MAGISTERIAL.

Taranaki Daily News, 9 June 1916, Page 7

MAGISTERIAL.

NEW PLYMOUTH, JUNE 8. (Before Mr. A. Crooke, S.M.) BREACH OF BY-LAWS. William McCullum was charged that on April 25 he unlawfully and without reasonable excuse left a motoi lorry in a public place, the Main South road, near Oakum. Mr. Quilliam appeared for the informants, the Taranaki County Council, and Mr. Johnstone for defendant. In pleading guilty, Mr. Johnstone stated that the. lorry"defendant was driving on the date mentioned had an axle broken, and he left it on the roadside for three days, after transferring his load to another waggon. Lights were attached to the lorry as a warning to travellers, but it would be admitted that the back part of the lorry was on the metalled road. A fine of 10s, with costs 17s 6d, was inflicted, another charge against defendant arising out of the same circumstance being withdrawn. A CASE OF STAMPS.

Mrs. Sarah May Raven, of Urenui, was charged vvitli intent to defraud the Postmaster-General, by using a penny postal stamp which had already been used, and whicli stamp had been got off or removed from some other postal packet. Three other informations of the same nature were also laid against accused, who, through Mr. Bennett (Roy and Nicholson) pleaded not guilty. Mr. H. R. Billing appeared for the >Pos(ta;l Department/, and stated that three postal packets/had been sent to defendant, on Decej/nber 0, S and 10, with defaced stamps thereon. One. was a brown piper pacel addressed to Pio !l y io, the others were letters to lie/ son at Stratford. In two cases the '/ 2 d stamp passed, but the Id stamp was questioned. In the third instance both stamps were questioned. The Chief Postmaster at New Plymouth had , written for an explanation, and defend- | ant replied to the effect that ii the stamps had already been used the misI take was not done with fraudulent intent, as she was in the habit of giving her correspondence to her children to post. F. A. Hunsmann, postmaster at Urenui, deposed to receiving the packet? in the post and to challenging the .itamps. (Exhibits put in; the handwriting on exhibit A was admitted). This parcel was forwarded to the Chief PostmnsW, New Plymouth, with a request that the cover should be sent back. The S.M.: That is taking a considerable risk, I think. Witness, continuing, said he was certain the stamps had been vemoved from other postal packets. Mrs. Raven call ed on him on December 10 and stated that she could see no marks on the stamps, and she had no intention to defraud. She generally got her children to address letters and affix stamps. To Mr. Bennett: The only stamp he would sweat to that appeared to have a date stamp impression was one on exhibit A. A Vni stamp on exhibit C appeared to be cancelled by pencil. On exhibit B he could not say what marks were on the stamp, which had been torn whsn the letter was opened.

C. 11. Burton, Chief 'Postmaster, corroborated the evidence in chief of previous witness. At this stage one information regarding the penHy stamp on exhibit C was withdrawn. Mr. Bennett applied for dismissal of the charges, as there was not a tittle of evidence against defendant, biit the S.M. said that the onus was on her to prove that she did not put the stamps on. .Mr. Bennett complained of the laxity of the postal officials. An aged person, whose sight was much impaired, could not without the aid of a microscope, or magnifying glass detect small marks on a stamp. From January 10 till May 11, when the informations were laid, defendant had heard nothing more of the matter. Mrs. Raven, in giving evidence, said that she had never used gum or paste on a slump. Exhibits B and C. wenletters from her daughter to witness' son, and witness had only add-d a postscript. She kept used stamps which she sent to her sister to send to a mission in Ireland, and the children may have got hold of one or two. In a conversation with Mr. Burton, on January 20, the latter said that he did not think anything was done intentionally, but the department would prosecute on the slightest suspicion. A photo Unit was enclosed in a letter to her son never reached him, although the letter w;is opened in the presence of tne postmaster at Tongaporlll.ll. Witness, after examining the stamps, said that she would put the same stamps on packets to-morrow.

Alter witness was cross-examined by Mr. billing, 'his Worship said that it was strange, that a woman in comfortable circumstances and of good reputation should use defaced stamps. He considered that the stamps on the letters were put on by the children. Regarding exhibit A (the parcel) the presumption was that defendant put the stamps on, but the evidence was not sufficiently strong. All the informations would be dismissed.