CHARGE OF THEFT.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXIII, Issue 4418, 24 May 1922, Page 4

CHARGE OF THEFT.

BERTELSEN V. MITCHELL. INFORMATION DISMISSED. In the Paeroa S M. Court on Monday morning, before Mr J. H. Salmon, jakch Bertelsen, brewer, Paeroa, proceeded against Thomas Mitchell, carpenter, on a charge of having stolen tools and materials to the value of £32. Mr J. F. Montague appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr J. L. Hanna for defendant. Mr Montague said accused .was employed by Bertelsen for a year, the tods of his trade being supplied by Bertelsen. The tools and materials left in his care had disappeared, and accused could not give any information about them, hence the infprmation of theft was laicL Jakob Bertelsen, brewer, Paeroa, confl’rned counsel’s statement. Accused was paid eleven shillings per day, and given allowances, and. lived in a cottage belonging to witness. The . materials comprised timber, stores, etc. These and the tools were worth about £32. Witness came down the same day as accused left and found the cottage empty, tools and materials being gone. To Mr Hanna : Witness denied that Mr Kerr told him accused had given him the materials and tools to hand over to witness. Only a crowbar was left. There was no record of the timber there, or the amount used on various jobs.. The tools were wortn £25, and the timber £7 Ils 4d.

A number of questions by the magistrate closed the case for the plaintiff.

! For the defence Mr Hanna, said ! , that the tools may have been, lost; | there was no demand for the return , o? them ; in fact, there was no case to answer. ' His Worship held that was a case to answer. ' David Kerr, contractor, Turau, was ■ called by Mr Hanna. He remembered the night Mitchell went out of Bortelsen’s house. Witness told Bor- j j telsen accused had left the tools with 1 ’ him for Bertelsen. There was no wit- 1 ' ness present. He denied that Mr I Carter was present. Witness admitted being served with a summons by ! Bertelsen for rent. Witness had. given I him £lO (accepted) and an order for* | I another £lO. The taking of this ac- { tion had not caused ill-feeling. To His Worship: The tools are still in my washhouse. Witness then enumerated the tools that were in his washhouse and those I that were not. ■, Thomas Mitchell, accused, said he got Ils per day; an allowance cf . I rent, and an allowance of beer valu- ! : ed at 2s 6d per day on Mr Bertelsen's. , 1 estimate. He paid 5s a week rent,. ■ which was increased to 25s when the' cottage was repaired. Bertelsen had. ? been at the cottage in the jinorning' | cf the day accused left. Witness left t at 4.30 p,.in. He had given Bertelsen I a week’s notice. The tools had not. | been m the cottage for the last three [ weeks he was working for him. They" had been in Kerr’s washhouse. 1 To Mr Montague : The reason he* j had rot returned the tools was that: J ■ after Mr Bertelsen instituted the- j Court proceedings he thought it bet--j| ter to let the Court settle the matter. He was not hard up when he first

! went to' Bertelsen. H e had been I working constantly. ! His Worship said .he did not pur--1 pose to waste any further time with “ this farce.” With regard to the timber, the evidence was unsatisfactory, no record having been kept. Re- ! garding the tools, they were accountI ed for, being put in Kerr's washhouse I Kerr having used the tools .also. Ow- | Ing tc the ill-feeling between Berteli sen and Mitchell, accused took an 1 indirect way of; returning them. His Worship thought accused was unwise not to have advised- Bertelsen as to the whereabouts of the tools after the first proceedings. This failure j would mean accused losing his cosas jon the day. The information was dismissed.