Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THEFT OF RUG

REMOVAL FROM TRAIN

HAMILTON MAN'S LAPSE

Unusual interest attached to a charge of theft, preferred against Cecil George Johnston (known as Charles J. Johnston) elderly Hamilton businessman with substantial interests, by the police in the Whakatane Court last Thursday. Mr J. Harkness of Hamilton defended.

The' evidence of J. F. Farre.ll, -Medical Student, and owner of a rug which was removed from the Tane--ittua express at Edgecumbe on May 12 last was read in court (d.etajlis •of which have already been published).

Peter Anderson, taxi proprietor, "-of Edgecumbe, told hoAv he had met the train at the station on the night in question and. had been hired by -defendant to drive him and a young 4ady to a house a mile away. H<» recognised the rug in court as; the •one defendant was carrying by the initials worked on the corner. On -the following day, as a result of telephone enquiries lie had visited -defendant at the house above mentioned and enquired if he had taken the rug from the train. Defendant admitted he had, stating that he was afraid the Maoris might, take it unless someone looked after it. He had intended, lie said., to- hand tt -over to the po:ice. He had handed Stationmiasfer's Evidence 'over the rug to him (witness). Mr R. P. Russell, stationmaster *of Edgecumbe, said that as a result . of a telephone ring from Whakatane he had instituted enquiries and had interviewed accused at the house 4it which he was staying. To him defendant liad said the. carriage was ,-empty when he saw the rug and he ; had thereupon decided' to take it to the poJce. Witness said thai the two women present during the. con- , versation did not make his task any jcasier.

To Mr Harkness, witness said that he had interviewed Johnston in the course of' liis duty as anything found in the carriages shoUid be handed to the guard or to the station master. It was his duty to institute enquiries when any complaints liad been made. Mr Harkness: If. an honest man merely takes charge of some, property with the intention of hand, ing it over to the rightful owner, v -do you still think he is. in error in riot handing it to a railway officei. Witness: I think so! Case for Defence Mr Harkness then said that the •defence frankly admitted the removal of the rug but explained that defendant had seen a lady whom he thought to be the owner, get out at Edgeeumbe and talk to some friends on the platform. He had by way of obliging her gone into the carriage and..collected it. When he: re turned the lady had evidently departed with her friends and lie was left with the. rug on his hands. He had every intention of handing it into the police at the first opportunity. . From the box defendant said he owned a chain of butchery establishments in Hamilton. He had dismissed the incident from his mind until the detectives in Hamilton had produced a Avarrant for his arrest for theft. Prior to that the police had not asked for any explanation Avhatsoever. No 'Mystery' l Lady To Sergeant Farrell he admitted that he. had had a fairly good business training but in the excitement of meeting his friends had overlooked the proper course of handing the rug to the guard or to the station master. There was no 'mystery' about the lady, who he thought had -owned the rug. He had never seen her before in his life and merely sought, to do her a good turn.

Adam Wm. Crook, blacksmith of Edgecumbe, described how he with his sister, Mis s Brockbank, had cycled to meet the defendant on the train. He had returned by cycle and defendant and his sister by taxi. He corroborated Johnston's evidence about, the rug, and. added that Miss Brockbank had been staying with him ever since . coming out of the Whakatane hospital on Easter Sunday. .«>*•«#• Penalty Inflicted : ..Concluding his case Mr Harkness said that this was the first case which he had ever heard of where the police had not given the defendant a chance to explain his actions. The obligation was on the police to prove defendant a thief and this he claimed had not been <lone. {Continued in next column)

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/BPB19430608.2.17

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 6, Issue 79, 8 June 1943, Page 5

Word count
Tapeke kupu
721

THEFT OF RUG Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 6, Issue 79, 8 June 1943, Page 5

THEFT OF RUG Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 6, Issue 79, 8 June 1943, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert