Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SUPREME COURT, AUCKLAND. [BY TELEGRAPH—OWN CORRESPONDENT.] Auckland, Last Night.

At the Supreme Corrt to-day Judgp Gillies said : — "The cases are of an average number. Theie are 20 persons charged with 22 offences, and of these about one-third are Maoris. The offences, with one or two exceptions, are not of a very grave character. The principal case to be brought before you is one in which one Maori is charged with killing another. It appears from the depositions that the two men quarrelled and were fighting, when one of them stabbed the other to the heart with the blade of his knife You will remember the distinction that exists between murder and manslaughter. Murder is the killing of one person by another with malice aforethought, while manslaughter is killing without malice aforethought. Malice law implies in every case, but malice need not go further than is shown in the com mission of an unlawful act. Malice aforethought, on the contrary, shows that the person committing the crime has clone it with some amount of deliberation. I do not know with which of these crimes the indictment will be sent to you, but at any rate it will be your duty to examine the evidence, and decide whether sufficient grounds are disclosed to warrant you in returning a true bill for murder or a true bill for manslaughter, the distinction being as I have pointed out to you. If the bill sent is one for murder you are at liberty to find for manslaughter if you do not think there is sufficient to substantiate the other charge. If you have auy doubts on the matter you had better send the case on to the petty jury rather than resolve the matter yourselves." The first case was that of Tuhi, a native lad, charged with stealing a horse belonging to Father Luck, of Hamilton. He was found guilty and sentenced to two years. Richard Roberts was sentenced to eighteen months for stealing from the Blue Post Dining-rooms.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WT18820105.2.13

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Waikato Times, Volume XVIII, Issue 1483, 5 January 1882, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
334

SUPREME COURT, AUCKLAND. [BY TELEGRAPH—OWN CORRESPONDENT.] Auckland, Last Night. Waikato Times, Volume XVIII, Issue 1483, 5 January 1882, Page 2

SUPREME COURT, AUCKLAND. [BY TELEGRAPH—OWN CORRESPONDENT.] Auckland, Last Night. Waikato Times, Volume XVIII, Issue 1483, 5 January 1882, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert