SUPREME COURT.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2443, 6 March 1909, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

HALF-YEARLY SITTINGS.

- The -half-yearly sittings of the Supreine Court'were continued yestorday before His. Honor Mr. justice Edwards. ; •'

ALLEGED THEFT The case against Joseph Hannon, alleged horse-stealing} was continued. The case had been interrupted on Thursday owing to the non-appear-ance of the principal witness for tho prosecution. ■ David Stewart, in reply to Mr Nolan, said that'he had 1 been working at Mangaone with accused at a mill. They left there • the same day, -w.it!ness riding, and the accused walking. He (witness) arrived in Gisborne on a Saturday morning, and bought two horses at tho sale, one for £7 10s and the other for £2 10s. On the Monday he took the £.7 10s horse out i of the stables where he had placed it, ■ and riding his own horse, went along the street. He met accused and asked him’to hold the horse that he was leading, while lie (witness) went i to the Turanganui hotel. He was i away between half an! hour arid an hour; but when he came back lie could not find either accused or liis horse. He saw the horse at the Railway stables, where it liad been told. He had some drinks, but could not remember if be gave accused authority to dispose of the lior.se or not. When lie first met accused ! after coming from the Turanganui hotel, accused told him that as lie was hard-up. lie sold the horse for £3. Witness said that he would give accused time to get the horse back, so that there would be no trouble. Accused went aivay saying that he would return with the horse, but ho did not come back. To Mr Bu'rnard: He had been drinking heavily and his faculties | were somewhat impaired. He had ako been drinking heavily on the day the horse was sold, and lie could , not swear ’that lie did not give accused authority to. dispose of the horse. His Honor said that he did not see how they could ask the jury to find the man guilty after the evidence of the last witness. i ‘His Honor, addressing the jury, -said that he could not-see how the accused could be convicted. If they wanted to hear more, they could do so, but he did not think it wa6 necessary for them to do so. : The jury, without leaving the box, returned a verdict of “not guilty.” Addressing accused, His Honor said: “Prisoner, you are discharged not because, I believe you to be innocent, but because the evidence is not sufficient to convict you. You can go, but you- bad better be more careful in the future. CONTEMPT OF COURT. The witness ‘Stewart was then brought before His Honor, and charged with contempt of Court, by failing to attend on tlie previous day, and becoming intoxicated. His Honor said: Stewart, you are a disgrace to the place. You have put the public and the Court to a considerable amount of delay and expense. Yesterday you went away and made a do--graded unite of vuuiwrir, aiiuai r cnci what I should do I should send you to prison for at least a month. However. I shall not do this, but I shall absolutely disallow -all payments of expenses to you in connection with the case. Now, go! and behave yourself. ATTEMPTED THEFT FROM THE PERSON. Tlie next case called was that against Tames Garretty, who was charged with the attempted, theft of a pocket book from tlie person of one Wm. Atwill Spurrell, on board the steamer Manuka, between'Napier and Gisborne, on April 25, 1908. This was the third time the case had been tried, the jury having disagreed on the two previous occasions. Mr. J. W. Nolan conducted the prosecution, and' accused was defended by Mr W. H. Rees. The followi'n g jury Iwas empanelled: —E. S. Goldsmith, J. R. Parker, Jas. Morrison, Jas. Fisher, W. A. Robertson, TV Pool V. Nosfiitter, J. H. Dittos J. H. Ormond, A Morgan. C. Sargisson, C TV. Taylor. Mr James Fisher was chosen foreman. Mr Nolan opened the case for the Crown at length, outlining the circumstances under which the offence was alleged to have been committed. William Atwill Spurrell said, that;he ivas a passenger from Napier to Gisborne on 2oth April last, on the steamer Manuka, and retired about--11 p.m. He slept in the music room, and shortly after going to bed be wa.l disturbed by accused fumbling in liis (witness’s) liip pocket, in Avlucli was liis pocket-book. He turned round and exclaimed: J ‘What have you been doing here?”' Accused made.no reply but dodged round* the table. Witness followed him, thinking he had entered a bunk on the ..opposite side, but failing to find him went back to bed. Almost immediately he got up againto search and saw accused crouching behind the piano.A man named Taylor Avas in an adjacent bunk awake, and he said ‘ ‘That is the man’ ’ (p&intin;«- to the piano). Accused got up and walked out of the room-. Witness followed 1 him and‘found him in a bunk in the smoking room,, with hi© coat off. Accused then denied .having been in the music-room, .and witness ■again saw Taylor, who accompanied linn to the smoking-room and identified accused. In comuany Avitli the chief steward 1 witness again went- to tlio smoking-room and taxed accused Avitli the offence. Accused again denied having left the room. Later on, the hat (produced) was found "close to tlie piano in the - music-room Avlicre accuesd- had been, seen crouching. He ascertained that tho hat belonged to no person in the musicroom, and he delivered it to the chief steward. At about 7 a.m. lie saw accused .walking about the deck without a hat. . , •. To Mr Rees: He was sleeping on the port side of the skip. .Ho had his Avaistcoat on as well as his trousois. The great eoa-t lie used as a covering was overhanging the edge of. the berth. He Avas between the piano and tlie door, and it was light enough to discern any persons in the xnnsieroom. The light on deck,, just outside the door, was sufficient for tins purpose. - Ho did not leave tlie niusie-room. He was quite certain that accused was the man fumbling at bis pocket, and when lie' (witness), folowed him, accused dropped l dmvn behind a table., then, but . asked Taylor “Did you see

the man leave my berth just now?” ■and Taylor pointed behind the piano. He followed closely' behind the accused when he walked along the dock to the smoking-room. (Re-examined by Mr Nolan): He had no doubt that accused was the man who had been fumbling at his pocket. (To the Foreman): He had no difficulty in identifying accused in the smokingroom, as the man whom ho had seen in the music-roof.

Vernon. Taylor gave evidence of having slept in the music-room of the s.s. Manuka, on the same occasion. He was awakened between 1 a.m. and 2 a.m. by somebody calling out, .‘“What are you doing there?” Some moments elapsed, when lie was disturbed by somebody touching his arm. He looked up and saw a man on. his hands and knees on the .floor, near the iiiano, peering towards SpurrclPs bunk.- Spurroll went. back to his bunk, and the man on his hand’s and 1 knees crept behind the piano. Accused was the man behind the piano, and when. Spurroll came over, accused got up, and, followed by Spurred, went out of the room. In a few moments Spurroll returned, and asked witness to go with him and identify accused in the smoking-room. He did so, and recognised the accused. In the morning he found tliitt his hat was missing, and- the hat (produced) was in its place. Ho went up on deck and found his own hat on deck, near the smoke-room. He saw accused early the previous evening, and had supper with him, in a J bright light. He recognised accused when he got up from the piano.

To Mr. Rees: He could not say if Spurroll left the room when he got up, and he did not remember saying in the lower court that Spurred had done so. Spurred followed immediately behind accused when the latter left the music-room.

At the request of a jitrym.an witness fitted on the hat produced in court, when it was seen that it was much too small for him. To His Honor: 'When he went to bod he placed his hat on the piano. Detectivo Rawle said that he received a complaint when the launch arrived from the s.s. Manuka. He took .accused to the police station, and charged him with tlio present offence. Accused made no reply. Ho was wearing the hat, produced, which, on the inside band; bore traces of a name which had been roughly scratched out. At 'the conclusion of the hearing of the case in the lower court- accused said, “What about my hat?” and was informed that the hat would be 'kept in tho custody of the court. This concluded the case for the Crown, and no evidence was called for the defence.

Mr. Rees addressed the Court at length on behalf of his client, making a strong appeal to the jury to give the accused the benefit of a doubt. He submitted that it was. impossible for the witness to thoroughly recognise any person in the subdued light of the music-room. Counsel further pointed out that accused had gone towards the door and then returned into the room. He asked them if this was the action of a guilty .man ? Then again there was lowed close behind him,. and* when ho had reached the smoking-room anc opened the door _ there was accused with his coat off and wrapped up in bed. He (counsel) contended that such a thing was absolutely impossible, and there must be some mistake. Counsel further reviewed the evidence at length, and urged the jury to weigh the matter carefully, and give it their most careful consideration. They, had to consider two things, the commission ol the offence, and the identity ol the prisoner. If they had the slightest doubt on either point they had a. clear duty to find the prisoner not In y summing up, His Honor said that unless tho witnesses were wilfully perjuring themselves they must believe that some person had been fumbling in Spurrell’s pocket while he was asleep in the music-room, liis Honor reveiwed the evidence m detail,, and said that there could' be no doubt as to the dishonest intentions of the person who was crouchino- in the music-room. On the question of identity there might have more difficulty. The light- was out, but the witnesses said there was light enough to see. There must have been irathcr more light , than counsel for the defence would have them believe. The witnesses could have no motive but to see public justice done, and there was no doubt, lie thought, that whoever was crouching in the music-room took away Taylor’s hat, which was afterwards discovered on a scat on deck near the smoking-room, where the prisoner was sleeping. The whole thing depended on the fact of whether they could have any fair and reasonable doubt as to whether the prisoner was in the smoking-room with dishonest intent on tlie night in question. , . The jury retired at 12.20 p.m and returned at 3.35 p.m. with a verdict of guilty. ' - . , His. Honor deferred sentencing tlie prisoner until this .morning. ALLEGED ARSON. * A VERDICT OF NOT GUILTY. William John Knight was brought forward on three counts viz., (If That on or about October 20th, 1908, at Tologa Ray lie did wilfully set fire to a building fixed to the soil, the property of' the said W. J. Knight, and occupied by on John Badgery, as. a dwelling. (2) That on or about October 20th, 1908, he did wilfully attempt to set fire to the dwelling at Tologa’ Bay owned by him and occupied by John Badgery as a dwelling. (3) That' on or about October 20th, 1908, he did wilfully set fire to a tin containing kerosene,, that lie, the said J. W. Knight, at the time when lie so sot fire to the sfiici tin of kerosene, .knew ithat a building fixed to the soil, the -property of the said J. W. Knight, and occupied by John Badgery, was likelj r to catch , fire therefrom. The following jury was empanelled i —D. Peach, A. F. Kennedy, V H Harding, A. Pritchard, H. C. Anderson, L. T. Martin, F., L. m mas,' H. Miller, H. J. Bondle, J. R. Nicliolls, D. Gordon, C. A. Sheriff. Mr A. F. Kennedy was eh open foreman. Accused, ' who pleaded not guilty, was defended by Mr J. R. I\iik, and Mr L. T. Burnard. • .... Mr J. W. Nolan, Crown Piosecutor, in opening the case for the Crown,

detailed the circumstances and reviewed the" evidence that he proposed to call in support. AH .witnesses were ordered' out of tho Court. Elizabeth Badgery said that she hod lived at prisoner’s house at Tologa Bay. On the night of October 20 her daughter awakened her and asked to be dressod.. She then saw that tho dining-room adjoining her bedroom was full of smoke, and smelling stirongly of koroscne. She opened the door leading from tho dining-room to the verandah, -and wont outside to a disused kitchen at tho back of the house.

His Honor ,at this stage, said there should be some plan of the bouse. Mr Kirk said that he had prepared plans and was quito agreeable that the Crown should have tho use of them.

Continuing, in answer to Mr Nolan, witness said that when she went into the old kitchen she saw r.o fire in the grate, but on opening a cupboard she found three honey tins full of kerosene and bagging, one of which was alight. She extinguished the fire with the lid of the stove,' and before she left the room the accused came in hurriedly. 'She asked him what was the meaning of it (pointing to tho tins). Accused replied ‘Oh, what is the matter, has there been ‘a fire?” She then said to accused “I think you know what is the matter. Those tins have been deliberately placed there. Accused replied that the tins must have been placed there by some one. She then said to accused that he knew all about it, as that he (accused) and his brother were the only persons that had any enmity against them. Accused said that such was not the case, and said he was sorry, but that he knew nothing about it. Witness said to accused that it -was a serious affair, and ho again replied that lie knew nothing about it. Accused then left, and she secured the back door by nailing it up, and unfastened the door loading from the room on to the verandah. On reaching her room she again heard a noiso in the kitchen, and on going back she found that accused had hurst the door open, and was in the act of olimbing on to tho dresser. Accused remarked that he might as well take the three tins away, but she asked him not to removo anything until her husband came back. Accused then left the room, taking -tho tins. She again fastened the door, and sent her little girl to telegraph to Mr. Badgery to come home. When in'the kitchen she locked to see what had caused accused to climb on tho dresser, and she then found a tin containing kerosene, and having a fuse attached. This was. in a sort of old loft over the kitchen. Her husband returned in about a Jew hours. They had been living in the house for about twenty months. The house was rather old, but was rainproof. She had on one occasion asked accused to paper one of the rooms, but accused said that it was not much use to do so, as he meant to burn the place. This was some months beforethe fire. At the time of the fire accused had -very little furniture in the house.

To Mr. Kirk: The house was tenanted solely by their family. Her husband was a firewood cutter, and they rented three rooms from accused at PSomed"coi’tage" about 30 yards - away, and his brother lived there also. She thought that accused’s brother was an eccentric and reserved man. She saw the time of day by a watch of her own, which was in the bedroom at the time of the fire. Tho watch was her own, but she did not have it now. She thought her husband bad it, but the watch was not going at present, as she lvad broken the spring of it. She detected a smell of kerosene and smoke at the time she was dressing her little girl, but took no notice of it. She thought- perhaps that accused had gone into the kitchen to light the fire and heating water. He bad been in the habit of doing so before his new cottage was built, but this was some months previously. Nothing bad caught- alight when she discovered the fire. Any person could get into the kJebcn without any difficulty, and she knew that accused rose early to get in his cows from a paddock at the rear of the house. She did not hear any noise in the kitchen on the night prior to the fire, but heir daughter remarked that she heard Mr. Ivnight in the kitchen. She did not go to see who was in the room, and she was not at all. frightened, with her husband away and a strange man in one of the back rooms. She thought her husband was just about as clever as the majority of men. She had heard her husband say that it- was possible for a fire to break out a week after a person has left a place. Accused told her that when he set fire to the house, she would not be there when it took place. She also said to accused that he should lie careful, and ho replied that ho knew how to go about it all iright.

To ITis Honor: -She understood' accused to bo quite serious. She should be very sorry to say that accused was an idiot.

Continuing, in answer to Mr. Kirk, witness said to accused that he might get ten years for it. She knew this because she bad read of several cases of arson in the papers. It would be 6 a.m. by the time that her little girl left to telephone for’ her father. It was a mile or more to the Post Office, and she knew that her husband got the message.: He was twelve miles away, over a bad road, and when he arrived home lie explained that lie had been delayed trying to catch his horse. She was not positive, however, wliat time her husband really reached home. She would always think that accused tried to set tho house on fire, hut she was quite sure her husband was innocent. She nsed kerosene in the house, and they also used honey. Richards, the- storekeeper, had supplied them with a 21b tin of honey, but fit bad been returned t-o the store unused. Accused used to have a- lot of honey tins, but she did not know what he did with them.' Sho had been in the habit of getting sugar in the bag, and they also took the “Auckland Weekly News.” She was not awaro that the “Auckland Weekly News” "was used by the fire-raiser. 'Sho was firmly convinced that her husband did not endeavor to set tho placo on fire. She ho-Trd a Mrs. Smith say that a -fire had been started at her. house by witness’ little boy lighting a bag of shavings accidentally. Accused owned a boat, . which her children used to cross tho river to igo to school, and hoAvas nasty at times about it, aim sho thouglit that for this reason that accused Had a grudge against her. She was not sure of having given her conversation with Knight about tho fire when in the Court at Tologa Bay. I John Badgery, contractor, of Tologa

Bay, husband of til© last witness, said that when the fire took place he was at Mangatokerau, a distance of about 13 miles. He came home in consequence of a telephone message, and on reaching home 'he found the tins referred to in the cupboard, and some more in the loft over the kitchen. He was on friendly relations with accused, who had told him that the house was insured for £IOO, and the furniture for £SO. He valued the furniture in the house at about £2 15s. He saw accused after the morning of the attempted fire, and told him that he (accused) might have burned some of the family. He also said that he would send for Kirby, the policeman, and have him arrested. To Hr. Kirk: He had no animus against the accused, but he considered him to be a dishonest man. Accused used to milk from forty to seventy cows daily, and he also had a butter factory of his own and sold butter. Accused was also a sheep dealer/ and when witness was there, he had 150 a(kise& f ' :jfgtf + Viftr u&ifc* hold land, and for'the latter he was paying £3OO per annum. The tenancy of the house was a weekly one, a*-, a rental of ss, and he talso got milk and butter. After the fire he went away back to bis work, as be coma not afford to stay away from Ins work. He did not collect any old tins and dispose of them some time after the fire. When lie got the message from his wife he did not say, “Oh, I know what I have been sent for. It-s a game of the wife,” He never said that it was possible for him to arrange a. fire so that he could be in WeTiington before it was found out. Nothing of the sort ever came into Ins head. He may have made such a remark to his wife ,but not outside his own house. He had never told accused that if his (witness') wife took a “set” on anybody she would stop at nothing to attain her end. Constable Kirby -gave evidence as to having searched the house in v hich tlie fire was alleged to have been attempted. He then saw accused, who was working about half-a-mile away with some sheep. In reply to witness accused said that he knew nothing o the fire, and that he supposed the tins must have been put there. On the way back to tlie house accused told him that the house was one ot tlie oldest hi the district, and should have been burned down long ago, if only for sanitary purposes. Accusea further said, in answer to witness, that if he bad wanted to burn the pinco down lio would h<wo used something better-tban kerosene. " To Mr. Kirk: Accused bore a good character in Tologa Bay. Both accused and his brother were rathoi peculiar in. their manner. Hie house was a very old and dilapidated one. Muriel Emily Badgery. ji- child oi 11 years, and the daughter of two previous witnesses, said that oil the morning of the fire she looked into the cupboard, but the fire was out. On the night prior to the fire she heard the sound of someone walking in tho old kitchen of the house. She told her mother about this, but she took no notice. When accused was living in the house with them he useu to say that lie would the house. He said so on two or three occasions. To Mr. Kirk: She thought it was accused whom she heard walking m the old kitchen, but her another said it was all right. Her father was away from home, but it was possible that fie could have been back at night. Inc first she heard of the fire was when her little sister came in and tola hei she was wanted to take a note to bring her father home. When she went to her mother, her mother said, : “Just look here,” and opened the cupboard. Sho did not think her mother said that accused had set the house on Tho°©viclonce of Enoch .Richarts .M W. E. Holder was admitted b\ counsel for the accused. . In answer to a question bj ;' l! ; Kirk, tho latter gentleman said that accused had woolshcd insured for £IOO, in. a secluded spot. Tho depositions of E. Somervell and Detective Rawlo in the lower Court wore read over to the jury. Hie former gftyo evidence ns to tlu* value of the house, and the latter as to the articles that were found m the bouse at the time of tlie search.' This-'concluded the case for the Grown. His Honor said that- he could not see how there could be anything more than a mere suspicion that tho prisoner had attempted to set the house on

lire. It seemed to him that, -while the jury could hear the defence if they chose to, they could not fix the ci ime on the prisoner any more than they could on his'hrother, or even on Mrs. Badgery herself. Without leaving the box, the jury returned a verdict of “net guilty,” and accused was discharged. At this stage the Court adjourned until 10 o’clock this mora’ng.