SUPREME COURT.-WESTLAND DISTRICT.
CRIMINAL SITTINGS.
(Before his Honor Mb Justice Gresson.)
Tuesday, July 24. The Court was re-opened at 10 o'clock
HOUSEBREAKINQ.
James M'Gavin, with having on the 18th day of April, 1866, feloniously broken and entered into the dwelling house of one Mulius Nelron, at Coal Creek, and stolen therefrom certain moneys and a pair of trousers, the property of one Muliua Nelson.
Prisoner pleaded Not Guilty, and the following jury were sworn :—: — Smiuel Alcorn (foreman), Jamea Fitzsimmonds, Henry Baiiiard, Thomas Back, Edward Bonar, Matthew Edgar, Henry Elliott, Peter DeLoree, Thomas Gib.-^oti, Thomas North, Donald Potter, David Brocklehurst.
The Crown Prosecutor briefly stated the particulars of the case, saying that the indictment was laid under statute 7 and 8 George 4, c. 28 .s. 12, by which it waa enacted that if any person should break and enter the dwelling house of another steal therefrom any property of any value soever he should be guilty of felony. He called
Thomas Meagher, who deposed— That he \va^ the sergeant of police stationed at Cobden. He remembt red about the 18th April last; from information he received he went to Greymouth and arrested the prisoner, and .one John Langton, who has since escaped from prison. Langton had a swag which witness searchi d and he found two pairs of trousers (produced), which had previously been described to witness^. Witness arrested the prisoner at a publfc-hnuse at Greymouth. He had not seen prisoner and Langton together that day. Witness searched M'Gavin but found nothing on him to identify him as the robber.
Peter Nelson deposed that he was a boatman residing at Coal Creek, in the Province of Nelson. On the 18th of Aprjl last he went ont about 7 o'clock in the morning and returned about 5 o'clock in the evening. Witness then lived at the house of his brother Emilius Nelson, at Coal Cre ek. When he arrived home he found the door broken open, and when be went into his bedroom all his clothes were thrown out on the floor. The first thing he looked for was his money which he had left lying in bis waistcoat pocket in the bunk. He did not find it ; the money w s Hone. He also missed two pairs of trous-ers There was aho a deposit receipt belonging to hia brother. (Trousers pro(1 ced). One pair of the trousers produced were his, but he could not swear to the other pair as ,they were new and he had n>t worn them/ They were like the trousers he had lobt. When he went out thai morning he left Edward Barry and William Dent in the hou>e.
Edward Barry, said that he remembered the 18th April last. a.nd was then working at Coal Creek. He was burning lime for himself at CuaJ Creek, near Nelson's honse. Witn' si ,was living at Nelson's house. Witness left tho house about 10 o'clock that morning. When he left he locked the outer dour and put tho key away under the step. Wi ness returned to the house about noon. The door was open and Dent was inside Witness did not know the prisoner by sight. He did not i-xamine the door when he returned at noon but he did in the evening. He could then see where something had been put in between the door. and the check to prise it open. It was at the lock that it had beeu prised open. William- .Dent deposed that he remembered the 18th April last. He was then living at Coal Creek with Emilius Nelson. He left home about 1 1 o'clock that morning and returned about 2 o'clock. He found the door broken open and kept t-hut with a shovel. In the evening witness noticed marks on the lock of the door as if a pick had been used to force it open. .
Charles Bradshaw and Duncan Oswald gave, corroboratory evidence. Eis Honor aaid that the prisoner was clip ged with having feloniously broken op,n and entered the houBC of Emilius Nelson, and stolen therefrom certain moneys and ai tides, the property of one Peter Nelson. He said that the only evidence against the prisoner was his being seen in the company of the man Langton. He need i>ot tell them that he considered this insufficient to enable them to convict the prisoner. He deemed it unnecessarj' to reud the evidence over to them, but would leave them to decide the matter.
The JHry, without retiring, brought in a verdict of Not Guilty.
The prisoner, who yesterday pleaded guilty to escaping from custody, was then sentenced to six calendar months' imprisonment, wiih hard labor, for that offence.
I.ABOENT.
John Lockyer was charged with having on the l.tth day of May, 1866, stolen a purse and money, the property of one Andiew Macarthur.
Witness pleaded Not Guilty, and was defended by Mr Rees. The following jury were sworn : — Thos. North (foreman), Samuel Alcorn, John M'Beatlv, George Horneck, John Newton, J iraes Hir.>-ch, J - dward Boyle, James Godfrey, Henry Barnard, Peter Griffin, Alexander Reid, Hem-y } lliott. The Crown Prosecutor said that the indictment was framed under the statute 7, Will. 4 and 1 Vie, cap. 87, sec. 5, which enacted, that whosoever should rob anybody or should bteal anything from the person of another should be guilty of felony. He then (shortly stated the particulars of the case.
Mr Rees would mention to his Honor that the indictment differed considerably with the charge before made against the prisoner. His Honor said it was not material.
The Crown Prosecutor called
. William Williams, who deposed that he was a constable, stationed at Cobden. On the 13th May prisoner was given in charge to him by 4he prosecutor, whose name witness did not know. Witness cautioned prisoner. He saw the prisoner searched. A sovcrtign, and five shillings' in silver were found upon him. Witness did not produce the sovereign. He believes it was given back to the prisoner. When prisoner was taken into custody he was told the chargo, viz., robbery of money on tho North Heach, near Cobden. The sovereign found on prisoner ivas a new one. There were also five shillings, three halfcrowns, and one shilling and sixpence. That was all the money found on him.
By Mr l<ees — Prosecutor gave me information that he had been robbed on the North Beach. He said the prisoner wus the man who robbed him, and gave him in charge. Andrew Macarthnr deposed that he remembered the 13th Muy last. It was Sunday. Witness was at an hotel on the North Beach, about four miles on the north side of the River Grey. He had gone therf f>n the Saturday night previous to this. Witness had somewhere about Lls upon him. lie changed a LlO note in the evening. He got in exchange aLS note, three Ll notes, a sovereign, and 208 in silver. The sovereign was new, and , witness passed a remark at the tim° that it had not passed through many hands. He could not Jell what kind of silver it was he got. He knew there were half-crowns amongst it. There were also shillings, but he could not tell whether there were any sixpence". Loi'kyer was present when he c 1 anged the note. Also Mr Leathwood, proprietor of the house. Witness put the money in his purse, and placed the purse in his left band trousers' packet. He could not remember what time it was. He had no more money than the change for the LlO in hi 9 puree. He had not the purse with him now. It was at the camp in Cobden. (Purse produced.) This is the purse. Witness slept in Leathwood's hotel that night, on a box. He believed it was 10 or 11 o'clock' when he went to bed. He did not take off his clothes. He felt the purse in his pocket when he went to bed. hut did not know whether he had any money in it or not. He did not open the purse. He had not opened the parse since he put the money in it. He had taken no money out of the purse. The purse wns in the same pocket he had put it in when he got the chausje for the LlO. Witness fell asleep, and awoke about the middle of the night. He awoke of his own accord. When be awoke he felt for the purse in his pocket, and could not find it. He made no alarm at that time, but laid down again on the box. He turned out again about daylight, when the bar was oppned. He asked Leathwood if he had anything belonging to him (witness.) He grave him the purse and two miners' rights. Witness went to Cohdeu for a policeman, and gave the prisoner in charge to the police. Witness first found out he had lost his money when lying down on the box. He knew this by nothaving thepurse. He was, not sure whether the money was in it He had no doubt the money was in it. He was certain of this, because he had taken no nirmey out of the purse since he put it in. When he changed the note prisoner remarked that it was a long time since he had seen a LlO note before. Prisoner had bpen drinking with witness that nich f . Witness paid for the drink I.1 '. Witness saw the prisoner lying on one side of the box on which he was sleeping.
By Mr Rees — I do not rememher what time it was when he changed the note. Tt was about 5 o'clock. I had but L 2, and had spent L 3. I was drinking that night. I shouted for the men there. I have not a distinct remembrance of what occurred. I do not know ho*v many times I shouted. The shouts were sometimes 2s, and sometimes 3s. I swear that the silver was sufficient to pay for the drinks. I swear that I did not change either a sovereign or a note. I never took the puree out of my pocket when I went to bed. I was sleeping on the right hand side going in. The boxes on which I slept were near the bar. It was nearer to the bar than to the back of the house. At daylight, when I awoke, I complained of losing my money to Mr Leathwood. There was another man present when I complained. The prisoner was lying down; so was a man named King. I came to suspect the prisoner by information I received from witnesses. I was present when the constable arrested him. I did not see him searched. I spent more money in the public-house before I changed the LlO note than afterwards. I saw the prisoner that morning before I gave information to the police that I suspected him. I could not give him in charge, for there was no one to give him in charge to. It was from what King said that I gave him in charge. I did not see any of my money on the prisoner. I saw a sovereign on the prisoner something like mine. I cannot tell it' it was a colonial or an English sovereign. When I gave prisoner in charge I said he might thauk his mates for it.
By a juror — I examined my pocket, and knew the purse was in my pocket. I cannot tell how I slept, whether on my back or side. The reason I went to the barman in the morning was because I missed my purse, and I thought that being a little the worse for liquor overnight* the barman might have taken the purse from me to take '-are of.
Fiank Leathwood d' posed that he managed for his brotrer at the Marine Hotel, North Beach. He remeniber-d Sunday, the 13th May last. Macarthur and the prisoner were there that night. Wit ess changed a LlO note for M icanhur that night. King, the prisoner, and a •friend of Mncarthur's were present. Witness gave him, in exchange for the LlO note, a L 5 note, three Ll n tes, a sovereign, aud Li's worth of silver. It was about five o'clock in the afternoon. The house whs closed about eleven o'clock that night. Before closing he supplied some drinks to the friend of the prosecutor and Mr King. Witness then closed the house and came in and told the parties in the house it was bed time. Macartimr's friend wished witness to see how much money Macarthur had on him. Witness searched prosecutor in the presence of Macarthur's friend, the prisoner,, and King, He found nothing on the prosecutor. When searching, Lockyer stooped and picked up something, and said " Here's his purse.'' There was no money in it; only two miner's rights. Witness kept the purse till next morning, and then gave it and the miner's rights to the prosecutor. The prisoner hid been drinking from between two and three in the afternoon of that day till nine or ten o'clock at night. Witness did not see any monej' in the prisoner's possession. He missed Macarthur from nine to 10 p'clock. The prisoner came in about eleven o'clock. He went out about ten o'clock. It was before Lockyer went out that witness missed Macarthur. Macarthur fclept in the concert-room. There are two doora to tho room, one from the bar and one from the back. (Purse produced.) This purse was like the oue Lockyer gave him, but he could not swear tdit.
By Mr Rees — Prosecutor was at the house from 10 o'clock in the morning. I cannot tell how much money he spent. It was from four to five o'clock when he changed the note. After he changed the note Macarthur had alxv.it four drinks, which , witness trusted him for. It was
between nine and ten o'clock when I missed prosecutor. I missed King from five or six o'clock. Macarthur went and laid down while King was there. Prisoner went out about ten o'clock and re-entered by the buck way about eleven. King was in the bar. He had been in half an hour before prisoner. It was about halfpast ten. king turned down the only light in the concert room. He left prosecutor sleeping. He did not then say anything about the purse. I went in and t>aw Macarthur in the concert room about eleven o'clock. I only know that Kin? had been there by his own words.' The first time I sow Macarthur there was when I searched him. I did not see the prisoner pick up the purse. I saw him stoop and he handed it to me. I L oked inside the purse iv their presence. Prosecutor was not awake. He had taken in a candle. It was Macarthur's friend's wish that I should search prosecutor. A drunken man had complained that he had lost some money in the house the, night be'ore. It was not Macarthur's friend to whom I allude. King was there at the time. No one was given in charge in reference to this matter. Prisoner was not in the house on the previous night. Between the time I missed the prosecutor and eleven o'clock I did not go in and see him sleeping. I did not leave the bar till closing time. There I saw prosecutor next, and he said something to me about losing his money. I said that I had taken his purse, but there was no money in it, only two miner's rights. I did not say I had suspicions. It was King. I did not see the prisoner between the time he went away at ten o'clock and the time he came back. When I went to Bearch the prosecutor, King, the prosecutor's friend, and the prisoner were present. James King said thnt he remembered the 13th May last. He was at the Marine H itel on that day. He knew Macarthur and also the prisoner. They were at the hotel ou the. night of the 13th May. Macarthur slept on some porter cases in the concert room of the Marine Hotel. He (Macarthur) went from the bar about a quarter past ten, and said he was going to bed. Witness saw him go into the concert room. Witness went to bed about ten minutes to eleven. He' had not been in the room before that. Witness did not go into the room between the time Macarthur went to bed and the time witness went to bed. When he (witness) went to bed there was a man lying on the table, and Mr Leathwood was in the act of going to bed. .There was also a child, and Macarthur was also there. • Prisoner came in shortly afterwards. When witness went into the concert room Macarthur was in bed. Thero was a knock came to the door: shortly after Lockyer came in. Mr Leathwood, prisoner, the friend of Macarthur, and witness, searched the prosecutor, but could not find the purse. Prisoner handed the purse to Mr Leathwood. Before the prisoner was searched, he came in at the back door. He went over to Macarthur, and took his swag from under his head, and laid it on the floor. His hand was towards prosecutor's pocket, but he could not say if it was in his pocket or not. One hand was towards Macarthur's pocket, and the other was on his head. He then took his hand away; and put it in his own pocket, and walked out at the back door. It was the left hand trousers packet. Prosecutor was lying on his right side. This was from ten minutes to a quarter of an hour before the search. When witness next saw Lockyer he came in by the front door, with Macarthurjs mate. Witness was present when the search was made. Nothing was found in Macarthur'a pocket. Lockwood stooped, as if in the act of picking something up, and then handed the purse to Mr Leathwood. Witness cannot identify the purse. He cannot tell whether prisoner had any money that day. He knew that he borrowed a shilling from Mr Leathwood between three and four.
Witness was cross-examined at considerable length by Mr Rees. Edward Ashbury, deposed — that he was a publican residing at the North Beach. On Sunday, 13th May last, he caw the prisoner in his (witnesi') hotel (the Bluff Hotel) that night. It is about 200 yards from the Marine Hotel. He came there just about balf-paat nine, and stayed there about ten minutes, and went out for a short time. He afterwards came in again. He had a drink and then left. He paid witness for tho drink by a Ll note, for which he gave change. Witne«3 could tell the time by his watch. Witness told prisoner it was time to close up, and he then left. Witness judged of the time by his own watch. He saw the. prisoner next morning. He saw him with 2s, with which he paid for two drinks. Witness did not hear the prisoner say where he had come from, or where he was going. Mr Rees cross-examined the witnesi without eliciting anything particular. This closed the case for the Crown.
Mr Rees addressed the jvft-y on behalf of the prisoner. He said that in this case there was no evidence to convict the prisoner upon such a serious charge as that on which he had been arraigned. There was nothing to warrant the proceedings which had been taken by which the stigma of felony was laid upon the prisoner. He would tell them that on no account should the prisoner be branded as a. felon, except upon conclusive evidence. They would observe that the only evidence against the prisoner was that of King, and he (Mr Rees) contended that the evidence of this witness was perfectly unreliable, and was contradicted by the -witnesses for the Crown. There was no property found in the prisoner's possession. .No one saw the prisoner near the place but King. It was he who saw the prisoner steal in at the back. It was he who saw him creep towards the bed, take the swag from under the prosecutor's head, and put his hands towards his pocket. It waa King who saw everything. The commencement was King, the continuance King, the ending King. He (the learned gentleman) would not point suspicion towards anybody ; he would leave the jury to take the evidence for what it was worth. They would notice that King swore that it was about a quarter to 1 1 when he went into the concert- room. Shortly afterwards he saw the prisoner enter, so that it must have been between ten minutes to 11 pnd 11 o'clock. First the prosecutor goes in, and about ten minutes to 1 1 in goes Mr King. It must, then, be between ten minutes to 11 and 11 o'clock that the prisoner stole iv, as described by King, and perpetrated the offence. Then it was that prisoner went where five or six men were sleeping, and committed robbery. King would have them to believe that, actually while the proprietor was iv the room looking at him, he took the awag from under the proie-_'
cutor's bead and put his hand in his pocket and took the. purse out. Men do not generally commit a theft in a lighted room ; they rather seek darkness and secrecy. Would they not 'consider a man a fool if he committed an offence in the presence of others who would be the ny ans of establishing his guilt. It was Mr King who saw everything. -Now this evidence they, as men of sense, would see was utterly unreliable. If the prisoner Had committed the offence charged against him, would he not have wared until all the others were out of the room before he picked the prosecutor's pockets? And what a fi-oi he would have been to pick up the purse which was the evidence of his own guilt. Would he not have let one of the others pick it up? "You would naturally believe bo. — The learned gentleman, after noticing the discrepancies between the statements of the different witriesses for the Crown, pointed out to the jury that the evidence of King tvou'd lead them td believe that the prisoner had not a shilling in the world, bitf it.had c.me out in cvi. dence that more than an hour before the theft was- alleged to have been committed he changed a pound at Mr Ashbury's. If King had told the truth, was it not his duty then and there to accuse the prisoner, instead of waiting till the morning ? The prosecutor might , well say, " You may thank your mates for this ! " Surely they would not convict a prisoner because he happened to have a few shillings in hia pocket ! If they convickd the prisoner upon such evidence as had been adduced, then he (Mr Rees) would be very sorry indeed. He thought some further proof was necessary. The case aa it then stood was not sufficient to cause a suspicion against the prisoner. The learned gentleman concluded his address by saying that he insisted that there was not an atom of proof against the prisoner at the bar, and he k would call upon the jury, after such ridiculous evidence, to discharge him from the dock. s
The learned gentleman called no jvitnesseg.
His Honor then summed up the evidence in the case, and the jury retired. They returned, after an absence of half an hour, with a yerdict of Not Guilty. The prisoner was then discharged.
BTEALING MOXEY.
George Ellis and William Warner were charged with having, on the 7th day .of May, 1866, stolen one bag and money, the property of one George Full. The prisoners pleaded Not Guilty. 1 The following jury were empanelled : — James Fitzsimmons (foreman), John T. Love, Thomas Pringle, John Myers, William Moffatt, Thomas Back, Peter DeLoree, Donald Potter, James Sloane, James Hastings Keppell, M. Watt, John Holloway. The Crown Prosecutor said that the indictment was laid under the statute 7"Will. 4 and 1 Viet., c. 87, s. 5, by which it was enacted that whosoever should steal any property from the person of another should be f?uilty of felony.
The jury found the prisoners Not Guilty, and they were discharged.
• Wednesday, Jdlx 25. The Court re-opened at^en o'clock. KIOTOUSLY DEMOLISHING A STOKE.
William Quinlan and William Ryan were charged with having, on the 30th March, 1866, demolished the dwelling-house of Francis M'Guigan and another, at Bruce Bay.
- Prisoners pleaded Not Guilty, and were defended by Mr South.
The following jury were sworn : — George Horneck (foreman), Thomas Back, Thos. Gibson, James' Hurst, Thomas Pringle, James Hastings Kepple, John Newton, James Fitzsimmons, Robert White, William Allen, Edward Boyland, and John Myers.
The Crown Prosecutor stated that the indictment was laid under the 7th and Bth Geo., c, 70, 8. 8.
Fraucis M'Guigan said that, on the 30th March last, he was a storekeeper at Bruce Bay. It was on a Friday. Witness was at hia house that night, and saw between 200 and 300 men knocking about, and singing out " Rollup,boys." They stopped at the opposite store about half an hour, taking the stock out of it and tearing it down. After the crowd left the opposite store, they came across to his, and as many aa could get in rushed in and filled it up. Some of the crowd outside cut the sides of the store. Those inside then commenced to take out cases of porter, gin, and other Jiquors. Witness told them they raiyht have as much drink as they had a mind to, if they would not destroy anything. The door was open when they came in. They cut the tent to throw out the cases at the other side. He saw the prisoner Quinlan there. He was at the back of the store, beside a case of porter. Quinlan was breaking the case, and taking out the bottles. Witness saw him inside about two minutes. He saw him in and about the store for ten minutes. He did not see Ryan there.
David Beattie, said— He remembered the 30th March. Witness was at the store that night; so was M'Guigan. A party of men came up. They were making a great noise, singing out "Roll up." They came to witness' store and rushed in, tore the calico of the tent, and took the things out. Witness saw one of the prisoners there (Quinlan). He was in the store but did not know how he got in. He not see Quinlan more than once that night.
By Mr South — I did not see Ryan at all. lam quite certain I saw Quinlau. I did not see Quinlan take anything. Thomas Brooks Smith deposed that he remembered the 30th May, and was at Bruce Bay. Witness saw a mob of people (200 or 300) at the German Store. They came to M'Guigan's store, tearing the place down, and afterwards made a rush towards the witness* store. Prisoners were among a <nob of twenty or thirty who rushed towards his store.
By Mr South — When I saw the prisoners they were running. I swear I saw Ryan, amongst the crowd. I did not see either of the prisoners do anything as to destroying property.. I could distinguish the faces of the prisoners twenty yards off.
Mr South addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoners. He 6aid that riotous and tumultuous assemblies should take place in the district he, as a citizen and resident, deplored very much ; but when the question arose whether the prisoners, or either of them, were there among a mob of people behaving in a riotous manner, was a perfectly different thing. Ho said that a riot was a tumultuous assemblage of people collected together to do what lawyers call an overt act. In order to convict the prisoners it must be proved that the prisoners took part in an assemblage that had
gatherer! together" for an -unlawful purpose, and that that purpose was ex« cuted. The law was strict in the punishment of an offence, and it was also particular in throwing round subjects protection from injustice. He would insist that unless it wa3 distinctly proved that the prisoners took part in the demolishing of the tent, the charge c 'iild not be brought home ; and if the charge was not fully proved^ ') then of course the prisoners must be acquitted They would have to decide whether or not the prisoners and the rest met together to do an illegal act. To convict the prisoners it must be found that they formed part of the inciting mob, and that they must have been mutually assisting each other witli the intent to do tbe overt acts charged in the indictment. The learned Crown Prosecutor would make out that if persons were countenancing with their presence snch an assemblage as was complained of, lm would amount to the crime ; but h« (Mr South) begged to differ with him in the interpretation of the statute. If a looker on wns standing in the position that he (Mr South) was, would they presume that he was countenancing the affair ? Why, it was a case that he himself might be in. If one of them saw a mob of persons collected together, would they not naturally like to see what was going on ? The learned counsel addressed the Court at considerable length, and was stopped by his Honor, who remarked that he had listened to his objections, and it appeared to him that the case must fall to the ground, inasmuch as the tent was not proved to have been attached to a " freehold ; " and the jury accordingly brought in a verdict of Not Guilty, and the prisoners were discharged. Henry Hansen was brought up and discharged, the Crown Prosecutor not intending to proceed against him.
LARCENY BT A BAILEE.
George Furquhar Smith was charged with having, on the 11th day of January, 1866, stolen certain money, the property of one Mary M'Laren. Prisoner pleaded Not Guilty ; Mr South defended him.
The following jury were then sworn :—: — Samuel Alcorn (foreman), Thomas Back, John Myers, John Newton, John M'Beth, William Allen, John Holloway, James Sloane, George Horneck, Maxwell Watt, Thomas Gibson and Matthew Edgar. Mary Ann M'Laren deposed — That she remembered the 11th January last. She knew the prisoner at that time. On the 11th of January witness gave him Ll2 to pay to M'Kay and M'Farlane — money that witness owed them for stores. Also LlO for Messrs. Mowatt and Henderson. He undertook to pay both sums. Two days after she had given themoney to prisoner Mr Mowatt wrdte anote to her askingformoney on account. Prisoner has not accounted to her for the money. Witness had taken money for her before, and had paid it correctly. Prisoner said he would take the money to the parties and pay the accounts. She told him to bring the money to Hokitika to M'Farlane and M'Kay. By Mr South— The prisoner had received some money from me before He promised to pay the money for me when he went into Hokitika. He appeared to be going there then. I never asked him for the money.
William M'Kay said he wns a partner in Hokitika in the firm of M'Farlane and M'Kay. He knew Mrs M'Laren. In January last, she owed them Ll2 Is 6d. Witnes^ made two applications to prosecutrix. .The prisoner has never paid witness or his firm anything on account of Mrs M'Laren's bill.
Thomas O'Callaghan deposed that he was a constable of the police at Hokitika. From information he received, he arrested prisoner. After witness arrested him, pri soner said he expected it. He arrested prisoner about twenty- two miles from Hokitika.
By Mr South — He was driving a dray in connection with some work or contract He did not say, " I expected she would wait until I came in.'' He said, '• I expected it." He, when I arrested him, was going to the pit for a load of gravel. Andrew Mowatt deposed tbat he was a merchant, residing in Hokitika. He knew Mrs M'Laren. Last January, she owed him L2O or L3O. Witness knew the prisoner. He has never paid witness anything on account of Mrs M'Laren since January last. By Mr South — I have known the •prisoner since January. Money is often sent in by the drayman to us. I never heard any harm of the prisoner up to the present time.
Mr South then addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoner, contending that, as far aa the evidence went, there was nothing whatever upon which to convict his client. He would not deny tbat the money had been received by the prisoner, but the question was whether he intended to convert it to hi 3 own use. The learned gentleman commented upon the evidence for the prosecution, and said, in common fairness and justice, they must be satisfied that he (the prisoner) at the time he received the money intended fraudulently to convert the same. He said that if the prisoner, soon after he received the money had applied it otherwise than was intended, and then went off, he could understand their returning a verdict of guilty. But the course which be pursued would, he hoped, leave no doubt in their minds of the absence of any fraudulent intent on his part. The learned gentleman concluded a long and very able address by saying, if there was any doubt in their minds they were bound to give the prisoner the benefit of that doubt.
His Honor summed up the evidence, and the jury, without retiring, brought in a verdict of Guilty. The prisoner was sentenced to nine calendar months' imprisonment, with hard labor.
[We must defer the remainder of our report until to-morrow.]
The Sydney " Empire" says, it will bo remembered that from the wreck of the Dunbar, at the Gap, near Sydney Heads, one soul only was saved. That one vas Johnson, a seaman, who, after that event, was provided with a situation on shoro" by tho Government. He is at present, and has been for some timo time past, stationed afc the Lighthouse here, from tbe site of which he witnjßsed tho lobb of tho Cawarra, and from whence, also, he discerned tho man Hedges struggling with the waves. Johnson, with Mr Jessie Ilauncll, his son, and another, formed one of the crew of the dingy which put off fro jo. the Lighthouse and saved him, tho onl.v ono who has escaped the fato of the rest. The parallol is striking, and could not ...fail to give rise to melancholy reminiscences in the mind of Johnson, who had thus been instrumental in the saving of life in a case so liko his own.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WCT18660726.2.8
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
West Coast Times, Issue 262, 26 July 1866, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
5,836SUPREME COURT.-WESTLAND DISTRICT. West Coast Times, Issue 262, 26 July 1866, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.