A TURUA THEFT.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVI, Issue 4879, 18 September 1925, Page 3

A TURUA THEFT.

MISSING HURRICANE LAMP. - FOUND, ON A LAUNCH. A young Turua farmer, William McCowatt, jurir., was found guilty of the theft of a hurricane lamp, valued at 12s 6d, the property of the Post and Telegraph Department, at the Magistrate’s Court, Thames, on Wednesday. Mr Garland appeared for the accused and pleaded not guilty. Sergeant McDonald said that the Post and Telegraph Department wais having a cable laid in a trench at Turua and placed lamps to show the public the trench. A lamp was missed and the matter was reported to the police, and some time later the police had occasion to visit ( the accused’s launch and there discovered a lairip. A. W. Wicks, foreman of the departs merit’s cable-laying gang, gave evidence of having seen the lamps placed in position and of .having discovered the following morning that one of them was missing. Witness identified the lamp produced as the missing one.

In reply to Mr Garland witness stated that he had never seen other lamps of the same type as those used by the Post and Telegraph Department. There was no mark on the lamp to identify it as belonging to the department.

Constable Riley gave evidence, as to finding the lamp on the launch. Constable Devereaux had taxed accused with having a lamp which did not belong to him and accused had replied that he knew it did nbt rightfully belong to him, but he had found i* in a drain near Truelove’s about four months ago. He had obtained a new glass.

In reply to Mr Garland witness stated that accused had riot attempted to tide the lamp. Constable Devereaux also gave evidence of finding the lamp in the launch. Accused had stated that he had found the lamp, -but he knew a lamp had been stolen. He knew the lamp in his possession did not belong to him, and when informed that he would be charged with theft, he had told the police to do their worst. Witness was examined at length by Mr Garland and Sergeant McDonald.

Mr Garland contended that there was no evidence to show that accused had stolen the .lamp. McCowatfs story was that the lamp was discovered in a ver dilapidated condition in the drain. It was discovered in broad daylight, and he had made no attempt at any time to hide it. No notice of z missing lairip had been given.

Council quoted a case to prove that accused should be acquitted, as he could not reasonably expect to find an owner.

Accused was then examined. He stated that,- when with two other men, the lamp had been discovered in a drain about nine chains from where it was missed. The lamp was then rusty, the 'glass was broken, tne wick missing and the container full of mud. It was worth about 9d. A glass and. a wick had oeen obtained at Bagnall’s store. Many people had seen him carrying the lamp. He had not taken steps to let the owner, who ever he was. know that he had found a lamp, as he did nbt think the l.amp was worth advertising.

L. R. McCoid was examined- He stated that he had seen McCowatt carrying a lamp, which was dirty, and minus a glass. No attempt was made to conceal the lamp. McCowatt had said that he had found it. In the conditions the lamp appeared to be in he did not think it worth while inquiring for an owner, though it appeared to be worth taking home, as it might be made useful.

F. W. Abrams gave corborative evidence, "McCowatt had told him when they met that he had picked it up out of the drain. His Worship said that if a person who found an article, and having reasonable chance of finding the owner, converted it to his own use he was guilty of theft. The case rested on the evidence of the statements made on the launch. He could not believe that the two constables had. “framed” the case and committed perjury, and would therefore disbelieve the evi--dence of the accused. From some slight discrepancies, in the evidence of the two witnesses he would not place much reliance on that evideiice. Accused would be convicted and fined £2 and costs.