LOST PROPERTY.

Taranaki Daily News, 27 April 1917, Page 7

LOST PROPERTY.

RAILWAY PORTER CONVICTED. THE DISAPPEARANCE OF A WATCH' As the outcome of the finding of a bag and purse in a railway carriage at New Plymouth on October 7, last year, Percy Moncrieth Glcnie was charged ill the Magistrate's Court yesterday, before Mr. A. Crooke, S.M., with stealing, on or about that date, 5s Id in money, the property of Mrs. Jessie Lydia Tinsley, Stratiord. Glenie pleaded not guilty. Mr. A. H. Johnstone appeared on his behalf. Senior-Sergeant Bowdeu, in outlining tho case for the prosecution, said that defendant was, on October 7 last year, a railway porter at the Neir Plymouth station. Mrs. Tinsley and another lady arrived by the 10.4.5 train from Stratford, and the former left in the train a black velvet bag containing, among other articles, a purse with money in it. It was the duty of Glenie to look through the train, and he evidently found nothing. The coaching foreman later found the bag and purse, and the money was counted into Glenie's hand and he was told to enter the articles in tho book at'the parcels ottice. He did so in the case of the purse and bag, but no entry was made for the money. Later he denied all knowledge of the money, and the department had decided that lie should be prosecuted.

The first witness was Jessie L.. Tinsley, wife of tho Rev. Mr. Tinsley, of Stratford. She stated that on October 7 she left in the train a bag containing a gold watch and chain, a handkerchief and a purse containing silver. She did not know the amount of the money at the time. Witnoss continued that on discovering her loss she wrote to the stationmast-er at New Plymouth and he replied that articles similar to those described by her had been found, and later she got the purse back without anything in it. The watch and chain were never returned.

Frederick Joseph Rogers, train examiner, deposed to finding the bag and handing it to Mr. Beck, the coaching foreman. He asked the latter to open it, and they found a purse with T>s Id in it, a gold watch and chain, and a handkerchief. Mr. Beck called Porter Glenie and gave him all the articles to take to the office.

Thomas Beck, coaching foreman at fJew Plymouth, said that on the morning in question Rogers caine to him with a bag, which contained the articles already mentioned, and he gave them to Glenie, and told him to attend to them. It was then the latter's duty to enter them in tho book at the office. Herbert Alfred Arney, clerk at the railway station, deposed that on October 1 he had initialled two entries, for a bag and a watch and chain and a purse, made by accused.. At the time he saw no morley, but about ten days later was told that there was money in the purse. Some days later the watch and chain were claimed by a woman giving her namo as "Reid," and they had not been recovered. ALTERATION OF ENTRY IN BOOK. The sergeant drew attention to an erasure and alteration in the entry in the book relating to the purse. Arney said he knew nothing about them. Cross-examined by Mr. Jolinstone, witness swore he had made no alteration to any entry. Mr. Johnstone: It is quite evident that the entry relating to the purse has been altered. At any rate, you did receive a gold watch and chain?

Witness: Yes. Counsel: I believe there ivas an inquiry into your conduct concerning that watch aud chain.—-There was a departmental inquiry into the delivery of them, certainly. And tho result was you were reduced by two years?— No. You were transferred from here to somewhere else, were you not?— No. I was never permanently stationed here. •

How do you explain having delivered the watch?—lt was called for by a woman, who asked if there was a gold .watch and chain left in the train. She described it. I handed it to her, I cannot describe the lady. How was it that the purse was not'also handed to the woman?— She made no application for it, and I did not know they all belonged to the same lot. Witness further said that this was four days.after October 7. He did not remember a handkerchief. A receipt for the watch was at the station. In replj; to Sergeant Bowden, Arney said he did not get the address of the woman.

_ Answering the magistrate, he said he did not ask the woman how she knew that the articles were found in the train.

Mr. Johnstone here remarked that the name of Mrs. Tinsley's mother-in-law was engraved inside the case of the watch.

Mr. Johnstone agaiit asked witness if he bad been in any way disrated or censured in this matter," and witnes.. replied that he had been fined £2 and had his rise stopped for carelessness in not making inquiry before handing over the watch and chain.

Plain-clothes Constable Fitzgibbon deposed that when he had interviewed Glenie at Ingiewood lie denied receiving the money. Witness further stated that he had been unable to find the Reid who received the watch.,

THE DEFENCE. Mr. Johnstone, for the defence, said he was bound to admit that defendant had acted foolishly when lie stated that he had not received the money. He was now prepared to toll the court that he did receive the articles mentioned, including tho money, He entered it in the book where the erasuro noiy appeared, and that was all he knew of the matter. Regarding what defendant told Constable JMtzgibbon, the speaker could only say that Glcnie hoped thereby to shield others. Defendant then entered the witness box. He stated he was now stationed at Inglewood and was formerly at Now Plymouth. On October 7, 191G, he did not inspect the 10.45 a.m. train .as he was otherwise engaged, but later Mr. Beck gave him a black bag, a watch and chain and a purse containing ys Id, which he took to the parcels office and entered in the book. After examining the book, which was produced in court, witness said the second entry did not look like his. To the Sergeant: Thero was now no entry in tho book accounting for the handkerchief and tho money. His vecBon for denying knowledge of the money was foolishness and a desire to protect somebody else, whose name hp could not disclose. He had entered the purse and the money, but not the handkerchief. When the clerk initialled the entry it read 'lady's purse and 5s Id." In. answer to Mr. Johnstone, defendant said that tho book in which tho entries were made was never locked up and was alway6 lying on a table in tie parcels office. Mr. Johnstone said he had looked the book and there appeared to be »wy few alterations, and tho alteration itt the present case wa,s significant. The Magistrate said that if the entry had been altered it must have been

with defendant's connivance, as the) writing appeared to-be the same as his. | Mr. Johnstone replied that naturally t anyone making an alteration ivould try l to make it the same. Ho also commented on tho disappearance of a valuable watch and chain, so that the polios could not trace it. A CONVICTION ENTERED. His Worship said that there must be a conviction, as tho writing after the alteration was the same as the defendant's. In view of defendant being married and having a good record in : tho service he would convict him and order him to pay costs amounting to 14s 4d.