MERCER.

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 6, Issue 275, 15 May 1917, Page 1

MERCER.

CATTLE THAT VANISHED

CHARGES OP THEFT. At the Mercer Magistrate's Court on Thursday last, before Mr C. C, Cutten, S.M., C N. B. Mardbn, farmer, late of Te Kopuku, was charged with the theft of a roan cow belonging to Mr Clunie F. Drake. Chief Detective McMahon prose* cuted on behalf of the police and Mr J. P. W. Dickson appeared for the accused.

Clunie F. Drake, in his evidence, said that he was a, farmer at Whangamarino and at the outbreak of war he went to the front with the main body leaving his fathei as his attorney and Roy GannonsWay in charge of his farm. Most of his cattle were branded with hie brand a" V " over a " D." On his return from active service in April

1916 a muster disclosed . that a

number of his cattle were missing and he complained to the police. A roan cow named " Tulip" was among those missing. He had last seen this cow in June 1914. At the suggestion of the police he went t.> a Mr Walker's farm and there saw "Tulip." The brand had been ■ altered. He recovered this cow by civil process from Mr Walker and he had brought her in to the Court. Walter Clunie Drake said that he was a retired civil servant residing in Wellington. He owned 300 acres of freehold land at Whangamanno and his son, the last witness, used this land in conjunction with a leasehold as a farm. While his son was at the front he. acted as his son's attorney and visited the farm at intervals. Garmonsway had charge of the farm. He, the witness, did not sell any cattle during his son's absence.

In answer to Mr Dickson the witness said that Garmonsway had some of accused's cattle milking them with his cattle on the farm. The accused had never given him any notice to fence. Harriet Ethel Nelson gave evidence that she had a farm adjoining Drake's and knew Mr Drake's cattle. She knew the cow " Tulip " well and had known her for about five years. This cow was no good as a milker and was turned out with her calf. While Mr Drake was away the accused had asked her to identify some cattle and she had told him * Tulip '' was Mr Drake's, Accused had said he could pretty well .swear she was his. A Mr Simmons was there at the time and also said "Tulip" was Mr Drake's. The accused said nothing To this. On another occasion the accused was driving some of his own cattle and three of Drake's. Garmonsway had stopped the accused and she was called in to identify Drake's cattle In answer to Mr Dickson the witness said disputes about the identity of cows was not uncommon. On one occasion a dispute had arisen about whether a beast belonged to Mr Drake or to the witness. She did not think that even a person who knew nothing about cows could make a mistake about" Tulip." Oscar Nehou, husband of the last witness, also identified the animal brought to the Court by Mr Drake as the cow "Tulip,'' but admitted that he had made a mistake in March last when asked to pick this beast out of a mob.

Koy Garmonsway was called as the next witness. He said he was now a flaxmill hand but had managed Mr Drake's farm while he was at the front. Drake had about 80 head of cattle. Drake did not himself know exactly how many he had. Accused had a farm adjoining Drake's and Mr Johnson now held the homestead portion of this farm. While managing Mr Drake's farm the witness had leased milking cows from the accused for the season. These were returned to the accused. On one occasion he had objected to accused mustering on Drake's land while he (witness) was away and accused had said he was just getting them into the yard to have a look at them as some of his cattle were on Drake's place. Mrs Nelson assisted in deciding whose beasts they were and accused took two of them. The witness knew the cow called " TuHp." The accused never claimed her. Later the witness was in accused's employ. Once whence with accused was passing Drake's property accused claimed two boasts on Drake's property which witness thought was not Drake's. One had accused's brand and earmark and the other witness believed was " Tulip." The witness said he was prepared to swear that the beast now shown to him outside the Court was not " Tulip." He had not seen "Tulip" since August 1915 and was not sure it was " Tulip " ho saw on that occasion.

To Mr Dickson : He never saw

" Tulip " on Mardon's property. He did not know whether any of Drake's cattle strayed on to Mardon's j Uce but he knew some of Mard< n's strayed on to Drake's. Amelia Johnson said her husband was now on active service. She had Mardon's farm. The cow now outside the Court was taken over with the farm. It was not on the farm when they took over but her husband and Mr Mar<Jon got it the next day from Mr Drake's place. They did not know the cow as " Tulip " but only as a roan co w. Alfred Ernest Jackson, daiiy farmer, Pacmure, said he had been employed milking on Drake's farm after Qarmonsway had left. He identified the cow produced as one of MrDrakt<\ Fie gave evidence of

an occasion when the accused and Johnson were endeavouring to drive 14 or 15 head of cattle through a gate on Drake's place and as it was after sunset he would not allow any to be driven away. Next morning he permitted them to take the cow " Tulip " and her calf at their own risk, He said there was a proper dividing fence between the accused's and Drake's properties. William Mason McLean, sharemilker, Whangamarino, said he was milking on Johnston's place when an exchange of cattle was made between Mr Johnston and aMr Wrigley and Mr Wrigley took this cow " Tulip." It was probable that he (witness) put Mardon's brand on the cow while at Johnston's.

James Fredrick Wrigley, farmer, Birkenhead, said he at one time had a farm at Kopuku and had obtained the cow in question from Johnston in an exchange of a number of cows. He had sold out his farm and stock to a Mr Walker.

John Hamilton Walker said he had purchased Mr Wrigley's farm and stock about August. 1916, and "Tulip" was among the animals taken over by hir.. The Aon the brand was old and the V new—he thought about five months old. John Henry Sweeney, detective, Auckland, said he had interviewed the accused and told him he was inquiring about the loss of some cattle and described "Tulip" to him. Accused said he couldn't recall the beast but he believed he had obtained it from Mr Fraser, of Pokeno. He said he had handed over his place and stock to Mr Johnson. The witness took a written statement from accused after warning him. He now produced the statement. On the Bth March last he, witness, attended at the Magistrate's Court at Mercer as a witness in the case Drake v. Walker. The accused gave evidence for the defendant in that case. The witness took a full note of the evidence given by the accused and he now produced his notes of the evidence.

This evidence was objected to by Mr Dickson, counsel for the accused. At this stage the hearing was adjourned. On resuming on Friday, Norman A. Fitzsimmons, clerk, Wellington, gave evidence that at the time Mr Drake went to the front he, witness, was a cadet on Mr Drake's farm. Garmonsway was managing the farm. Mr Drake had a cow called "Tulip." She was not used as a milking cow. She had a calf with her. The cow shown him outside the court was "Tulip." She was of a different type from the other cows on the farm. This concluded the evidenee for the prosecution. The acpused reserved his defence and pleaded not guilty and was committed for trial at the Auckland criminal sittings on the 24th May next. Bail was allowed and was immediately forthcoming.

A SECOND DEFENDANT Eoy Leslie Garmonsway was then charged with the theft of a red and white heifer, valued at £lO, the property of. Clunie James Drake. Chief Detective McMahon prosecuted. The accused was not represented by counsel. Evidence was given by Clunie James Drake and Walter Clunie Drake. Harriet Ethel Nelson gave evidence identifying the heifer in question as one of Drake's.

(J. A. B. Mardon was called as a witness, but objected to give evidence on the ground that a charge was pending against him and his answer might incriminate himself. Albert George Stokes, storekeeper, Kopuku, stated that he had bought the heifer in question from the accused Garmonsway. He had taken this and other beasts from Garmonway in payment of a deal owing to him by Garmonsway. Garmonsway at the time of the sale mentioned that there was a dispute about one of the animals. He had had to give up the animal as the result of civil proceedings taken by Drake. Constable Horan gave evidence as to inquiries and to statements made by Garmonsway. Detective Sweeney, Auckland, produced a signed statement made by the accused and also produced a note of the evidence given by the accused as a witness in the case Drake v. Stokes. This concluded the evidence for the prosecution. Accused reserved his defence and was committed for trial at the Supreme Court sittings at Auckland. He was admitted to bail. **.