SALE OF CAR HAS COURT SEQUEL

Chronicle (Levin), 16 May 1946, Page 4

SALE OF CAR HAS COURT SEQUEL

CHARGE OF THEFT HEARD MAN SENT FOR TRIAL Appearing in the Levin Court yesterday, William Henry Robins was charged before Messrs. D. J. Gardiner and G. B. Sweetman, J's.P., that on or about March 1, 19^6, at Foxton, he did steal the sum of £90, the.property of Alfred Dehnis Prodger, Mr. N. M, Thorpson' appeared for Robins. Alfred Dennis Prodger stated that he lived in Foxton and on February 27 last he answered an advertisement for a salesman, pr.eferably an ex-serviceman, to sell an attractive line in the Manawatu. Subsequently the accused called bn him, informing him that the ..job .compfised canyassing for wine saies. An arrangement for payment of £3 10s weekly wage, plus 7s per case of wine sold was entered upon. He informed the accused that he had a car which was not altogether up to standard, and he suggested that he trade it in and procure another. Robins suggested that they sell the car privately, as sueh would- assure a better price,,and he was given authority to dispose of it upon his assurance that he would forward the money secured immediately upon receipt thereof. A blank transfer form was signed by witness and handed to the accused, and arrangements were made for him to receive the eertiftcate of registration. The car was sold by the accused at Levin, it having been taken away by the accused, who left his own car witn the witness, who undertook to elfect certain repairs to it. He agreed to give witness an equity of £90 on his (the acpused's) car until he had received the amount agreed upon for the sale of the witness's car. Subsequently Robins rang him from Levin, stating that he had sold the car for £90.

Witness said he afterwards meti Robins at Shannon, where the lat- , ter wrote out a cheque for £115,[ representing £90 for the sale of thej car, two weeks wages and the_price| of the repair work effected on ! Robins' car. He was assured that the cheque was alright. It .wasj paid into his P.O.S.B. account at j Foxton, and he was later informed! by the chief postmaster at Palmerston North that the cheque hadi npt been met, and was requested to 1 present his pass book that a debil for that amount might be entered. He had not since seen the accused o'r received any payment of the amount recpived for the sale of the car. .; i To Mr. Thomson, witness said he had not . received a telegraphic request from Robins to meet him in Wellington to receive his money. j The witness produced three tele-., grams received regarding wine! saies, and stated' 'ih "erOss-examin-ation that he had received others, which he could not produce as he had taken them to the police in Foxton. He said that he had telegraphed Robins, stating that if he did not receive his money ,he was laying an information with the police. He ; could not reeollect receiving a reply. IJe complained to the, police on March 20. He agreed that the first time he knew that Robins' cheque was di?honr oured was on March 19 or thereabouts. He further agreed that it would only be 24 hour.s or thereabouts from the time he learned the cheque was dishpnoured till he placed the matter in the hands of the police.

Stuart Stanley McMinn, managing director of McMinn Motors, Levin, gave evidence as to the accused calling upon him and offering a car for sale. Negotiations between them resulted In witness paying the accused by cheque the sum of £90 as the pur?hase priee of the car. He verified the accused's statement that The car belonged to Prodger. Garrett Hogan, detective, of Wellington, gave evidence of taking a statement from the accused,- in which he admitted selling Prodger's car for £90 at Leyin. He stated that when he issued the cheque for £115 he knew that it would be dishonoured. He had used the money which he received for the sale of Prodger's car, as he was in financiai difficulties and he knew the same to be theft. He had subsequently communicated with Prodger to meet him regarding the payment of the money, but had not received any word from him. The accused pleaded not guilty and was committed for trial at the Supreme Court at Palmerston North on July 22 next. Bail was ailowed in one surety of £100.