SHEEP-STEALING CHARGE.

Taranaki Daily News, 21 August 1920, Page 8

SHEEP-STEALING CHARGE.

TRIAL OF OKAU FARMER. VERDICT OP, "NOT GUILTY." A verdict of "not guilty" on both counts was returned by the jury at the Supreme Court yesterday in the trial of Georg? Payne, a farmer of Okau, who was charged before his Honor Mr. Justice Salmond with having stolen between • November, 1919. and May 1, 1920, nineteen sheep, the property of Scott Bros., •farmers of Okan. An alternative charge, of having received the sheep knowing them to have been stolen, was also preferred against the accused. Mr. C. H. Weston conducted the case for the Crown, and Mr. R. H. Quilliam appeared for the recused. j On Thursday, i'lc evidence for the pro- ; secution was concluded, and the case for I the defence was commenced yesterday j morning. !

Frank William Sutton, Inspector of Stock and Registrar of Brands, was recalled by his Honor in order to state this sex of tin; sheep from which *kin No. 8 was taken. Mr. Sutton said he was quite sertain the sheep was a ewe. Mr. Q'jiUifttn, in orsriiug the case for tho defence, sairl that the evidence for the prosecution w,v, simply an inference to be drawp from the possession by the accused of soma skins, the ears of n'hirii had hee« apparently cut about. The defence was a denial that any sheep ■had beeafetolen or that any sheep had been dislronestly revived by the accused. Counsel then detail «J the nature of the evidence he propo*; to call. Josph Norman Eva, storeman in charge of' Mr. Nolan's hide store at New Plymouth, said he had had considerable experience with sheen skins and hides. The ears produced on which there had besn considerable mntilwtion were just odd ones picked up on the floor. The second collection of ears, which had been mutilated were from Chambers Bros, on I Jib Jlokau River. To. Mr. Weston: The ears were a collection !ic had picked up on the floor from the skins sold at the last sale. He had pioked out the worst ones he could find. The six ears from Chambers Bros, were from a collection of 100 skins. .ACCUSED'S EVIDENCE.

The accused stated that he was 49 years of age, and had been twenty-five years at Okau. He was a married man with 12 children. Accused related the circumstances ot' the visit of Constable Blaikie and William Scott to his. farm. Constable Blaikie asked him if he had any skins, and he showed them alt the skins in his possession. The constable and Mr. Scott also examined the sheep which were mustered in the yard. With reference to the raddle ontsome of the sheep he had raddled them for killing purposes. As far as he knew all his sheep were mustered on that day. He had mutiliated some of the ears in order to place his own mark upon them. He had killed some sheep just before May 1. He had not at any time stolen sheep, nor had he at any time received sheep which he knew to be dishonestly obtained. He could neither read nor write, but could sign his name. To Mr. Weston: It was a complete surprise to him when the constable visited him. No hint that he was suspected had ever been made to him previously. He diet not keep any note of any transactions, and his wife relied on her memory as to what business was done. He did not know that he had not the right to mutilate the 'ears, but had done so simply in order to place his own mark upon them. He paired very nearly all his sheep's feet before dipping. He had not bought any sheep since shearing, and he was not quite certain whether he raddled ithree or four sheep. The reason he said to the constable that the ears had been chewed off by a dog was because he was excited. The statement was not true. One of the skins had been put over some steps at night, and remained there all night. The next day It was put in the shed. With reference to skin No. 8, the mutilation was an old out. He could not say w'hose mark was upon the ears. He did not know Mr. Greenwood's mark. As far as he could say the sheep came from the Uruti yards. On skin No. 3 there were two marks which he knew nothing at all about. The skin bore his own mark on both ears. The ears had been tipped when he bought the sheep at the f-rnti yards. He Jiad a clever sheep dog, but he did not use it for sheep more than about once in six months.

To His Honor: The story lie told the constable about the dogs chewing off the ears was not true. He remembered cutting the heads off two of the skins, not knowing that it was unlawful to (lo so.

Charles Stewart, clerk employed by Newton King, Ltd., gave evidence that the last occasion on which the a'ccused purchased sheep through his firm was at the Uruti yards in February, 1919, He then bought 16 ewes and another lot of 21. This concluded the case for the defence, and counsel addressed the jury. JUDGE'S SUMMING UP. His Honor, in summing, up, said that the only evidence against the accused was the'evidence adduced by the Crown in regard to the ten skins produced in Court, and of these, Scott Bros, had only been<prepared to swear to the identity of two as having been theirs. These were the skins described as JJos. 3 and 8. An extraordinary feature of the Crown's case was that relating to the sex of the sheep stolen. Scott Bros, stated that they lost 17 wethers and two ewes, and the two ewes were lost on the 20th of April, only two days prior to the visit of Constable Blaikie and Mr. William Scott to the accused's farm. There was no evidence of Payne having stolen two ewes, and the remarkable feature was that skins Nos. 3 and 8 were of ewes and not wethers. Itis Honor explained the different methods of identification, and said that the case against the accused was based more largely on his own statements and contradictory explanations than on any evidence adduced by,the Crown. In directing the jury, his Honor said that they would have to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that one or more of the skins belonged to Scott Bros, before they could convict him. If they could not satisfy themselves that any of the skins belonged to Scott Bros, they must acquit the accused. The jury retired at 12.18 p.m. and returned at 12.44, with a verdict of "not guilty" on both counts. The prisoner was accordingly discharged.