SUPREME COURT.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 11507, 13 February 1903, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

camnNAL sessions.

The Criminal Searioae ot the Supreme Court were resumed yesterday, before Mr Justice Denniston. ALLEGED THEFT OF STAMPS. The case against Waiter E. Rose, charged with breaking and entering the premise* of C. <J. Fryer, and stealing therefrom a gold watch and gold seal, and stamps to the value of £150, was continued. Sidney T. Mirams, etamp-dealer, Dunedin, stated thalt he easily recognised, as ar. expert, individual stamps which he had supplied to Fryer, and which were among the produced property. Henry B. Oakey, tobacconist and stampdJealer, Christchurch, thoupht that he could identify a block of four Hawaiian stamps, cold in the first place by himself *o Fryer. Hβ might have cold eimikr stamps to Rose, out not in blocks of four. Crossexamined—He migflt have sold them 'n blocks of twelve, which could be subdivided. , Reginald Bray, who ie totally deaf, gave evidence that he left a gold seal with Fryer as a (security. He told Rose that he could not afford to recover it, and tie latter said that he could get it back for him, or word* to thai effect. When -witness told Fryer this he wae much excited, and asked him to tell the police. He drafted a report of the story as witness- was to toll it, and witness rather demurred at the poeitiveness of the statements as there set down. This was tfwo or three days after Rose's arrest on December loth. Immediately after hearing of the robbery he went to Fryer to inquire about the eea], and was told that it was stolen. Henry Flatman, locksmith, Christehurch, deposed that Rose came to his shop two or three times in July last. On the first occasion he wanted a key for a lock which he brought witih him, and wae eupplied with one. The second time he wanted a new key to replace a broken one, which he brought. The third time he brought another key. and wanted a duplicate made of it. Hβ "said that he could not leave it, and witness replied that it was unusual <<> mike a duplicate iir'.efs th.- original was left. Rose repeated ---■I. ha could not leave 'the key, and nsfce'l «!'::;■:•= to take an impression of the kc-yt. iitid niakw the duplicate- frcin th>\ Y» itr.<?«j agreed, and gave Rose the duplicate about, a. week laitcr. The impression, which was taken in soap, was destroyed in a fire which 'took place on witness's premises. The kry was similar to tho oce produced, and though witness could not swear that it wae tho same, he had no reason for thinking it was not. He probably told Rose thai he would only require to keep the original key nn hour <r co, to make the duplicate direct from it. The first two keya were ordinary look keys. The last was a night latch-key- used for a spring lock. - detective Ward started that on the 23rd August last he executed a search-warrant on the accused Roee'e premises. Detective Fahiey was present, and also . Rose and Fryer. A Targe quantity of stamps wae found, wihich Fryer, after going through them, declared were not hie class of stock. Rose stated thalt these were the only stamps he hod, excepting some which were at hia solicitor's , office. From time to time since then u'rye-r had handed witness stamps alleged 'to" have been purchased from the accused Rose. On December 13th witness executed a warrant of arrest, and took possession of all the stamps found on the premises. Those which tad been produced in Court, with a few exceptions, were so obtained. When found, they were jumbled up all over th© floor, and* witness sorted them, in company with Fryer, at the Police Station, the process taking them several days. Half of a partly smoked medicinal ctigiar, which Fryer (had deposed to missing from 4ms office, was found with the stamps. As far ac witness could judge, the stamps found in the second instance seemed a different stock from those first seen.' Cross-examined—Witness knew enough of etamps to be able to identify certain of the exnibits, with the varieties reported by Fryer imeiediaitely after the robbery, as missing. Detective Herbert, who was wJth Detective Ward at tlfce'time of .the arrest, aJeo gave evidence. "The house was like a 'Johnny all-sorts shop' for disorder and confusion," when searched on the second occasion. This concluded the case for the Crown. Mr Byrae said everything depended m whether the jury believed Fryer or, when they neard him, would believe Rose. Both could not be telling the truth. The evidenco for the defence was outlined genera 11 v. and the Court then adjourned till 2 p.m. The accused, Walter E. Rose, "stated, on resumption, that ho had known Fryer for eight years in connection with stamp-dealing, and had been doing business in Chancery lane, near hia office, for two or three years. There had been large transactions in buying, selling, and exchanging stamps, between himself and Fryer. Witness often assisted Fryer, and knew that, apart from rarer soite of stamps, there was practically no difference between hie stock and Fryer'a. Among the exhibits those rarer kinds had not been identified. Discussing a judgment against Fryer in connection with a mining transaction, the latter suggested that he should say his stock belonged to someone else, so that the bailiffs should not seize it. Witness replied that it would be useless to do so, as he would have to prove it He told Fryer that they might make him bankrupt, and the latter explained that he would sooner throw himself in the river. A letter was put in referring to the sale of some Hawaiian and fiscal stamps from Fryer to Some of these had •been identified by Fryer as forming part of his stolen rtock. A second letter referred to stamps sent from one Bennetts to ' Fryer, and on the back was a memorandum from the latter to Hose, telling him to call, as the goods were at hand. Witness gave evidence that on the nfternoon before the burglary Fryer himself locked up a private box and cupboard containing .stamps, as well as the back and front doors, putting the key in hie own pocket. Before ten in the evening witness returned to his own offico to meet his wife, who proved not to be there. He went straight home, and was not out again that night. After tli« robbery, the detectives having asked Frvcr whether he could l identify his stamps, the latter replied that he could not, as ho had no private marks. All the riUmps now in Court, with the exception of those in the hands of Mr Thornhill Cooper, those in witness's office 1 , and one approval sheet which he had had in has pocket, were on witnesses's premises when the first search was made- On the afternoon preceding the robbery Frver'e stock must have worth about "£220, speaking roughly. Fryer gave witness a large number of registered envelopes, and hie used to collect others, which were thrown out at tlie back. Those exhibited had been obtained in this way. He could not identify in Court the particular Ennrington and sheet which, had been referred to, but he had bought similar sheets from Fryer. Some years ago a man rczned Nelson took from witness's house a number of valuable stamps, which h& had brought from England with him. He found , one of these in Fryer's possession, and , the latter told him tie might nave tie rest for tho price Fryer had paid for them. The general object of Mr Byrne's examination of the witness was to show that the stamps produced in Court, and identified by Fryer, had been in his possession before the burglary. At this stage the Court adjourned till 10 o'clock this morning.