SUPREME COURT.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVIII, Issue 2762, 17 March 1910, Page 7

SUPREME COURT.

HALF-YEARLY SITTINGS. The half-yearly sittings of the Supremo Court were continued yesterday morning, before his Honor Mr, Justice Cooper. SENTENCES. Joseph Henry Norcross, who had been remanded for medical examination, was again brought up. - Dr. AV. 13. Porter gave evidence as to having examined thq prisoner. Ho found that the- right foot was badly malformed, as the result of an accident in early life ; the right leg was considerably atrophied; and there was a suggestion of sciatica. Except for these complaints there was no sign of any other illness, but in his 1 opinion any long confinement would certainly be prejudicial to the prisoner’s general health. His Honor said that the case was not one in which the provisions of the First Offenders Act should be applied. Not only had the accused failed to keep proper and suitable books, but lie had also defrauded his creditors, by contracting debts by means of false representations. Accused was clearly not entitled to the benefits of probation, and he (his Honor) realised that it was impossible for .him to extend it to the prisoner. He would, however, take into considera. tion the health of the prisoner and the approaching confinement of liis wife. Prisoner would be sentenced to month’s imprisonment, without hard labor, in the Napier gaol. SIX MONTHS’ HARD LABOR. Patrick Jolm Hofen, who had previously pleaded guilty to a. breach of the Chattels Transfer Act, was next brought forward for sentence. Mr. T. Alston Coleman, the prisoner’s counsel, intimated that he did not desire to address' the Court. His Honor, addressing accused, said: “In your case, prisoner, you have committed a breach' of the Chattels Transfer Act by selling certain articles which you had no right to. Your previoiis character lias not been good, and it is impossible for me. to accede to the_ request of your counsel for probation. You will "be sentenced to six months’ imprisonment, with hard labor, in the Auckland gaoh The question of the ownership of the chattels in the case, was mentioned by Mr.’ Nolan. His Honor said that in the meantime he would make no definite order regarding the chattels, but intimated that later on he would bear any application for the return of the goods to the mort_ gagee. ALLEGED ASSATJLT AND ROBBERY. The case against Charles, IToggard alias Clifford, alias Mote, alleged assault andi robbery, was proceeded with, having been adjourned from the previous evening in order to enable accused to call further witnesses for liis defence. William Henry Pool, in answer to ac_ cused, stated that on October 4th, just after accused had been discharged from gaol, he (witness) had advanced him the sum of 255.

Frances Ellen IToggard. wife of accused. said that on the night of October 4th he arrived homo at about 11 or 12 o’clock. He was not under the influence of liquor, nor did he appear to have been fighting. He went away about 6 o’clock next morning, taking between £6 and £B, which she had saved out of his earnings. By Mr. Nolan: Up to the date mentioned accused had oiuy been about a fortnight out of work. He served a sentence of one month's imprisonment in Gisborne since January, but she did not know if he had served a sentence a s a stowaway. While her husband was in gaol the men at the railway camp got up a. subscription list for her, but she could have done without it. Thomas Habgood (recalled) stated that it was about 5.30 p.m. on the night of tlie alleged robbery that he saw the men lying on the roadside. This concluded the evidence for the defence, and accused addressed the Court, at length, on his own behalf. He denied straight out that he had stolen the money, and said that all the evidencel went to prove that lie was ndt aware that Mullins had any large sum of money in liis possession, and that he (accused) was a wrongfully accused man Mr. Nolan having also briefly addressed the Court, His Honor said the case was a most singular one. There was no question that Mullins had the largo sum of money mentioned, in h:s possession , when ho left the Post Office., The evidence of the movements of the two, after leaving the train, was somewhat confusedv but it was quite clear that in some way, Mullins lost nearly all his money; an'd he (Mullins.) asserted that the prisoner had taken it. ITis Honor then proceeded to deal exhaustively with the evidence, his summing up being, on the whole, in the prisoner s favor. , The jurv returned at 11.20 a.m., and returned at 11.55 a.m. with a verdict of not guilty. Tire prisoner was accordingly discharged. SHEEP STEALING.

The next case, called was that against Wm. John Knight and which compns. ed two charges of sheep stealing. Accused, who was represented by -Ur. both indictments. On the application of Mr. Burnard, the case was* allowed to stand over m order to enable medical testimony as to accused’s mental condition to be tendSr AVb.-en the Court resumed after lunch, con Dr. Clive Collins, called by Mr. Burnard said that lie had examined the prisoner, and he formed the opinion that hi s mental balance was not very stroll", and 1 that.lie appeared to be a man with an- exaggerated opinion of his own powers. He had known the prisoner to suffer from delusions. To His Honor: He could not certny that the prisoner was insane. Hi® Honor said that the case was one in which he must impose a- sentence of imprisonment. The prisoner was probably morally insane, but that was the case with all those persons who took things that -did not belong to them. Ihe offence of sheepstealing was a very serious one, especially m a country like this, and in the case before lnm the* prisoner had pleaded guilty to two charges. He would sentence the prisoner to two years imprisonment with hard labor, on each charge, the sentences to lira concurrently.