SUPREME COURT.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2301, 21 September 1908, Page 1

SUPREME COURT.

BIENNIAL SITTINGS.

Tito ilialf-yonrly sittings of tho Supremo Court were continued yesterday bei'oro His Honor Mr Justice Edwards. ALLEGED ATTEMPTED THEFT EBOM THE PERSON. Tito jury in t his case, heard the previous day, having failed to agree, evidence in the re-trial of James Carroty, charged with tho abovo oilencc, was taken. Tho following jury was empanelled: —Messrs H. Neill (foreman), H. Hondorsou, J. A. Eaton, E. Roderick, N. Nicholson, J. B. Leydon, Win. Hay, G. Willan, IV. 11. Dunstan, T. McConnell, It. C. Piesse, Donald Gordon. . . Tho evidence was identical with that given at tho first hearing. Mr Rees did not call evidence, but addressed the jury at length on behalf of the accused. Tho jury retired at 12.18 p.m. and at 4.30 p.m. tho foreman intimated to His Honor that there was no chanco of an agreement, and they were accordingly discharged. Tho accused was remanded for further trial of the next sittings of the Court to bo hold in Gisborne, Bail was allowed, accused in £SO and two sureties of £25 each. THEFT. Albert Edward Liclitwark and Norman Frederick Marlow were charged with, and pleaded, guilty to the following charges of theft: April Ist, one saddle, the property of Mm. Clarke, To Arai; May 4th, saddle, coat and whip, property of Will. Millington, Matawhero; April 10, Harness, saddle, bridle and breastplate, property of D. G. Robertson, Whataupoko; April 13, saddle, horse cover, winkers and saddle straps, property of Co-operative Supply Stores; April 9th, harness, buggy-rug, coat and whip, property of It. J- Parker, Te Arai. - . Mr W. L. Rees made an appeal for* leniency on behalf of Liclitwark, whom, lie said, had a wife and two young children depending on luin, and who, up to the time of the committal of the thefts, had borne a good character. In sentencing both the accused His Honor said that it was quite impossible for him to let such a senes ot thefts go without inflicting some substantial penalty. If bo did so he should only bo encouraging crime. Ho was treating them leniently in sentencing them each to two years’ imprisonment in the Auckland gaol on each indictment, the sentences to be concurrent.

ALLEGED CARNAL KNOWLEDGE

Norman Frederick Marlow, on a charge of carnally knowing one, Agnes Mischeivski, under the age of 16, was again put on trial, tho jury having failed to agree ill the first case. The following jury was empanelled:—Messrs E. H. Pavitt (foreman), J. A. Robb, D. Bain, H. B. Whyte, A. A. Hepburn, J. Colley. P. H. Graham, T. J. Rosbotham, Goo. Hall, J. Healy, J. Gilmour, T. N. Andrew. -The evidence was again the same with the exception that Hofen, one of the Crown witnesses, swore that accused had told him that lie knew the girl was only 10 years old. For the defence Albert E. Liclitwarlt, called by accused, swore that the girl Agnes Mischeivski had told him on one occasion that she was 17, and again later that she was 18. After a retirement of ten minutes the jury returned a verdict of “not guilty” and accused was acquitted. IN CHAMBERS. In Chambers on Saturday morning the following matters were dealt with : In the case of Sarah Cooper and others v. John Coleman and others, that the Court will direct John Coleman to transfer one equal six-se-venths of the block of land mentioned in the statement of claim to the plaintiffs. Mr Rees said the position was a peculiar one. The case was before Mr Justice Denniston some two or tlireo sessions ago. He had the papers, and so far had not given any intimation as to what should bo done—His Honor said the only course was to refer the matter to Mr Justice Denniston. —Air Rees said that had there not been any trustee in the case, 'arrangements could be made between the parties. In the case of Te Raima Hapo v. Watene Huka and Riwi Roto: (1) For the value of 20 pigs, value £26, destroyed by defendants, the property of plaintiff; (2) injunction restraining defendants from killing more. Mr Rees explained that this also was in a peculiar position. It would be advisable if both parties withdrew both the claim and coun-ter-claim. —Mr Stock intimated they were going to consult their clients, and probably no more would be heard about it.—Mr Rees pointed out the costs already incurred were almost double the amount sued for. Mr Nolan intimated that the summons against the District Land Registrar bad been withdrawn. It was intimated that the following cases would bo gone on with: Geo. Tlios. Sefton v. Frederick Halil: (1) That the defendant execute to the plaintiff a transfer of 4 acres 3 roods 22 perches, section 38, and II acres 2 roods, part of section 42, upon payment of £lsl 19s, the unpaid purchase money for such area; (2) £2OO damages for non-completion, and for failing to give a title for l the full areas sold. Joseph Burke v. Gisborne Times Company, claim £250 damages for alleged libel. In Banco matters: John Higgins Martin v. Win. Alfred Barton: For writ of mandamus compelling the defendant to sign a certificate that plaintiff is a fit and proper person to hold a publican’s license. Walter James Sykes v. Amelia Gatherino Neill: Appeal from a decision of the Stipendiary Magistrate at Gisborne. Wm. Henry Jones v. Daniel Courtney: Calling upon informant to show cause why a writ of prohibition should not bo issued to prohibit further proceedings of the defendant, in respect of a conviotion made on 4th November, 1907. In connection with tho alleged libel case, in reply to His Honor, Mr Rees 6aid there were a considerable number of witnesses. This case ivould be the first on the list. In the compensation case, John George Johnstone ' v.' Minister for Public Works, for £461 16s lOd, compensation for lands taken, Mr Nolan asked for it to bo taken next Tuesday and Wednesday, so that the Government officers coming up from South could return on Wednesday.— Hi's Hoijor said his duty was to attend to thp'Supreme .Court business before becoming a land valuer,' Bankruptcy matters: Uis Honor intimated that the bankruptcy ap-

plication of D. hi. Orr, for discharge, bad boon put in too late. Mr It. U. Burke, agent for Mr G. Hutchinson, applied lor 1 lie ease of Ho rain a Rnrokaipuko (Mr (*. Hutchiii.son) v. Wm. Douglas Lysnar and others (Mr H. D. Bell), for change of venue, to bo transferred to \\ ollington.— Defendants not being represented, Hi's Honor adjourned the application. On tlio application of -Mi’ A. \V. Bees, probate in the will of Catherine Aston (deceased) was granted. On tlnV.application of Mr F. AV. Nolan letters...of administration were grantod in tho estate of Roderick McKenzie Campbell.