Cite: http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article2556002

Tags (Keywords)

Add New Tags

Comments

No comments yet.

Add New Comment

14 corrections, most recently by neilgen1 - Show corrections

maitland AEsizes.

MONDAY", MARCH 7.

fBefcre His Honor Mr. Jtisticc Burton, and

a Jury.)

The Queen's proclamation against vice and im rortality hiving heen read, the Judge pro- ceeded to address the jury aud those assem-

bled in the court room.

His Honor s.iid that he did not consider

it necessary to occupy the time of the jury "by any lengthened remarks. The present

was the second occasion on which he had .addressed thom from the same placo «ithin the space of eleten months, mid iu the inter- nal many circumstances had occurred tu impress them «itli painful reminiscences. The commercial dislre.-s of the colony had 1iocn great, and many ¡nilli ¡duals hud u ti for -tunately been obliged to give way to it, and in the general visitation this district had not ?been passed over. To meet the wishes of debtors and creditors, to protect the iutercsts of all, and to give to honest debtors an oppor- tunity of redeeming their aflaios, the existing insolvent law had been introduced, which, come into more general operation, would, he was persuaded, be productivo of great good. The-people had been clamorous for a change

between two clisses-the creditor was anxious for payment-of his debts, and tho debtor to tie relieved from obligations which it was no longer in his power to discharge. Tin's state of tilings he hoped by the new law, would be speedily remedied, and he trusted that under the providence of God, and with their own. industjy, when he next visited them ho would find things greatly improved, They did not «onie there to pet form their duty merely as lawyers-they were interested in the im jrovement of tlie people, and felt strongly every circumstance that afl'octod the welfare 'of the community. Mercy, he hoped, would a'ways bo interposed between debtor aud cre- el i tor, and this benevolent fooling tho new law was intended to encourage. It was simply a recurrence lo the ancient laws ot England, and hy it no man who honestly surronded his property for the satisfaetion of his creditors, could be confined in gaol tvvonty-fuur hours. In former limes, the amount of crime com- mitted in this colony was absolutely appalling, and the responsibility of adjudication teaif'ul. This prevalence of crime then appeared to him under a form still more aggravated, from his having just left a country where it was extremely rare. Hut he rejoiced to think that under the gocd piovitlence of God, things were now happily changed. At the period to which he alluded, chain and road gangs were ?talioned all over the colony. Murders and crimes of the most soriou« nature, wero then of constant occurrence, but the circumstances of the country were greatly altered since thal j period. The chain gengs no longer poured

forth marauders to commit depredations in .their neighcourhood. They had ei her boen,

or wero in the course of being gradually withdrawn. At the time lo which ho referred,

he was afraid lillie pains had he.cn taken to bring about a helier stuto of things. The country did not (hen nfford much lucilily for the moral improvement of this or any other class. Six years ago one minister of religion was i nly to UP found within ¡i distance of fifty miles; whereas, at present, within that space no less than six clergymen were official ing [Many had shown a proper and moat praise- worthy spirit in their efforts to extcnJ by liberal subscriptions the blessings of religion and tho benefiis of benevolence. This was a 8Uliji"ct of great congratulation, and war- ranted (ho indulgence «t the mo4 cheering anticipations for future times He had looked over tho calendar before him. It certainly shewed a li^t of criminals, and, ii deed, such »ill always ho tho caao in every sialo of society, but it was no. larger than a district of England of similar extent and population would exhibit. The establishment of Circuit Courts must ho considered as a great bent-fit to the country ï opulation" The time and trouble it saved them in obviating tho neces- sity of their proceeding lo Sydney, must, he .was aware, be at once appreciated by (ho public. This, certainly, was a great improve- ment; and, although it entailed a consider- able addition of duty upon the Judges, whose avocations previously were sufficiently pres- sing, still tliey were always anxious at what ever sacrifice, to overlook their own conve- nience in order lo advance the interests of the

public. It-was al»o a very favourable arrange- nt'nt that Courts of Quarter Sessions pie ceded the Assises held by tho Judgo, whose jurisdiction extended to a general gaol deli- very, and «hose duty it was ¡o seo what pri soncrs remained in coi linenient. This was a recurrence to the piactice of old England, and the moro fully her free and equitable laws wero ititioduc-ed into the colony, so much the moro perfect would bo tho administration of justice. Wh. u he arrived in the colony, the constitutional principles of England were feeble in their operation; bul now, he was happy to ray, it was not so. Many of those who heard him, had not enjoyed the privilege of seeing England in all her glory -in the freedom ot her government, and in the equity of her laws, lu those who had enjojed this advantage, and want of respect for her institu- tions was un] ardonablo. In this colony, juries were now selected fiotn iho body of the people. Such had not formerly been tlie case, vvlven military officers were appointed to discharge that duty. This was a practice of which he never approved. JHcdeprecated any intention of reflecting upon the chiractcrof military gentlemen, bul he had always thought that when twelve honest upright men could be se- lected from the people, they were to bo prefer- red. Nothing could belter secure the pure dispensation ofjustice that a Judge presiding over'a jury of the people. The constitution of England was unifoitn in its operation, anti to enjoy its blessings wo must take ititi dil. We have it in the Church-we liai o it in the administration of Ihr Judges, and in the free giovcmnvent enjoyed by the people. Wc ought never to forget to copy England in her laws and in her virtue ; and if we did so, we could not err in becoming a great nation They world now proceed to discharge the duties for which the) has met. Theso remaiks had bren fcuirgestcd to bim upon his taking his scat on (ho-bench, and they could never bo considered out of place when addressing a jury of his countrymen.1

James Daly, (bond,) and Henry Wood- ward, (fice,) lato of _Jcw England, were pla- ced al tho bar under a charge of killing two sheep the properly of Mr. Ilonry Dangar, with intent to steal the carcasses, on the 23rd of August. 1841.

The prismers pleaded not guilty.

The Solicitor General addressed the Jury for the prosecution- The prisoners had been employed by Mr. Dangar, and had charge of some slierp, his property. They had gone out of their hut on the evening in question, foi

lowed by a person named Melville, who observed one of the prisoners lay hold of the sheep while the other killed it. The case was a very simple one, and they would hear it detailed hy the evidence.

The case was fully proved against the pri- soners and the jury after a short absence returned a verdict of guilty. .Remanded for

sentence.

Stephen Lawrence, late of Mait'and, indic- ted ior an assault on the person of Sarah Ross hhch, with intent, on the 17th September last. Die pi isoner pi« ailed uot guilty. This case was postponed on account ot the illness of the prosecutrix, who was in an advanced stale of

pregnancy.

George M'Kcw, charged with killing with intent to slay, on the 10th of Juno last, one ewe of the value of forty shillings, and one sheep of ihe value- of forty shiluhgs, the pro- perty of Mr. 11. D ingar

Robert Melville-Was in Mr. Dangar's service in June and Jnly last ; remembers 10th of June last; saw prisouer suffocate a bheep by holding ,ts mouth and nostrils ; can only speak from memorada ruadesubscquently.

The Judge in addressing the Jury remarked, that one of the benefits of .migration was, thal people were brought ¡uto tho colony of whose character little was known ; nothing ho ive ver had transpired to impeach the character of the witness. He certainly ought to have given information of the circumstances at the Police station in his neighbourhood ; in this respect his conduct was somewhat slrange. Tho case depended entirely upon his evidence, and it remained for the Jury to consider what degree of credibility they could bestow upon it. The Jury after au abseuce ol about twenty minutes found the prisoner guilty ; remanded for sen-

tence. '

TUESDAT.

The court sat this morning at soven o'clock, to try a man named Waters, accused of having committed an unnatural offence, übe Jury after listening attentively to the evidonco, rcturnod a verdict of guilty, and his Honor after an improssivo address, passed the awlul sentence of death upon the ptisoticr, who heard it with firmness, and was removed from the bar apparently not much affected. After having disposed of this case, the courl adjour-

ned to eleven o'clock.

James Samuel Watson, late of Scone, and formerly poundkeeper at Satur, was charged   on the information of the Solicitor General with misdemeanor under the Act 4 William 4th. No. 3.

Defendant pleaded not guilty.

The Solicitor General opened the case for the prosecution. The defendant was charged with a misdemeanour, a species of of- fence below felony. There is no particular statute under which such offences are to be tried, but they are nevertheless breaches of the law, and punishable. There are many examples of such cases-acts of indecency

for instance. The defendant was pound keeper at Satur, and as such his duties were laid down under the act William IV, N.o 3, sec. 23. By this act several steps are re- quired to be gone into when stock art im- pounded which are not claimed, and whose owners are not known ; and, among other things, it is provided that the money arising from the sale of such unclaimed stock shall be paid into the Colonial Treasury within one month from the day of sale. It will be proved that the defendant, in his capacity of pound keeper, sold a bullock branded JA ; an entry of this sale is made in the pound book, and the price of the bullock is stated at £4 7s. An application was made by the defendant in the usual way to the police magistrate to authorise this sale. There will also be pro

duced a return made to the colonial treasurer   of the sale of six cattle, in which the one in question is still entered at £'3 7s. The de fendant is charged in the information with retaining the sum of £1, part of the price of this bullock: He would proceed to call wit nesses, and His Honor would say whether it were the offence described. Several wit- nesses were called who substantial the case for the prosecution, after which, Mr. Pure-

foy objected that there had been no proof adduced by the Crown, to show that the defendant was a Poundkeeper under the act

alluded to.

Mr. Windeyer followed on the same side, and further arged that the defendant should have been proceeded against in Petty Ses-

sions.

The Solicitor General said, that the ob jections did not at all apply. The defendant could show, if he liked, that he was not Poundkeeper. There were certainly the most ample proof of his being so. The other ob jection, that the defendant ought to have been proceeded against before the Petty Sessions, was also equally inapplicable. This was not one of the offences specified where the Magistrates could adjudicate. It was not in the nature of a mistaken entry, but of a false return. If it were a mistake, it re- mained with the defendant to prove it such. Evidence of the appropriation was furnished by the return.

Mr. Purefoy replied.

His Honor said, that the prosecutor had brought forward enough to establish the fact   that the defendant was Poundkeeper. Parties might impound cattle on their own ground, and therefore they were by that act, and for the time, Poundkeepers. The argument on this point might have been saved by producing the notification of the defendant's appoint-   ment, but the proof of his being such was quite sufficient as it stood at present. There was certainly a case to go to the Jury. The defence was then proceeded with.

Mr. Purefoy said -It was not without deep regret that he addressed the Jury on behalf of the defendant, who although criminally prosecuted, was a person of great respectabi- lity. The charge against the defendant con- tained in the information is a fraudulent ap propriation of £1, and from documents, it appears that the Government hold in their hands £12 belonging to the defendant. It was a principle recognized and acted upon, that guilt was never to be presumed. It belonged to those who preferred a charge to prove it. It was very possible, that the defondant might make a wrong entry in the pound book, and if such was held to be an offence, then every clerk would be liable lo a criminal indictment -this would certainly be a dangerous princi- ple to act upon. He was instructed by the defendant to state, that the object he had in view was to remit the amount of two sales to the Colonial Treasurer, and that before he had an opportunity of doing so, his person was arrested, and he was put in irons, and his house ransacked. The learned counsel would submit, that after the defendant had been prevented by the operation of his arrest of   complying with what was alleged against him,

that arrest ought to plead his excuse. No

evidence whatever had been shown indicative of appropriation by the defendant. Warling's receipt, even if it differed from the amount entered in the amount entered in the books by the sum of £1, could lead to no other in- ference than that it arose evidently from a mistake. The evidence of Shields was liable to great objections. It was probably known to some of them, that the defendant had been in prison for nearly twelve mouths. He had no doubt the jury would come to the conclu- sion, that the act of the defendant resulted from no deeper design than a simple mistake of figures.

His Honor proceeded to charge the jury.

If the defendant had failed to account for the money belonging to the Treasury, it certainly was a fraudulent act. The learned counsel was correct in his remarks, when he said that guilt was not to be presumed. The first point for the jury to satisfy themselves upon was whether the animal sold by the defendant at £4 7s, as specified in the receipt, was the same as that entered in the pound book at £3 7s. The sale took place on the 28th of April, and the defendant was apprehended on the 28th of May. On that occasion the money and cheques had been more arbitrarily taken from his person than there appeared to be any occasion for. He could not see any necessity for forcibly taking the money from his person, and forwarding it to the Colonial Treasurer. The Crown possessed advantages enough, by means of writs of distraint, with- out resorting to such modes. The defendant appeared to have made out three lists, all of which seem deficient to the same amount - The letter of the defendant to the Colonial Treasurer shows, that there was a sort of running account kept beetween him and the Treasury, and it also appears from the same letter, that he was indulged in making his payments, beyond the exact time prescribed. The jury must bear in mind, that the offence could not be considered to have been com mitted until a failure was made in the pay- ment, and that the defendant had not been considered as bound to pay on a particular day. The money was taken out of his pocket without its being known whether he intended to pay it away. The case, in His Honor's opinion, was not ripe, but he left it to the consideration of the jury. The jury imme-   diately returned a verdict of not guilty.

James Williamson, late of Newcastle, a labourer, was indicted for rape on the person of a woman named Ann Hyde. The prose cutrix was the only evidence in the case ; the jury returned a verdict of guilty, and the prisoner was remanded for sentence.

Arthur Henrietty, James Cox, and Richard Cox, late of Paterson, were indicted under a charge of feloniously killing and carrying away one cow, the property of Mr. Thomas Holmes, at a place called Russell Farm.

Mr. Windeyer stated the case for the prosecution

Mr. Purefoy addressed the jury for the prisoner.

His Honor in charging the jury, remarked, that almost the only evidence in the case was the approver Lloyd, and although the prt sonns had no doubt been guilty of many dishonest actions, still, when they were brought before them charged with an offence, it must be proved. The cwdenoe of an ap- prover was always most suspicsous brought

before a court of justice, and he never would   send a case to the jury without intimating,' that the testimony of an approver unless cor- roborated, was never lo be trusted. Verdict not guilty.

WEDNESDAY.

John Barran, late of Newcastle, indicted on information of tho Solicitor General, for the murder ofja person named George Keune wall, lately residing at Newcastle, by inflict- ing wounds on his person on the 1st of Jan., in consequenco of which he died next day. Prisoner pleaded not guilly.

The St.lici or General in staling the case for the prosecution, remarked that it would appear in evidence that the prisoner and the deceased had casually mot at the Commercial Hotel, of Nowcastle, kept by Mr. Groves. A slight quarrel seemed to have taken place between thom, and the subsequent murder of the deceased, appears lo ha\o been the work

almost of an instant.

A number of witnesses wero then examined

for the Crown, who fully made out the case against the prisoner.

His Honor, in charging the jury, remarked that it was stated in tlie indictment, that tlie deceased was beaten and bruised, and there- by died. It was tho duty of the jury to take up ti.e information and to see that it was fol- lowed out by the proof. His Honor then went into a minute and lengthened recapitula- tion of the ovidenco that had been led in Ihe oaso, commenting on it as he went along, wilh great impartiality, and concluded by leaving it in the hands of the jury. After having withdrawn for a corsiderable time, the jury ou their return, found the prisoner gailly of

murder. Remanded for sentence.

A prisoner of the Crown, named Noble, a witness in the above case, who hu mi nely went

to the assistance ol the deceased after lie had

been beaten, was brought into the Gourt by order of-the Judge, and informed by his Honor, that he would himself recommend him for a ticket-of-luave.

Arthur Henreity -indicted for feloniously stealing and killing, with the intent to carry away, three cows, the property of Mr Richard Lang. Prisoner pleaded not guilty.

Mr. Windeyer addressed the jury for the prosecution. The learned gentleman stated, that he had the honour to appear by permis-

sion of the Solicitor General. He then de- tailed the facts of the case.

From the evidence, it appeared that the offence was one of many, in which the prisoner and others were alleged to have been concern- ed, the principal part of which was furnished by approvers, with the material difference, however, that in the present their testimony

was to some extent corroborated.    

After the evidence had been adduced, Mr Purefoy addresse the jury for the prisoner.       The learned gentleman remarked, that the evidence for the prosocution, depended upon men who had been deeply tainted with guilt and therefore must be viewed suspicous     and-mistrust. Although it was undoubtedly   legal to convict on the evidence- of accom- plices, he did not hesitate to say, that it was unjust, and before a conviction could follow upon such testimony, it must be corroborated in every material point. The only thing ap-   proaching to corroboration in this case, was   furnished by a convict for life. These were the principal witnesses brought forward by   the prosecution-two men under sentence, while punishment was hanging over the head of the third. It was the opinion of Justice Littleton, that it was of no consequence, whe-

ther there was the evidence of more than one

accomplice. It did not the less require cor- roboraron. The discrepancies were not on trifling and immaterial points, but upon great and important facts. Men no doubt relate occurances as they remember them. there   will be a difference in trifling minutiae, but here the difference amounted to far more than this, The learned counsel here entered upon an examination of the evidence, commenting unfavourably on it as he went along, and con- cluded his address by remarking, that offences like the present, were no doubt prevalent, but God forbid, that merely because the were so, a conviction should follow upon insufficient proof. It was a remark of Chief Justice Hales, often quoted aud admired for the bene- volent and just feeling which it breathes, " that it is better that ninety nine guilty men should escape, than that one innocent man should suffer." The evidence was altogether unsafe to convict upon.

His Honor summed up at considerable length, commenting on the evidence as it bore on either side. The jury, after a short absence, returned a verdict of guilty. Sen- tence, fourteen years transporation.

THURSDAY.

Hugh Barron, convicted on Wednesday, of murder, was placed at the bar, and receiv- ed sentence of death, with an intimation from hi« Honor, that be should recommeud its commutation to transporlation for life.

Thomas Homer assigned to Mr. S. F. Mann, was indicted for the murder of James Stone, the superintendent ol Mr. Mann's station, at New England, by shooting him on the thigh on the 28th July last.

From (ho evidence it appeared, that on the day named ia the indictment, the prisoner was seen going towards the hut occupied by the decoasod, having a gun in his hand ; thal a report was shortly afterwards heard, and on some person proceeding to the hut, Stone was found bleeding profusely, from the thigh. The prisoner said, on being questioned as to the deed, that Sloue had threatened to take him to court for the purpose of preventing bim (piisonerj from obtaining his ticket-of leave, for which ho was due, having served eight yean on that station. Some days-after wards, when he was iu custody, the prisoner mado a statement that the gun was a bad one, and went off at half-cock by accident, while the deceased wa» in the act of pushing him out of the hut; but having thrown the gun into a water.hole, it could not bo produced in

corrouoration of his assertion.

The jury returned a vordict of guilty, whereupon bis Honor passed sentence of

death.

Mr. Purefoy, at the request of his Honor, conducted the prisoner's detence.

Richard Dines, superintendent of Mr. How's station on the Macintyre Uivor, was

indicted for the manslaughter of Thomas* Devine, employed as stockman on the station.

The Solicitor-General briefly addressed the jury. In the present case there were no citcunMnnnes against the prisoner, indicative of matice, but purely accidentai, having, under the impression that he was defending (he property under his charge from depredation hythe blacks, shot a man with whom ho was on ihe torms ol' the closest intimacy and friendship ; and he had no doubt that the jury would arrive at the conclusion, that

under (ho circumstances the case was one of ! justifiable homicide.

John Ilolringshaw deposed-Remembered

the death of Devine, io November hist ; ¡ about ten o'clock that night all hands went to bed, bul not very long afterwards witness heaid the report of a gun at the back of the house ; he then heard a low voico call out "Mr. Dines!" Dines made reply «. who are you?" to which the answer was, "Tom;" prisoner then ran into the room where witness ami the other man were lying, and exclaimed, " Oh my God, I've shot Turn !" and ordered alight; prisoner brought Devine in his arms, and on examination found that the ball had entered tho left groin; Devine never spoke after he was brought in ; prisoner sent witness for a horse while he wroto to acquaint Mr. Commissioner Mayne of the circumstance, and on returning found bira walking up and down outside the house in great distress ; prisouer then told witness that when he had been some time in bed he heard a noise as of

some one' breaking into tho skilling at the back of the house ; that he got up and pro- ceeded thither, and perceived the window darkened by some o..e passing it, but on lookiug out could see no one; that he went from this window to go to the front of ihe house, but on looking back he saw the window darkened a second time-that he then pro- ceeded to his room fora gun, and on rctrning saw some one, a black fellow, he thought, half-way through the window-a<.d that, with a view to deter the supposed black from effecting his entrance, lio discharged his piece, but wiih no intention to kill any one

Two oiher witnesses were called, whose testimony was substantially the same as that given by the first.

Mr. Purefoy addressed the jurj for the defence, alleging that the evidence clearly established the melancholy occurrence as one of justifiable homicide, and therefore they would feel no difficulty in pronouncing the acquittal of the prisoner.

The Judge then summed up-His Honor could not but tell tho Jury, (hat (he evidence against the prisoner had considerably disap- pointed him in the expectations he had formed of the case before the court, from the intro d ne tory speech of the Solicitor General. The evidenee adduced had shewn an entire absence of that caution which every person

person was bound to exercise before he dis-

charged a deadly weapon against a. fellow being, whether a white or a black man. The fact alone of the prisoner not bavins demanded who was rbcre, before he fired, mado the case not one of justifiable homicide, but of man- slaughter.

The Jury retired for a few minutes to con- sider their verdict, and on their return pronounced the pi^oner not guilty.

The court was crowded to excess during this trial, and the finding of ihe Jury was received with evident general satisfaction.

Counsel for prisoner, Mr Purefoy; attorney,

Mr. G. it. Nichols.

Harney M'Cuddcn, was indioted for ki ling with the intent lo steal, ihe carcasses of one bullock and one cow, the property of Thomas Holmes, at Williams River, on tbel7lu Octo- ber, 1838.

The evidence in this case was nearly the sam« as in that of Henrietty, convicted of a similar offence, on Weduesday, and therefore unnecessary to repeat. The prisouer was lound guilty, and sentenced to fourteen years transportation.

w^sWt^mst^s^ntmammÊmkmÊtwmÊmmamÊmz

Zoom

plus
thumb
minus
left
thumb
right
up
thumb
down