SUPREME COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2552, 7 September 1893, Page 1

SUPREME COURT.

At Auckland James Griffin and William Younger, for Prosser’s safe robbery and the Robert Burns Hotel robbery, were sentenced to 3 years’ imprisonment. Numerous convictionsy were furnished from the Central Police Court, Sydney, against Griffin, At Wellington James Collins and John Douglas, two young men, were charged with assaulting and robbing a young man named Gresham White. Prisoners were found girlty and sentenced to two years’ hard labor each. Ernest Gundlach, for the larceny of a clock from the Imperial Hotel, was convicted and sentenced to two years. At Dunedin the hearing of the charge against Sidney Maxwell for libelling Dr Truby King, of Seacliffe Asylum, was continued on Saturday. Dr King’s crossexamination was concluded, and Mr Stewart, the head attendant, gave evidence contradicting the statements in the libellous letter as to the bad treatment of four patients. Dr Batchelor, Dr Brown, and Dr Jeffcoat, gave evidence as to Dr King’s qualifications, and deposed to having ex-mined three of the patients in question without discovering any sign or symptom that they had not been properly treated. William Kerr gave evidence as to the feeding of a patient who died. For the defence Mr Woodhouse contepdqded that the bringing qf a qh ar g Q °f criminal libe| \yaa a b4 r shimoqe§d|ng. The plea of not guilty had begn put in, which raised the question of privilege, and whether there was a libel. Then there was a question of criminal intention. There was no feeling against Hr King; it was a perfectly fair and honest motive to seek to have so-called abuses sifted. The public did not know all that went on in an asylum. Was it not strange, for one, thing, that there was no entr r of a patient in the last stages qf consumption having fallen qqt Pi *1 window,, excepting to enter it as an attempted escape? regarded the' patient whq djqd ? there was no mention in the repo 1 , t that he was being held by two men when ho died. These were the sort of things the public had a right to know. As to the plea of justification the other side had relied on a theory They said fbqt thq things complained of equip pqt have happened because the i uleg forbade their happening. He (Mr Woodhouse) wo.uld rely op facta j roles had been b.rqkqn. John Clarkson, a charge attendant, in his evidence declared he had seen maggots in a sore on the leg qt one patient. Another attendant ’ named Blaney also deposed that ho saw what he took fq b,p maggots, Edwlp Tattersal, exaitondaut, aLo swore he saw maggots in a sore. There was no mistake as ho saw an attendant, Perry, take the patient to a bath and wash them out. Defendant in his o video or also declared that he had seen maggots, o» two occasions. Contrary to anticipation, the libel case in which Dr Truby King is prosecutor, was not concluded on Tuesday. The defendant was subjected|to close examination, which las! ed the whole afternoon, Three ex-attendants gave evidence for the defence. By that time it was so late that it was decided to put off counsel’s address and the summing up till next day. At Hokitika there were only two criminal cases, and both prisoners wore acquitted—Mrs Hayes fur arson and Milcheii for perjury. In the latter case Mr Joyce, conn ml for the accused, relied on the fact that accused was not sober when the assault, out of which the perjuiy arose, was committed, and therefore it could not be held that he had a knowledge that his evidence was PLe, The majority of the Crown witnesses evidently had a strong leaning to the accused, and the jury only took five minutes to return a, verdict of “Not Guilty.” In the libel case Mitchell v. Bavau a verdict was given for plaintiff for £SO, though the Judge summed up very strongly for defendant.