POLICE COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXIV, Issue 60, 22 February 1902, Page 2

POLICE COURT.

Fridat, 21st February.— Before Mrt R. L. Stanford, S.M. 1 if ALLEGED OBTAINING GOODS BV FALSE J PKBTENCES. ; t Tom Stewart, c*rtsr in the employ of c J. V. Hooker, was charged with ob- 1 taiuing a sack of flmr, value £l, by i falsa pretences from the railway goods t shed on the 18th inst. ' * Mr Weston appeared for the ac- i cused, who pleaded not guilty, and.< ! a6ked for an adjournment. ' Sergeant Haddrell, who prosecuted, ' i opposed the adjournment, as the wit- i r neeses were present. ' His Worship decided to go on with i > the case for the prosecution. ' ' George S. Concept stated he was i ' .>c!ing as doorkeeper fit the goods shei 1 on t.h» 18th when accused came for 20 s sacks of flour for Mr Lealand, arid wit- : ness obtained authority from th» fore- • miin to deliver the flour. Accused : look 11 sacks for the first, ioad. Wit--1 ness assisted accusad in lo«ding, and the Utter signed for receiving 11 cack< [. for the first load. This was about 4.45. I Subsequently accused sime back for n the remainder of the order, and thin '' said that when unloading the flour at

Lealand's he only found 10 sack?, and Leil&nd alse remarked tbat there were only 10. Witness asked accused if he had not dropped one on the road, and witness said he had not. Witness eventually said that perhaps he had made a mistake in counting, so gave accused a further 10 sacks, and witness altered the first entry to 10. Accused asked witness to mtke the secund entry for nine sacks only, but witness declined. Witness shortly after went to Lealand's and counted ihe flour, finding 20 sicks there. In the evening witness, with another railway official, went to Stewart's house aßd saw him, and then accused admitted he had made a mistake and found he had a sack too many, which he intended to return, but as the shed was closed ho could rot do so, b«b promised to return is in the morning. This he did. Is was witutfsn' duty to cheok geods delivered from the shed. Had not previously had a mistake. Had no doubt accused took away 21 sacks. Counted the first load twice. To the S.M.—There wos such a large lot of flour in the shad that he could not tell the quantity. To Mr Wenton.- Knew the flour was going toLealand. The shed closes at 5 o'cluck sharp. Accused admitte 1 that he bad one suck over. Henry John Day stßtionmaster at New Plymouth, said accused came to him on Wednesday and made a written statement, which was read over to him and signed by him. The statement set out that accused found on delivering the second load that there was a sack too many, and that he had to keep it till the morning, as the goods shed was closed when he discovered the error. Arthur Ledand, biker, Stid that accused delivered the fir»t load shortly before 5 o'clock. Accused said he had eleven sacks. Witness did not count the sacks. Accusad returned with some more, but did not. «ay no v ra*nv. Nine sacks were delivered, and wit-ess when counting the sacks found the number corr«c-, twenty. Witness on seeing one sack left in the van asked accused if he should lift it out, but accused said it was a sack over, and he would have to go to Mr Walker's about it. Took accused to mean that the extra sack was to be delivered to Mr Walker. Did not call accused's 1 attention to the fact that there were only tec sacks in the first load. To Mr. Weston: Accused made no secret of having the extra sick. Mr. Walker was agent for the Shipping Company and would therefore be 1 interested in a claim for shortage. Had kuown accused f.<r 13 years and. gave him a first-class character, 1 A. C. Walker, agent for the Union 1 Steamship Company, said he was nob expecting flour to be delivered to him by Stewart. There was not the slightest reason why accused shou'd go to him about an extra sack. In cues of shortage claims were made on the company. If this sack of flour had been misied RQ doubt a claim would have been made. Sergeant Haddrell pointed out that ' the witness Connett had been en duty purposely to check goods going out of the shed owing to constant loss of goods from the shed. He briefly attm- ; med up the evidence pointing out the 1 salient points of the case. Mr, Weston submitted there was not sufficient evidence to convict and that even if false pretences had been > proved there was no evidence of attempt to defraud. He contended that accusjd's conduct as shown by the evidence for the prasecutioa was such 1 as showed innocence ef the charge i attributed to him. His Worship would not say he would ■ give the accused the benefit of the doubt «s it was clear to his mind there : had merely bpen an honest mistake. ■ He quite unders'ood the desire of the Railway Department to put a stop to t peculations, but in this case he coni sidered there was not a stain on the accused's character. Case dismiss -d, B BEACH OP STOCK ACT. Frank Salway was charged with omitting to brand nine sheep which were exposed for sale at the Waiwakaiho yards. Mr. Rowan prrsecu'od. Defendant, who admitted it was an oversight, was fined lspsr head and, cos's— in a]l,