THEFT OF SHOES.

Taranaki Daily News, 15 February 1918, Page 6

THEFT OF SHOES.

CHARGES AGAINST TWO WOMEN, In the Magistrate's Court at New Plymouth yesterday, "before Mr. ACrookc, S.il., Holly Tubb was charged with the theft of two pairs of ladies' shoes, of the value of £1 17s, from the Regal 'Shoe Storo in Devon street on January 'S,i. Betsy Flloyd was charged with aiding and abetting Molly Tubb in the above offence. Sub-Inspector Hutton represented the poliee, and Mr. A. If. Johnstone appeared for the accused. Mr. Johnstone entered a plea of guilty on behalf of Mrs. Tubb of the theft of one pair of shoes. Defendant was a visitor from Wanganui who was staying with the other accused at. Waitara at the time, and took the shoes from some displayed outside the Regal Shoe Store in Devon Street. He said she was the mother of three children, and her husband was a perfectly respectable jnan. He thought that as a plea of guilty of the theft of one pair of shoes was put in the poliee would probably not proceed with the other charge as there was not the slightest evidence to support it. Sub-Inspector Hutton said the losse9 sustained by tradespeople in this connection were serious. He thought there was sufficient evidence in the present case to warrant the charge of stealing the two pairs of shoes. George H. Buckley, manager of the Regal Shoe Shop, deposed that on Jan.' uary 23 he saw two women examining the goods outside his shop door. One of the women was the accused Plloyd. He overhead one of the women ask the ,other if there were any "fives" amongst the hoots. He thought it was the woman on the outside, whom he could not ; see sufficiently to identify her, who had asked about the size of the shoes. He had examined the boxes and shoes a little before he saw the women there. On going out to the door after the women iiad gone he discovered that two pairs of shoes were missing. The shoes produced were from his stock. To 'Mr. Johnstone: He could not'say how many pairs of boots were out at the front of the shop that day. He had not counted thera. He knew two pairs were missing because there were two empty boxes. It was some minutes after lie saw the women there that he went o«t and discovered the loss. He was keeping a look out, as a pair of child's boots had been taken during the time he was away to lunch. He could not say from memory how many pairs of boots he sold that day or any day. To the Magistrate: He had examined the boots a little while before he saw the women at the shop door. When he next examined them there «ere two empty boxes. It might have been a quarter of an hour after he saw the women that he discovered the loss. Dorothy Oliver, assistant at the shop gave evidence as to seeing the two women at the shop door. One (Mrs. Flloyd) appeared to be looking into the shop while the other was turning over the shoes in the boxek She .did not think the women saw her. She knew the shoes were- missed after the women had been there Mr. Buckley went and told Constable Fitzgibbon. and sent witness to the railway station where she caw Mrs. Tubb in a railway carriage. When she came out of the carriage at the constable's request she noticed accused had on a. new pair of shoes (which j were those produced) and had a parcel ' of old shoes in her basket. Constable Fitzgibbon said at the request of Mr. Buckley he went to the railway station and'there saw the Aefenddif-. He questioned them as to the shoes hui they denied having' taken any. Oliver noticed defendant (Mrs. Tubb) wearing a new pair of shoes and identified them as from the stock of the Regal Shoe Store. He asked the first accused her name, which after some delay she gave as Molly Flloyd, and said nhe lived at Nelson street. Stratford. JuKt then the train was leaving the station and he got on board to further question accused as he was not satisfied with what she had (old him. She later told him her name- was Molly Tubb. The other defendant gave the name of Mrs Joe. Flloyd. of Nelson street, Stratford. After considerable inquiry he found that defendant (Flloyd) lived at Kelson stre=t. Waitara. Mr. John*'one submitted there w»3 no evidence to sustain the charge against Mrs. Flloyd. The Magistrate said there was certainly something for accused to answer, and she was accordingly called to give evidence. Accused said her name was Betsy Flloyd. married, of Nelson street, Waitara, Mrs Tubb was a visitor witli her on January 23, on which day they came to New Plymouth together. She remembered being in front of the Regal Shoe Store that afternoon. She had done business in the shop on several occasions. She knew nothing of the theft of the shoes mentioned. She did not see Mrs. Tubb handling the shoes in the boxes at the shop door. To Sub-Inspector Mutton: She did not know if Mrs. Tubb handled the shoes at the front of the shop. She herself handled only one pair of boots (size 13). She was not looking at any other of the shoes. To tlie Magistrate: She did not know when Mrs. Tubb stole the shoes. The first she saw of the shoes was when they were handed to the constable at the railway station. She was not aware that they had been stolen. Mrs. Tubb had never told her she stole the shoes. She said they had been given to her. They did not go to the station together from the shoe shop. When witness got to the station her friend was in the carriage. She did not see her change her shoes. She had gone into the lavatory of the carriage but witness did not know that she had changed her shoes. The charge against Mrs. Flloyd was dismissed. Mrs. Tubb was convicted of stealing one pair of shoes and fined the sum of £2, in default 14 days' imprisonment.