EXTENSIVE THEFTS.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1132, 20 May 1911, Page 3

EXTENSIVE THEFTS.

MOTHERLAND TWO DAUCHTERS CHARGED. A DUXEDIX CASE. ICy Tclegraph-Pross Association.) Dunetlin, May 19. Tlie charges against Mrs. Hell and her. daughters, arising out of thefts of goods from the D.I.C. and Mrs. Dreavers, were brought to a conclusion in tho Supremo Court to-day. before Mr. Justico Sim. . Frances Elizabeth Bell, the mother, was convicted yesterday on a charge of stealing goods valued at £67 iroin the D.I.C, and a further charge ol stealing articles valued at £10 Js. du. from Mrs. Dreavers, was partly heard, accused pleading not guilty. After further- evidence had been given this morning accused withdrew the pica of not guilty and pleaded Frances Elizabeth Beatrice Bell, ouo of tho daughters, was then arraigned on an indictment charging her with theft of soft goods valued at £20 145., tho property of Mrs. Dreavor, on divers dates during February, also with receiving tho same, well knowing them to have been stolen. Accused pleaded guilty to the charge of receiving and the plea was accepted by the Crown. Evelyn Jane Bell was then charged that, between December 1 and March 11, sho stole a black ami white stole of the value of 215., the property of Mrs. Dreaver, and a second count charged her with receiving, with guilty knowledge. A second indictment was that, between 1903 and 1911, she stole goods o ft'ho value of £19 10s. 9d., the propertv of tho D.I.C, and a, second count charged her with receiving the same about March 20. She pleaded guilty to receiving, the plea being accepted. ~-!•' I Mr. Hanlon said that in pleading not guilty Mrs. Bell thought that unless it could be proved that she had stolen all tho articles mentioned in tho indictment she was not guilty, but lie had explained the position; hence the change in tho plea. Ho thought, however,' it would bo shown that some of tho goods belonged to her. Some, were presents and some were purchased, and sho felt misgivings about pleading guilty to til the. things catalogued. The Crown I'rosccutor said that early in 1909 accused was keeping boarders, amongst whom was a man named John Watt Wilson, who was then employed at A. and T. lnglis s shop in the carpet department, and ho was arrested on two charges of thelt, receiving a month's imprisonment on each charge, concurrent; .It was then discovered that different parcels of stolen goods were sent to.Mrs, Bell s house. Some of these parcels were addressed to Mrs. Bell, others to 'Mrs. Dunne," and "Mrs. Dunn." Inquiry showed at the time tliat no such person as "Mrs. Dunne" or "Mrs. Dunn lived with Mrs. Bell, who admitted receiving tho parcels, but could not account to tho pohco what had become of them. Evidence in possession of tho police pointed to tho fact that tho thctts wero extensive, apart from tho charges brought before the Court and the opinion formed by the polico' was that sho originated practically a systematic scheme of theft, involving 'members of the family as a necessity.

Accused was sentenced to two years' imprisonment with hard labour and an order made for her detention afterwards for reformative) treatment for a period not exceeding threo years. That, was the sentence on each, charge, .sentences to he concurrent. Frances Elizabeth Beatrice Bell, daughter, was then placed in the dock. Mr. Haitian said the girl did not admit taking or receiving . nil the goods,mentioned in tbo indictment, hut sho admitted receiving a number. ■ Evelyn Jane Bell, another daughter, was then placed in tho dock.. The Crown Prosecutor said when this girl was interviewed by Detective Ward in February,. 1909, as to tho stolen property exhibited in Wilson's case, sho at first,..stated tho property was not in the house and that she did not know where it was, but she stated afterwards that lie had burnt it as soon as she knew it .was stolen property. _ His Honour: Tho order I mako with respect to Evelyn .Inno Bell is that sho bo detained in prison for reformative treatment for a period of two years. As to Frances Elizabeth Beatrice Bell, I have a report from tho probation officer I think sho should ho released on probation. The order is that she be admitted to probation for .a period of two years. I suppose, Mr. Fraser, sho would not be in a position to pay anything and that it would be no use'making that' condition? Mr. Fraser: No, your Honour. It would be only added temptation if sho had to find some money.