ALLEGED SHEEP-STEALING.

Taranaki Daily News, 20 August 1920, Page 6

ALLEGED SHEEP-STEALING.

OKAU FARMEII ON TRIAL. EVIDENCE AT SUPKEME COURT. At the criminal sitting of the Supreme Court at New Plymouth yesterday before his Honor 'Mr. Justice Salmond, George Payne, farmer, of Okau, appeared for trial 011 a charge of having between November 15, 1919, and May 1, 11)20, stolen 19 sheep, valued at £32 Is, the property of Scott Bros., farmers, of Okau: An alternative charge of receiving the said sheep, knowing them to have been stolen, was also preferred against the accused. Mr. C. H. Weston conducted the case for the prosecution, and Mr. R. H. Quilliam appeared on behalf of the accused, who pleaded not guilty. The following jury was empanelled: Messrs. John Hamiltbn. J. D. Jenkins, A. G. Gibbons, J. James, I}. W. Edgecombe, A. F. Mollison, A. Gredig, E. W. Clarke, C. Hosking, A. Lee, J. L. Beid, A. C. Downs. Mr. Downs waa chosen foreman. Mr. Weston, in opening the case for the Crown, said that Scott Bros., two young farmers, bought a farm on the Okau Road, from a Mr. Foreman, and ihey entered into possession in November last. The accused's farm adjoined their property. Scott Bros, on taking possession of the farm, took over Mr. Foreman's stock, all of which sheep bore Mr. Foreman's ear mark. Later they bought some stock witli a Mr. Greenwood's mark. Between November 17, the date on which they took possession, and. March, they missed 17 sheep, and on April 29th they found that their sheep had been disturbed. In consequence they mustered them, and found that another two were missing, making 19 in "all. They then informed Constable Blaikie of the matter. IDENTIFICATION OF SKINS.

Counsel described the various methods of branding sheep and explained that Scott Bros, had carefully branded their sheep. On May 1, Constable Blaikie and William Scott visited the accused's farm, the accused having his sheep in the yard. There were 57 sheep in the flock, and the ears of several were very much mutilated. Accused showed them ten skins which he had in his possession. While being interviewed by the constable the accused showed considerable hostility, and would only answer questions after consultation with his "wile. slr. Weston remarked that the Crown's case really depended very largely on the evidence which would be adduced concerning the identification of the skins found in accused's possession. William Scott, a partner in the firm of Scott Bros., said that they bought the whole of Mr. Foreman's lloek of MO sheep. They also bought some slicep from Mr. Greenwood. Witness then examined the skins (produced) and identified some as having marks and brands similar to those of sheep which they had missed. The ears had been cut oil' two of Ihc .'kins, and tile feet on several had been trimmed.

Arthur .Scott, brother of the previous witness, said that the fences were in good condition when he and his brothers took over the farm, and they had been kept'in good condition since then. Witness also identified the marks and brands on several of the skins as being croVnt case concluden. . William Greenwood, farmer, Oka it, said his farm adjoined that of the accused.' He had not sold any sheep lo Payne for over six years, but in November last lie sold 7« to the Scotts, all the sheep being ear-marked with bis mark. Witness examined the skins and recognised one from a sheep bred by himself. The only sheep he ever sold to Payne was a ram.

William Schmidt, farmer, Okau, ex-, amined the skins. He stated that some of the earmarks appeared familiar to him as being those of Air. Foreman. Some of the skins appeared to be mutilated by having the car-marks cut about. Witness identified Mr. Greenwood's earmark on one of the skins. In reply to Mr. Quilliani, witness said ike was a practical farmer with {25 years' experience, a>id he considered ear-marking was a satisfactory means of identification. To .Ah*. Weston: He knew of no better method of identification than earmarking. Constable Hugh Biaikie,. stationed at Mokati, gave evidence of having interviewed the accused on May 1 in company with William Scott. Witness found seven skins, which lie examined, and he noticed that some of the pkins had had the ear-marks mutilated, and that' tlicy showed signs of having been recently foot-rotted. Payne showed them another three skins, one of which Mr. Scott said had Mr. Greenwood's mark upon it, and the other two skins had the ears completely cut away. By the nature of the skins he believed the sheep had been killed immediately after shearing. Payne, when asked why the ears had been mutilated, said that they had fallen off the beam and the dogs had chewed <them off. Witness saw another skin with a red saddle on the back. Of the 10 skins 2 had the earns completely cut off and fi had the ears mutilated. Four showed signs of footrot. Of the S skins with ears:remaining none had Payne's mark upon them. Payne said he had not branded his sheep since shearing, and they had not footrotted for from 7 to 12 months. Payne persisted that the sheep had been killed near the shed, but witness saw no signs of sheep having been killed there. Accused said lie had saddled four sheep previous to dipping, but had not dipped t'nern, and tlie one with the red saddle on it was one of them. From the appearance of the skins the sheep appeared to have been killed about six weeks previously. When witness asked accused questions concerning the sheep, he did not reply until he had asked his wife's advice. Payne adopted, a very hostile manner. Witness got two statements from Payne, one on May 1 and i,he other on May 10. In both statements accused stated that the skins were bis.

Frank William ,Sutton, inspector of stock aiul registrar ot brands, gave export evidence regarding the brands on (he skins and the mutilation of the ears. He identified marks of Foreman, Scott, and (Ireemvood on some of the skint?. Mr. Quilliatn showed witness a collection of ears taken at random from a sheep station and asked witness for his opinion. Witness said that the ears were very badly mutilated and the marks resembled Mr. Payne's registered mark. Several of the ears were not. markedfit all; they were simply mutilated.

This concluded the ease for the Crown, and the hearing was adjourned until 10 it.a. ie-dty