ALLEGED THEFT.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 464, 15 July 1909, Page 3

ALLEGED THEFT.

At the local Police Court this morning, before Messrs Thomas Rimmer and F, W. Frankland, J’s.P.,, WiWam Anderson was charged, on the information of the police, that on July 3rd, he did unlawfully steal one pair of gent.’s boots, value 16s 6d, the property of William Apariraav Accused pleaded not guilty, and ■asked that hd* be remanded until the next sitting of the Magistrate’s Court, as bis chief witness was in the Otaki Hospital with a broken leg, and, another witness was away at Wanganui. Constable Woods stated that he had seen accused wearing the boots (produced) arid had taken him to the police court, and taken possession of them. They were afterwards identified by Apraima. The Justices asked the accused

0 state the grounds of his de-

fence, and they would then consider whether- the case should be adjourned or riot. , Accused said that his defence was that he purchased the boots in Napier, and if he were remanded, he would be able to get witnesses to prove that thisrwas the case. The Justices’ decided to proceed with the case.

For the prosecution, the police called William Aparima, whc stated that the toots produced were his. He identified them by the sewing, etc., and also that he had cut one end off both the lacesOn Saturday, 3rd inst., he had driven into Foxton, and as it was was raining, he was afraid he would get wet, and had purchased a pair of knee gum boots, ah oilskin, and a bat from Mr Gillespie. He took his boots off, and Mr Gillespie wrapped them in brown paper. He placed the parcel under the seat of his buggy, and drove round behind the Manawatu Hotel. Went inside t.o get his father, and on coming out saw accused behind the buggy. He was in a crouching position, and was buttoning up his oilskin. Asked him what he was doing fhere, and he said, “Nothing, just teeing the old man get in the buggy.” Drove home, and then sound that the parcel was not in the buggy. Came into Foxton on Sunday, ond laid an information. Accompanied the police to where the buggy had been left the previous _ evening, and found the brown'paper produced. In answer to accused, witness said that he was not in the hotel more than five minutes, John Gillespie said he remembered Aparima coming into the shop on the 3rd instant. He purchased a pair of gumboots, an oilskin, and a hat. He look off the boots he was wearing, and asked witness to wrap them up, which he did. The bools produced were similar to the pair he had wrapped up. He would’ swear that the paper produced was that which he had used to wrap the boots in. He had taken particular notice of it at the time.

At this stage the accused asked that the case be adjourned for two hours, and an adjournment was granted until 2 o’clock.

On the case being Called oh again at 2 p.m., accused was represented by Mr Barnard Who asked for a remand as a most important witness (Bangley) for the defence was absent, and as a matter of justice to the accused a remand should be granted. The Bench stated that they would hear the evidence again and consider the point raised later. Mr Barnard cross-examined Aparima, who then said that on purchasing the boots be had left them on the counter, and went into/Mr Ball's to get a shave after which he returned to the shop, and took away the boots, calling out to Gillespie, that he was taking them away. Was not sure whether Gillespie heard him. He then took the boots round to the hotel, and deposited them in the trap.

John Gillespie, on . being recalled. stated that Aparima purchasea the goods between two and three o’clock.

1 Some passages took place between counsel for the defence and the.bench, as to the right of crossexamination of Aparima on his, recall, and as to the nature of Constable' Woods’ evidence, which Mr Barnard objected to as hearsay The objection was upheld. Constable Sweeney, on oath, stated he saw Mr,. Xaagley at; the railway station and in answer to a question by witness he said (at this point Mr Barnard objected to this witnesses’ evidence being taken as it was only hearsay). The justices ■ decided to hear the evidence) that he did not know anything about accused buying a pair qf boots in Napier, and that was going to keep away from Foxton |while the case was being heard. This concluded the case for the prosecution, and the Justices decided to grant a remand for one week, in order to give accused, an opportunity to have his witnesses present. ' , Bail was fixed at ,£3O.