Please wait. Contacting image service... loading

Article text

ROBE CIRCUIT COURT.
________________________
Friday, May 5.
Before His Houor Mr Justice Gwyime, and
Juries.
The Commission authorising the holding of
the Court was read by the assistant Judge's
Associate, Mr. W. W. Gwynne.
The Jury list was called over when it was
found that Mr. James Flew White was absent.
His Honor said that he had received a letter
from White stating that business had taken him
to Melbourne,: rad,h^j therefore,'as)ded? to' be.
excused for hori-attendahce. His Honor.Tsaid.
eiiousea another
might, and it rwould -be impossible ,to form a
jury.//It was a' matter of duty, hotjofidiscie:
tion, for a juror to attend, and lie (His Honor)
could not receive - the let ter - as ^an excusp,'there»'
fore'Mr. White would be fined £5. >
HORSE-STEALING.
Robert Chambers Boyce and William Boyce
were arraigned for having on the 16th January,
last, feloniously stolen one gelding of the value
of £20, the property of Mr. W. Hutchison, of
Murrabinna; a second count charged them with
feloniously receiving the same knowing that it
had been stolen.
The prosecution was conducted by the Crown
Solicitor (Hon. E. B. Andrews, Q.C.), with
whom was Mr. F. W. Davison ; Mr. F. Davison
defended the prisoner.
From the evidence it appeared that a bay
gelding branded 11, which was well-known in
the locality as belonging to the prosecutor (Mr.;
Hutchison) was stolen by the prisoner from
where it was running, Mr. Dunn's run, the Fish
ery. The prisoners were father and sohj and
the latter induced a mail named Gibbs to accom
pany him to the run upon which the gelding was
and bring it into the elder prisoner's yard, where
the horse was roped,: thrown, and the original
brand obliterated by means ol a hoop iron M
braud, which was then made, and heated in a
fire which was prepared after the capture of the
animal. The elder prisoner then proposed tliafc
Gibbs should go shares in the horse, but he de
clined. At the preliminary tried, held at King
ston, the offenders were admitted to bail, and on
Mr. E. J. Stuart subsequently, meeting with the
elder prisoner' and interrogating him as to what
he had been doing to get himself into trouble he
replied, " It's the old bird caught with cliaff."
The Crown Solicitor and prisoners' counsel
having addressed the jury,
His Honor summed up the evidence!
The jury then retired, and after about an
hour's deliberation returned into Court with a
verdict of guilty against both of the prisoners.
In answer to the Associate's enquiry as to
what he had to say why sentence should not be
passed upon him, the elder prisoner said lie had
a wife and family.
His Honor in passing sentence upon E. C.
Boyce said he never heard a clearer case in his
life, and expressed astonishment that the jury
was not impressed as he was. He considered
the defence set up a shuffling one, and said that
it should have no weight. He then referred to
the heinousness of the elder prisoner's conduct
in leadiug his offspring into crime, and said that
he deserved a severe sentence, which would be
imprisonment with hard labor for four years.
His Honor then addressed William Boyce, and
said some excuse could be made for him as he
Jiad had a bad example. He had acted iu ac
cordance with the orders of his father, and was,
therefore, in a different position to the elder
prisoner,, but nevertheless cattle-stealing must
be put down. As he had had a bad parent who
led and advised him into crime, he would be
imprisoned and kept to hard labor for eighteen
months, but that sentence might be considerably
lessened by good conduct.
THEFT OF A WATCH.
Mi Bennett was then placed in the dock and
charged with stealing a gold watch and chain, of
the value of £30, the property of Heury
Ealioue. ...
The prisoner, who was undefended, pleaded
guilty of having the. watch in his possession,
but not guilty of having it with any felonious
intent.
The circumstances of the case were that
Eabone arrived at Narracoorte by the Mount
Gambier mail about half-past eight o'clock on
the morning of the 4th January last having
travelled during the night.) He stopped at
Spangenberg's aud slept in a bedroom, from
which the prisoner was seen to issue later iu the
day, and when arrested he was wearing the
watch (which had Eubone's name engraved
thereon) and chaiu that had beeu stolen. The
prisoner stated that the prosecutor on arrival
was drunk, and gave him the watch, etc., to
take care of, but the statement was proved to
be utterly false.
The jury found the prisoner guilty, and
His Honor said he would pass the lenient sen
tence of imprisonment for one year with hard
labor upon the prisoner, but that if lie ever ap
peared again the sentence would be a much
severer one.
FORGERY.
Magnus Stewart was then arraigned for
forging and uttering a cheque of the value of £5
os., at Narracoorte, on March 17. The cheque
was drawn on Alexander McFarlane.
The prisoner pleaded not guilty.
The Crown Solicitor prosecuted, and Mr. F.
W. Davison and Mr. F. Davison defended the
prisoner.
A Jury was empanelled, and the Crown
Solicitor addressed them upon the charge. A
witness named George Eule was called, and
whilst giving evidence a cheque for £4 5s. was
put in.
Mr. Davison then asked to see the cheque,
and pointed out that it was not the one named
in the indictment.
The Crown Solicitor then said he would not
offer any further evidence on that charge, but
would enter a nolle prosequi if allowed.
His Honor directed the jury that the prisoner
was entitled to an acquittal.
The jury then brought in a verdict of not
guilty.
The Crown Solicitor said that on another
charge against the same prisoner of forging, and
uttering a cheque drawn upon Rice Hood,
junior, the Attorney-General had given a
certificate of "no case."
The same prisoner was then charged with
forging and uttering a cheque for £4 5s. drawn
upon Alexander McFqilane, at Narracoorte, on
February 19th last.
The Crown Solicitor prosecuted, and Mr.
F, W. Davison and Mr. F. Davison defended
the prisoner.
The circumstances of the case were that at ten
o'clock on the night uamed the prisoner caused a
boy named George Rule to go to the Narracoorte
Hotel with the cheque described for a bottle of
brandy. The boy procured the brandy and with
the change out of the cheque took it to the pri-
soner, who was standing outside. The prisoner
gave the boy 2s. It was shown in evidence that
the writing on the cheque was similar to that on
the £5 5s. cheque, and similar to the prisoner's
handwriting.
The jury brought in a verdict of guilty.
Mr. Davison then handed in a certificate, and
said that since the death of the prisoner's bro-
ther he had been slightly deranged.
His Honor said that he would defer sentencing
the prisoner until the next day (Saturday.)
INDECENT ASSAULT.
Josqih aiqrfumy was charged with committing
an indecent assault upon Mary Ann Dowdy (now
M. A. Brown) at Kiugston on 12th November
last.
The prisoner was undefended, and pleaded
not guilty.
It appeared that Hie prisoner went to the
house of the prosecutrix about eleven o'clock on
the night iu question, where he met a man
named Foster, who then went for a bottle of gin,
and was accompanied part of the way by the
prosecutrix, who subsequently returned to the
house. The prosecutrix said that it was during
the absence of Foster that the assault com
plained of was committed by the prisoner.
Foster returned later iu the night (or morning)
wlieu she complained to him. The prisoner,
who is said to be n Frenchman, submitted the
prosecutrix to a very lengthy and severe cross
examinatiou as to the object of Foster's visit to
the house at so late an hour at liight, and ns to
what passed between them while they were
away. A daughter of the prosecutrix's (aged 11
years) was called into Court and the oath having
been administered to her she was told to kiss
the Book. Slip replied thfjt slip did not know
what it was. On being questioned by His Honor
she said that she had never been to school or
been taught to read or write; she did not
attend any chapel; and she had not been
taught to believe in the existence of God! and
she did not kuow of any future state. She was
then allowed to go out or Court,,
*-v The'jury-'acquitted the prisoner, and he was '
discharged. 1
i The Court was then adjourned till the next
"day,^Saturday.
"t Saturday, May 6.
-h Before His Honor Mr. Justice Gwynue and j
, Juries. : ]
THEFT OF CHEQUES. .
IVilliam, King was charged with having
stolen at Narracoorteon, April 6th-j-last one .,
cheque of-the value; of ifiZSils, jBdif one chequej
of the value1 of £28, one pair of trousers, valued
..at"10a,,.one.riug.valued-atTl8ri"and-onekey:of'
the value of Is., the property of Harry Morgan;
a further count charged him with receiving »he
satne knowing tliem to have been stolen.
The Crowu Solicitor prosecuted, and_the.
prisoner wasdefended by Mr7~F. W. Davison.
The prisoner pleaded not guilty.
The particulars oftlie charge are as follow:
-Mr . Morgan, who is a commercial traveller,
;arriv;ech"at the Narracoorte, Hotel>arly|oiv the ?
. morning in question by the mail from JKingstoni
and occupied No. l bedroom. Later urthe day
the prisoner arrived at the same place in a help
less state of intoxication, with the Mount Ganibier
mail coach. He washed himself in Mr. Morgau's
bedroom, raiid was subsequently yseen by a wit
ness named Margaret Blackett in the passage, who
alleged thatheliad Morgan's trousers in his hands,
j A. witness named May Seedorf, wlio also
saw him at the same time, deposed that he .had
nothing in his hands. The trbusers were sub
sequently found in the passage, but the contents
of the pockets had been taken. The prisoner
was airested while in bed at an hotel at King
ston where the stolen property was found in a
pair of trousers which had been lent to him be
fore leaving Narracoorte . by a man named
Howell.
Mr. Davison addressed the jury in defence of
the prisoner,- and at /the conclusion of the
speech there were manifestions ;of approval;in
the body; of the Court house. His Honor
having summed up strongly against: the; pri
soner,
The jury retired, and after a lengthy de
! liberation returned into Court, and, said that
they had come to the decision^ that r the prisoner
was guilty of having the stolen property in liis
possession hut with no felonious intent. .
The Crown Prosecutor , pointed out that that
was no verdict at alL:
The jury then gave as their verdict-not
guilty.
The prisoner was then ?? discharged amid de
monstrations of pleasure by theauditors.
. . RE MAGNUS STEWART. : i
His Honor in sentencing the prisoner said
You have been found guilty of forging an order
for the payment of £4 5s. The learned counsel
made some allusion to your state of mind, but
that ought to have been the subject of a plea.
His Honor said that he altogether approved of
the verdict, and he did not think the jury could
come to any other conclusion. As the prisoner
had previously borne a good character he (His
Honor) was justified iu passing a lenient
sentence, which .would he imprisonment with
liard labor for two years. The matter of his
derangemeut would be enquired into in town,
and His Honor promised to give every facility
to having the position of the prisoner regulated
iii accordance with the opinion formed, if the
medical men found that the prisoner "was
demented he (His Honor) should recommend
a pardon being grauted.
FORGERY OF A -RECEIPT.
William Brilton Towlcr appeared in the
dock, charged with having feloniously forged .
and uttered at Narracoorte, on the 20th April
last, an accountable acquittance or receipt.
The prisoner pleaded not guilty.
_ The evidence in this case was similar to that
given at the Police Court, Narracoorte, reported
iu a late issue. His Honor summed up unfavor
ably to the prisoner, but the jury took a merci
ful view of his case and acquitted him. The
defence was conducted by Mr. F. Davison;
$