RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1278, 12 June 1884, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

AS HB ORTON. —To-dat, (Before H 0. S. Baddeley, Eag., R.M.) Alleged Larceny of Posts and Raids. —John Cairncroaa and David Oairnoross were charged with the larceny of posts and rails, the property of the New Zealand Railway Department. Frincia Schneider, ganger on the railway, aad stationed at the Hinds, said that all along the line there were fenced gravel pits. Had lately put in some posts and rails, which he had marked with a ounoh. Produced a rail which be had taken from the fence that morning, bearing a mark similar to those in the police’s custody. On the 31st of May missed a rail, on the 2nd June missed four, and on the 6th June missed four rails and one post. These were taken from various pits between Winslow and Binds. The two rails produced were marked by witness with a broken punch about two years ago, and witness identified them as two of the missing rails.—By Mr Branson : Did not miss any rails before the 31st March last. It would not be possible for rails to be taken away without witness noticing their absence. There had not, to his knowledge, been any surveyors’ camps in the neighborhood. Did not discover the rails himself; the police made the discovery.— Constable Neill went to the Binds on instructions received. Saw both accused harrowing in a paddock. A camp stood some five or six chains off which ho saw they owned. Told them there were some posts and rails they would have to account for, as some had been stolen, John Cairncross said hs could account for them and that they had been got out of Mr McLean’s fence that had been washed away by the flood. Told them the stolen rails were all branded and asked them to come and examine. One of the branded rails in Court was lying alongside the camp and another near a stack of wheat. One of the rails was cut and split. John Cairnctoss asked what the brand was, but witness did not tell him. He said (pointing to the brand) that that was the mark of a rivet washer. Suggested to him that the impression of a rivet washer would be all round, and not broken like that on the rail. Showed him a description of the brand aud compared h with the brand on the rail. They were alike. John Cairncros* offered witness L2 to say nothing about it. Witness said “ no,” but took iha rails to the railway line, aud compared the brands there. They were exactly alike. There were a number of other rails underneath the wheat in the paddock, to keep tha {wheat dry.—By Mr Branson ; The rails were lying open about 50 chains from the pub? lie road. —Donald M'Lean, manager, Lagmohr, knew accused who were cropping on some of the Hinds land of the Laginohr estate. One of the conditions of the lease is that the fences muit be kept in repair.—By Mr Branson : There have been many different parties camping in the neighborhood since January.—Mr Branson contended that not the faintest evidence had been adduced of larceny on the pa»t of the accused who had apparently found the rails on the land when they came to crop, and used them innocently to keep their seed wheat off the ground. They certainly, and very foolishly, had tried to induce the const .ble to say nothing about the matter, but tbftt]

was no evidence of guilt, and it coal-1 very readily be imagined that two young conn* try fellows would act in thnt way when they found themselves confronted 'with a constable, who was able to show them that they had other people’s goods in their possession.—His Worship said there was not sufficient evidence of “ taking and carrying away,” and he could not on the evidence before him brand these men aa thieves. He would dismiss the case. At the same time he would point out to one of the accused that he had already been previously convicted of larceny, and it was only because of the absence of the evidence already mentioned that the oaae was dismissed.