „.1...:+)-„' „„....,„• f„ „ t.nt.inn for llinr> vonrn. with tho tondi-

tions that he must attend some night school, report monthly to tho probation officer, pay f>s per week for 20 weeks towards the coat of tlio prosecution, and if he failed to iullil the order ho would he brought up and sentenced. Wis Honor addressed tho prisoner, and warned him of tiio seriousness of hi s crime, which would stand as a record aguinst him for ever, and urged him, by striving after further education, to seek to fit himself to take a proper place in the .community.

Frederick William Roebuck, Frederick Thomas M'Oegor, and Arthur Leigh Corhett, breaking and entering and theft from tbo store of Greemvay Bros., Okato. Mr. A. H. Johnstone appeared for tbe accused, and asked for leniency. He | pointed out that all tbe men admitted breaking and entering tbe store nt tbe back of tbe shop, and that Rnpi -ind M'Gregor admitted breaking and entering the main shop and stealing goods to tbe value of about £7O. Corbett was only 18 years of age, and was tbe son of respectable parents who h.ad been long residents in tbo district. Two sons bad been to tbe front, one of whom bad been killed, and another was going into camp. There was nothing of criminal intent about tbe accused. On tbe night in question they had all been drinking, and the theft was no doubt committed while tbev were under the influence of drink. Roebuck was a married man with several children, and be also belonged to a farmjly long and respeetaWv associated with tlio district. A number of prominent business men, for whom accused did carting work, had intimated quite voluntarily that, in spite of the lapse of which accused had been guilty, they were still prepared to allow him to undertake their carrying work between New Plvmouth and Okato. M'Gregor was also a member of a very worthy family; but, unfortunately, his record was not altoaether, clear. Ho bad not been in the. district long, and was evidently a man 1 of weak character.

His Honor admitted Corhett to probation for three years, and ordered him to ■ pay £7 rs towards the cost of the proscj"itwn. Ho was also not to enter a hotel or take intoxicating liquor durin" the probationary period. Roebuck and MGregor were each sentenced to two years' reformative treatment, his Honor remarkin? that he wa s dealing very leniently with the prisoners. Reformative treatment was not like being sent to gaol, and the Prisons Board had power, if the men behaved themselves, to release them at any time on probation. . THEFT OF WOOL. Herbert Longstaff was charged that on April 8, 1918, he did steal from L. A. Nolan and Co.'s store at Waitara 3401b of wool, valued at £l9 16s Sd, the property of the New Zealand Government. Mr J. H. Quilliam, who appeared for accused and pleaded guilty, explained that the change of plea had focen made as the first plea of not guilty had been made on account of the decisions of the Magistrate who heard the case, who held that he could not grant bail to a prisoner after he had admitted his guilt. Mr. Quilliam referred to a ruling given % the late Sir Joshua Williams, who had held that bail could not be given unless it was certain that the prisoner would be granted probation. He asked if his Honor would give a ruliw on the point that might he taken as authoritative.

The Chief Justice said ho entirelv agreed with the judgment of the late Sir Joshua Williams. The idea of giving a man bail was to presume his innocence until he had been proced guilty. When a man had admitted his guilt, he could not .he given bail. Mr. Qmilliam thanked his Honor, and remarked that th& judgment had evsdentlybeen misreported. Referring to the prisoner, he said it would be seen from the depositions that accused had been under the influence of limior at the time the offence was committed. He had met Jones and M f Arthur at the former's staibles, and, after drinking together, they had gone to the wool store and found the door open, and one of them had suggested talcing some wool, and the amount mentioned was removed to Jones's store. Soon after arrest accused had confessed the matter. He vms only 33 years of age. and had borne n <rood character. Ho had no criminal intention.

His Honor paid he disliked flendinp young men to gaol for the first time, He asked prisoner why ho was not at the war, and a reply was given that aocnsad had been twice discharged from Trenthani Gamp. Ho was admitted to probation for IS months, and ordered to pay £5 (within six months) towards the cost of the prosecution, and forbidden to enter a hotel or drink intoxicating liquor during the praibtiouary period. William James Jones and Duncan M'Arthur were also charged with a similar offence, and both .pleaded guilty. Mr. F. E. Wilson, who appeared for accused, said there was no doubt that drink was directly responsible for the acts of the men. With regard to M'Arthur, it was his first offence. Jones had been before the Court on several occasions. Ho wished to impress upon his Honor that the stables, which had been tho centre of illicit drinking, had been closed for ever. He hoped the provisions of the Probation Act would be extended to accused.

His Honor said the provisions of the Probation Act wore applicable only to persons of good character. Jt could hardly be e&id that a man who had been guilty of being unlawfully on licensed premises and procuring liquor during the currency of a prohibition order, was a person of good character. He had eventually admitted tho offence, and would be sentenced to 15 .months' hard labor. M'Arthur was placed on probation for a period of lS months, and ordered to pay the sum of £5 (within six months) towards tho cost of t.ne prosecution. jj e was forbidden, during the period of probation, to enter a hotel or consume intoxicating liquor. THE RAHOTU CASES. Noho Te Whiti was chftrged with, on March 28, at Rahotu,' committing a grossly indecent act in a public place, using obscene language, making an aggravated assault and a common assault, and. resisting the police, and assaulting Edward Duggan, to prevent lawful apprehension of himself. Accused was represented'by Mr. P. B. Ktzhenbert, and pleaded not guilty. The following jurv was empanncllcd:' -Messrs W. Jones, T. M. Averv. E. IT. r.ellrinjrer. W. II T>.-.;lle. <■. E. Hall. M. ,T. K Aw.-irrnv: E. J. P.i>rimotoii, IT. Eri-'-V--. V. U C. Allen, W. C'-'-Wt'.i.n. .•• F. Rivward. jjr. Beadle was chosen foreman

utfr. H. R. Billing (Crown P,Koseeutqr) outlined the case, and the evidence given was practically identical with that given in the lower court. Constable O'Xcill, stationed at Rabotu, cross-examined by Mr. Fitsdicrbcrt said he had been in that district for three and a-lialf years.' '.[Tp had passed his examination for a sergeant's rank. He had taken lessons in ju-jitsu, and considered himself a bit aboVe-the ordinary. He admitted that thero was only the width of the end of a shed .between the hotel urinal and the spot where the offence was alleged to have been com-, mitted. He did not think the actual offence committed was a serious one. Tt had been raining heavily during the day, kit it had eased about the time of tlie offence. The "grin" of Te Whiti was not aggravating to him, though ho had protested against it in the lower court. When witness first fell with Te Whit!, witness was on top. He would he surprised to hear that Te Whiti had sustained a broken rib. He did not take off bis coat and hat before he spoke to Te Whiti. Later he admitted asking someone to hold his coat. He received bis coat and hat after the affair was over from a Maori whom he knew as Tui. He considered the advice to let Te Whiti up was- given on account of the hostile attitude of the-Natives, and be considered it prudent to let him -up. He could not say that Te Whiti actually bit him. The accused got three of witness' fingers in his mouth and bit them badly. Regarding tbe assertion that .be bad on the following nav pimped a 4ft Gin fence, he bad done it because there were several Natives about who would like to have seen him down and out. Re-examined by Mr. Billing, witness said" be bad. previous to the occurrence, been on tbe best of-terms with' % the accused. ■■■■■>:'• COASTWISE LAWGUAfcS; Walter C G. Green, fafmefy Rahotu, gave evidence. In cross-esamination witness said he was satisfied; accused pushed into O'Neill first. Hevhad said that if something was. not dtone> about the Maoris soon it would be tame to migrate. ' (. ~, In explanation to bis Honor,.;witness said bad language on the part'of •' the Maoris in the district was veiy>'(common,. Every time a bit of a row>tbok place the language was disgraeefulii»*iTlio Judge replied tbait iff Such was the case it was time the Rahoti*'people were told it must cease, whether the offenders were Maoris nr Europ*ans.

Mr. Fitzherbert said lie did not believe Rahotu was any worse thaniany- other place in Mew Zealand, and fhW certain words had by common acceptaftflb become almost classical. --n-rn This provoked a sharp the Judge, wfco said he did not bJMeve that vvch was the ease, and he added: "Ihave b"e n in New Zealand longer .'fein you, Mr Fitzhcrbert." ' : '' , i '> Mr. FHzberbert replied that his Honor had proibaWv not had the Same< facilities as he had for judging in such flniHflcrs. Private Paul Willeox. of thS'yJSth Reinforcements, and John Christdpfoe'r Carr, cheese factory manager, also'give evidence. I'tiil*THE DEFENCE. ■'' i"' After explaining his case.to the Court, Mr- Kitzhei'bert called accused to give evidence. Nohomirangi Te Whiti, farmer, Parihaka, said he had had tea at the Rahotu Hotel on the day in question, and described the alleged indecent act. O'Neill said something to him, and he replied that 'That's got nothing to do with you." When witness told h'im that, O'Neill seized witness by the coat and threw him on the road- Witness said his chest was hurt, the constable standing on him trying to put the handcuffs on. One rib was broken. Cross-examined by Mr. Billing, witness said when he went into the urinal he saw Tu'hi and Wene there. He did not ssf> any others there, though there might have been some. He had had only three drinks all that dav. They were medium "sh«ndie3." The Maoris had not had a by-meeting about the case, and witness had not talked with uny other Natives aibout the case- When he came out of the urinal ha found one 'button of his trousers unfastened. Bpfnre he discovered that he had gone Voont the lensih of the court room. He was just close to O'Neill when he found the button undone and fastened it up. He denied using the words of which he had been accused. When witness was on the ground with O'Neill the Maoris were all standing some distance away. The Europeans were clapping their hands and calling out, "Go on, Dan!"

In reply to his Honor, witness said lie did not say to- O'Neill, when he got up first, "You ( go to b ." Moana Tulii, Rahotu, said ho was at the hotel on the night of the row.- Ho saw Te Whiti come out of the hotel, and he also saw Constable O'Neill, who asked Te Whiti what he was doing there, anil Te Whiti answered, "Nothing!—what tint got to do with you?" He also heard Te Whiti say, Do what you b well like." O'Neill then threw his hat and coat off, and closed with Te Whiti. He called out to witness to pick up his coat and fliat. The two men fell on the ground,, and when To Whiti got up he caught hold- of the verandah post. O'Neill then got hold of Te Whiti by the two ears, and banged his head against the verandah postTo his Honor: He heard Te W)iiti say to O'Neill, "Do what you like." After a good deal of trouble, the witness admitted he had heard him use a sanguinary word. Tuahinekora ("Big Dtek") said the first he saw was Te Whiti and O'Neill having a bit of a .scuffle. He saw O'Neill knock Te Whiti's head against the verandah post. He pushed Te Whiti away, and he left hold of tje verandah post. The Court adjourned at 5.15 p.m. till 10 o'clock this morning.. PALMBRSTON NORTH SESSIONS. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Palmerston North May 13. The Supreme Court' opened this morning with Mr. Justice Hosking on the bench. Frances Elizabeth Ga-with, against whom a true bill was returned,, pleaded guilty on. three charges of forgery, and two eharges of detaining letters while postmistress of Kelvin Grove. She was ordered to come up for'"sentence when called upon, and to pay £6 towards the cost of tho prosecution. . A true bill was brought in against W. J. Pong-hie. for theft of £49 from tho person of J. Mayne.