FINED FOR THEFT.

Shannon News, 7 October 1924, Page 3

FINED FOR THEFT.

CLOTHES STOLEN FROM. LOGAL PREMISES. . ,At thu Shannon Police Court yesterday morning,' before Messrs Wartog Taylor and E. Spencer, J.’sP;, a man named Hugh lots Rogers Was charged with toe theft on October 4, of one suit of clothes valued at £5 (he property of Howard Andrew, Ltd. also on toe same elate with toe thelt of a Pair of gent’s trousers toe property of W. H. Gunning and Co., Ltd. Mr Moody, who appeared for accused,' put in a plea of not guilty to both charges, stating that toe accused elected to be dealt with summarily. ,T!he prosecution called Howard Hunter, a partner of the firm of Howard Andrew, Ltd., drapers, wh6 stated that on Saturday evening at about 5,40 pan. he heard bQihe peopto talking outside toe shop window and on looking out he saw accused take a suit off one of the hooks. He immediately went out aftor accused, who by toe time he reached him was in front, of Mr Gunning’s. He asked him where he got toe suit and accused replied “What suit?” Witness then opened accused’s coat, under which toe suit was .concealed, and took it from him. He returned to the shop, the police having been communicated with. Shortly, after fie pointed accused out to Constable McGregor at tile Albion Hotef. He was certain he was fhe man whp took the suit.

To Mr Mopdy; On looking out of the window he saw: at least two men. He saw accused lift the suit off the hook. When he come out to him he was standing in ffont of Mr Gunning’s window by himself. From his speech he was satisfied he had had drink. He appeared surprised when questioned about the suit. After notifying the police he again saw accused on .the pavement by toe Albion Hotel.

Howard Andrew,) draper, said) at tile time he was at toe back of toe shop, and Mir Hunter drew his attention to toe fact that a man ha a taken a suit. He followed OVLr Hunter out and saw him, take the suit from the accused. He. identified accused when brought in by 1 Constable McGregor as the man who had toe suit. Accused seemed surprised when charged. He had been drinking. T. E. Drake and Wm. Clayton gave evidence identifying the' pair ol trousers as belonging to W. H. Gunning and Co., Ltd. Both witnesses stated they had never seen accused before. Mr Clayton said the articfe had been displayed outside toe window, and had not. been sold either by himself or his assistants. To Mr Moody: Would not know by record if sold, but the. amount couild be traced on detail slip. Did not know anything .had been missed until the trousers were brought in by the police. Constable McGregor stated he received a complaint of theft from the front of Howard Andrew’s, Ltd. Accused was pointed out to him in front of the Albion Hotel. He went and interviewed him and told him ne was going to arrest him and he would be 'charged with theft, wm-te proceeding down Stout Street to the station accused stated oile of the other men had taken._the suit, and that he did not know his name as Re was a stranger. He' denied all. knowledge of the trousers. • To Mr Moody: Saw .accused go into the hotel and followed him. He appeared to be by himself. He said ne had had drink hut was not drunk enough to be arrested. , For the defence Mr Moody stated accused was a labourer employed at Arapletii. On Saturday he came to Shannon with t\vq companions and had several drinks. He left the Hotel at' about 5 p.m. and met a stranger in front of Howard Lid., who. had suggested taking a sun, stating he would see him later. n was placed ib his hands by the stranger. Hq remembered nothing unul charged. x . '■ . Accused giving evidence stated be remembered coming into Shannon and leaving Moynifian’s hotel ,ai about 5 p.m. He met a stranger along toe street who he had been with during toe afternoon and while in front of Howard Andrew.’s, toe stranger had suggested taking the suit. The next he remembered was being charged. Did not remember Hunter coming to him, hut admitted telling Constable McGregor he knew nothing about toe suit. Did not know anything about toe trousers until bus morning. He said he was ho.t short ol money and had. Plenty df clothes. H Ryiands, workers’ inspector at Arapeti, said' he- had known accused for toe past three months and had found him a decent hard-working man. He said accused was not short oi clothes. The Bench sapid that though accused (had previously been convicted, he had not been in trouble for tne Past years, bis offences being m the Past owing to drink, and although. never previously convicted for theft they wore not satisfied with his explanation on fhe present charge. As regards the suit there was evidence of him being seen taking d, while to respect to toe. theft of the trousers these had been iound in nis possession. He would be convicted on the first charge of stealing the suit and will he fined £lO. m deiault three months’ imprisonment-and. on the second charge he was fined £5, m default one month, sentences to be cumulative. The fines were paid.

A BOY ACTOR

Master Sullivan, of the VanburgliBoucicault Company entirely lost ms voice early in the Wellington season His mother writes that a gargle with Fluenzol was wonderfully successiui.