MISSING TELEGRAPH POLES.

Taranaki Daily News, 26 March 1921, Page 6

MISSING TELEGRAPH POLES.

OF THEFT FAILS. CASE AGAINST WESTOWN RESIDENT.' A considerable amount of conflicting evidence was adduced in a case heard at the New Fly mouth Magistrate’s Court on Thursday in which Frederick J. Cowling, of Westown, was charged with the theft of six totara and one ironbark telegraph poles valued at £5, the property of the New Zealand Government. The offence, it was alleged, occurred about February 19. Detective-Sergt. Cooney prosecuted, and accused was represented by Mr. J. C. Nicholson. For the prosecution, Alfred Hart, telegraph linesman, said that in February he was acting foreman, and from something he heard he went along the lines with another linesman named Green and found six totara poles and one ironbark pole missing. On February 26 he went to Cowling’s farm, again being accompanied by Green. He proceeded down the farm, and as he was going along he saw the butt of a totara pole. They met Cowling, who was asked by witness if he had any telegraph poles and he said he had not. When shown the piece which witness had noticed, Cowling did not make any reply. They proceeded to a bridge which Cowling was making and there saw part of an ironbark pole and some pieces of totara poles. Cowling told witness that he had bought poles previously from thq Government for 7s a piece, and witness replied that these poles were not for sale as the Government wanted them. Cowling then asked: “What is it worth to keep quiet?” and witness replied that he was not taking anything. Hart said considerable trouble had" been experienced by the department over materials on country roads, and in one week 3 tons of wire were stolen.

In reply to Mr. Nicholson, witness said he was satisfied that the totara in the bridge was the telegraph department’s poles. Albert W. Green, linesman, gave corroborative evidence, and Detective Cooney also gave particulars of a conversation he had with accused. On this occasion Cowling said he had the poles. A. Baily, taxi driver, who accbmpanied the two linesmen to the farm, also gave evidence. THE DEFENCE. Mr. Nicholson said that the charge was an extraordinary one, and should never have been brought. It was true that Cowling had timbers on hie farm which had been telegraph polea, but these had been bought from the Govern- , meat years ago. Counsel said he would call evidence to show that the

so-called ironbark pole waff really < puriri bridge plank. Cowling was sq taken back when accused of stewing the poles that he sarcastically remarked to the telegraph officials that of course the poles were theirs. It was rather un* fortunate that he did make such • statement.

Accused, F. J. Cowling, in 1918 he bought a farm at OmaSkfrom W. J. McKean. There were fifteen lengths of totara on the farm which were formerly telegraph poles. He removed twelve lengths of the totara to his Wstown property. When Hart came to the farm he said: “Yeu were seen on the road about midnight with a dray, and in coiqpany with another man, taking the poles.” Witness then denied this. Hart pointed to the side of the bridge and said the timber was comprised of telegraph poles. He also said there was an ironbark pole there, and witness replied that he had I got the timber off the road at Omata. It was. not a telegraph pole, however, but a puriri bridge plank. Hart accused witness of being a liar and & shirker. Cowling denied the detective’s ; statements regarding the interview. I William J. McKean, of New Plymouth, said he formerly had a farm at Omata, which he sold to Cowling. On I the property there were six totara telegraph poles which witness had brought lin 1909. They liad been cut up for * stringers and whefi Cowling took over ■ the property he re-arranged the fences. . taking out the stringers. Witness had I examined the bridge on Cowling’s place | at Westown and identified two of the ! totara posts as having previously been ! on hie property at Omata. There was po ironbark in the bridge. B. S. Tancred, of Weatown, also gave ’ evidence as to the materials in the bridge. His Worship said' that after hearing the evidence of Tancred and McKean he felt satisfied as regards the •case. The information was dismissed.