THEFT FROM PALMERSTON N. BOROUGH COUNCIL OFFICES.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 3552, 21 October 1926, Page 3

THEFT FROM PALMERSTON N. BOROUGH COUNCIL OFFICES.

SEAMAN CHARGED WITH OFFENCE.

Palmerston N., Oct. 20

W|hile admitting' that on September 22nd last he had jumped tho counter of the temporarily vacated public office of the Palmerston N. Borough Council in search of work, Robert Gurney, a seaman, aged 26, denied that he had taken any money when charged before the Magistrate’s Court this morning with stealing £220, the property of the Council. Messrs W, F. Durward and A-. Headland* J’s.P., occupied the bench. Accused, of slight build and unkempt appearance, was not represented by counsel.

Senior-Detective Quirke, who conducted the case on behalf of the police, briefly outlined the circumstances, and pointed out that while accused was not in possession of any large sum of money when approached by the police at Shannon on the day of the alleged theft, he had left his companion of the road for several minutes while on the way to Shannon, and was thus afforded an opportunity of disposing of the money allegedly in his possession.

Morris James Strange, cashier, employed by the Borough Council, deposed that he made up a sum for banking. Part of the sum to be deposited was in •bank notes, and in cheques, and was left on the desk behind the cash counter, being in full view from the public counter, the £220 being in a roll by itself. Witness was absent at lunch from 12 until one o’clock, when, upon information given him by one Newson, who had been left in charge, he examined his cash and found the sum of £220 to be missing.

Evidence was heard from Ernest Edward Newson, formerly employed b.V the Borough Council, who said that he was in sole charge of the office on September 22nd, and alone. From about 12.15 p.m. he was absent from the counter for a few minutes, and upon hearing a thud in the main office he returned to find accused standing in front of Strange’s cash register. This was at n spot about four feet from the money. Asked his business, accused had replied that he was looking for work, and met an inquiry as to who he was by replying that his name was Gurney, and that his address was 56 Lombard Street. During this interview accused was in a nervous state of mind. Witness had written down the name and address given, and ‘had then told accused to wait a minute.,

With an exclamation, accused sought to interrogate witness at this juncture, but was told that he >vould be heard, later. Continuing his evidence, witness said he had then gone and interviewed one of the female typists, and upon returning with her to the counter after nearly a minute’s absence, found that accused had disappeared. Upon the instigation of a third employee, named Barnett, the money by the register was examined, but as the cheques were found to be safe, it was assumed that the money was all right. The loss was not realised until the return of Strange.

' Constable Blaikie, of Shannon, stated that he encountered accused in company with another man at 1 p.ni. on the day of the alleged theft six miles south of Palmerston N. They were walking rapidly in the direction of Tokomaru, and when questioned, accused said he had been in Palmerston North on September 21st, when he had met his friend Shapleski. Questioned as to why he was travelling, accused had replied that he was looking for work; also that he had £2 in his possession, and had given a similar sum to Shapleski. He said he had come to Palmerston North with £5 in his possession, which money he had obtained from a farmer in Taihape, for whom he had been working. Accused and, his companion were then allowed to proceed tq Levin. At this time witness was unaware of the theft at Palmerston North. When stopped at Shannon accused had in his possession a pair of boots which he said he had bought in Shannon for £l. On oath, William George Gardner, . labourer, of 56 Lombard Street, said he did not know accused, who had never stopped at witness’ house. However, in February last, a man giving the name of Gurney had called with a message from England for witness, but bad not returned.

Frederick Lovelock Collins, farmer, of Taoroa, near Taihape, said that on September 14th last he had engaged accused for one week. When accused left on September 21st, as far as witness knew, the only' money accused had in his possession was a. cheque for 35/6. Arthur Norman Shapleski, a. labourer (aged 19), said he had known accused for about six weeks. After accused’s sojourn at Taihape the two met at Palmeston N., and after a visiti to a restaurant had gone on to a labour bureau and the Borough Council offices in search of work. At the latter offices the two were parted for five minutes while witness went into a side office. Witness was absent for about five minutes, apd upon his return accused was still waiting, outside. Accused then suggested that the two walk to Wellington, and, witness agreeing, they started off, being subsequently assisted on their way by a motorist. After leaving the car, accused had said he owned £5 money he had saved up—and had given witness about £2 10s. On the road, before Shannon was reached, accused left the company of wit-

ness for a few minutes. At a later date both witness and accused were arrested by the Wellington police on a charge of vagrancy. While on the Linton road, accused had told witness that as the Borough Council offices were empty at the time he had jumped over the counter. A clerk had come in and interrogated him, and then gone out again. Accused had made no statement to witness concerning any money in connection with this affair.

Constable Kearney, of Wellington, stated in evidence that accused when arrested in Wellington on a charge of vagrancy, had admitted having jumped the counter at the Borough Council offices, but had denied having taken any money. This concluded the evidence, and accused, who pleaded not guilty, was committed to the Supreme Court at Palmerston North for trial.