ALLEGED THEFT.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXI, Issue 9093, 20 May 1908, Page 5

ALLEGED THEFT.

CHARGE AGAINST A LOCAL BUTCHER. THE INFORMATION DISMISSED. At the Magistrate's Court at Masterton yesterday morning, William Morris, butcher of Kuripuni, was charged on the information of John Ogilvy, that he did take one red-roan maiden heifer, the property of Ogilvy and Sons, of the value of six pounds sterling, and did thereby commit theft of the same or did receive the same knowing it to have been stolen or did wrongfully convert the same to his own use by taking, and killing the same for his own use at the Public Abattoir, Masterton. Mr D. K. Logan appeared for the prosecution and Mr P. L. Hollings for accused.

Mr Logan, in a preliminary discussion between Bench and Counsel said that the prosecution intended to rely solely on the charge of theft.

Mr Hollings said he would enter a plea of not guilty but the magistrate said he was afraid he could not accspt a plea. Speaking further to a request by Mr Hollings to deal with the case summarily, His Worship said as the offence was a very serious one if proved, the maximum penalty being 14 years imprisonment, he felt he must allow the case to go to a higher Court. He said that even if accused were found guilty it was doubtful if six months imprisonment —the limit of his Worship's jurisdiction—would be an adequate penalty. If the charge were not established that of course would end the matter.

Mr Rollings, in reply, said that although His Worship had decided to adopt that course, he proposed to place all the evidence before the Court, to allow it to form an opinion. The case wa3 then proceeded with. Mr Logan, in outlining the case for the prosecution, said that the serious charge accused was called to answer had not been laid until the informant was satisfied as to the facts he would set up. Briefly the case was that Ogilvy and Sons had purchased on March lGtn last, thirty maiden heifers, branded with Mr Riddiford's brand and ear marked. They were all fat cattle and part of a mob of 300 purchased by the Wellington Meat Export Company at Featherston, and unly sixty out of these were delivered in this district at all, thirty being purchased by I-lolloway and thirty by Mr Ogilvy. Only fifty-nine could be accounted for now, Mr Hollovvay's thirty and twenty nine of informants. The brand was easy to distinguish. The cattle were paddocked by informant on Manh 16th, in a padiock of Mr Wm. Perry's and it would be shown that they could not get out very easily. On the 16th April one was found to be missing. On May Ist all doubt whether one was missing or not was set at rest by the hides being counted after killing, there were only twenty-nine hides. Three slaughtermen at the Abattoir informed Ogilvy thac a beast answering the description of the one lost had been killed on account of accused on April 13th. They said that accused stated he purchased the beast at the Masterton pound. As a matter of fact a beast answering the description of one sold at the pound was kiPed on the day the beast alleged to be'stolen was slaughtered. It would be proved by the ranger's evidence that the fceasts r.'cre cows, not heifers and bora no brands, and that further during the last IS months no beasts bearing the Kiddiford brand—a large and distinct one, with an earmark also — had been impounded. The slaughtermen had no doubt as to the brand on the heast slaughtered., John Ogilvy, a member of the firm nf Ogilvy and Sons, deposed to purchasing thirty head of maiden heifers on March 7th from T. W. McKenzie, agent for the Wellington Meat Export Company. They were all maiden heifers, earmarked, and bearing the Kiddiford brand, a circle with a cross in the centre. Wm. Page drover for the Wellington Meat Export Company, delivered the animal?, putting them into a 40-acre paddock a 1". Penrose, (Mr Wm. Perry's.) Witness explained the position of the piddock and the means of access thereto. They were placed in the paddock on March 16th, and the tally was thirty, made by witness himself. All but three or four had been slaughtered before one was missed. A comparison with the books showed that there was one short. On April 13th there were three left, when the number should have been four.

N < By Mr Hollings: Believed Mr Holloway bought a mob of cows out of the same line. A cow was much larger than a heifer. The animals were fairly wild, as station cattle are. Had known cows to jump a fence when "pushed" over. If a beast had jumped the fence it would get on to the river bed. Witness had known cows to be impounded from the river bed. When the heifer was missed nothing was done until the hides were checked. Did not look in the papers to see if any beasts were advertised. Witness personally examined all the beasts and saw the brands on all. Did net know what colour the heifer was when it was first missed. One of witness' pens at the abattoirs was exactly opposite accused's pen. Any one opening the gate at witness' pen could see into accused's pen. Witness visited the abattoir pretty well every day, witness yarding up all his own stock Did noc think he was at the abattoirs on April 13th, but could not be sure. Witness would have know;) one of his own cattle had one been there. It would be difficult to get near a beast on foot of the description in the charge. Witness spoke to accused with Sergt. Miller, a:cused answering all the questions put him by the Sergeant. Witness asked the assistance of the Sergeant in the matter, but witness laid the information. Witness denied being on bad terms with any butcher in the town, saying he was on friendly terms with them all, and that any difference he might have had with accused vw.t "all over." Re-examined by Mr Logan: Was positive he did not yard any beasts from Saturday, April 11th, to Monday, the 13th, nor was anything killed, and there would be no beasts of witness about the abattoir yards during that time. in reply t;o Mr Hollibgs, i said he might) have yarded beasts on

the 33th, but did not remember being at the abattoir on the morning of that date. By the Magistrate: Had never missed a beast from their yard at the abattoir before. William George Page said he was employed in March last to deliver stock for Mr T. W. McKenzie, delivering thirty heifers to informant lon March 15th, branded with an ellipse with a cross inside, witness understanding that it was Mr Kiddiford's station brand. There was also an earnark. The beasts were all branded. Witness was with the mob two days, finally leaving them at informant's paddock, after counting them. Considered the fences round informant's paddock very secure, witness never having t>een an animal get out via the fence, though he lived close by. By MrHollings: The heifers were so wild that it would be difficult to get near enough to them on foot to see the brand. If chased by a dog they iright jump the fence, but a3 a rule, a beast tried to return to the mob. Had seen cattle on the river bed, but if a beast were wild it would not go near the bridge. Witness also delivered a mob from the same line of cattle to Holloway and Son; a mixture of heifers and cows. Had little doubt but that all the heifers delivered to informant were maiden heifers.

By Mr Logan: In three years only two lots of Riddiford's cattle hud come to Masterton, except a mob which came on Monday. Thos. W. McKenzie, local agent for the Wellington Meat Export Co., deposed to selling thirty head of maiden heifers to informant distinctly branded as previously described. Witness handled all Riddiford's fat which carnc to Masterton.

Donald Ogilvy, sworn, said he kept the books of his firm, which accounted for all the beasts purchased and slaughtered. Recently a heifer was missed out of a line of thirty. By Mr Rollings: First discovered one wds missing on the 17th or 18th of April, when about 26 had been killed. Witness informed his father of the fact. Did not look into the newspapers to see if a strayed beast had beeu advertised.

Frederick G. Holloway deposed that the full line of cows and heifers purchased from the Riddiford mob had all been slaughtered on account of witness' firm.

James Shackleton, second slaughterman at the abattoir, deposed that on April 13th two beasts were slaughtered on account of accused, one a heifer and the other a cow, the heifer being a reddish roan cow branded and earmarked as described by previous witnesses. Witness knew the brand well as Riddiford's brand. The other cow was aged, and witness could not recollect the brand. Knew that Hollovvay and Ogilvy had been killing cattle of the same brand as the heifer, and so noted it particularly. Killed the beasts just after dinner, and did not think there wf-re any cattle in Ogilvy's pens on that day. By Mr Hollings: Knew the position of the pens well, informant's and accused's being exactly opposite in the drive. The other cow killed might have been branded, but witness could not recollect. Accused did not tell witness he purchased the beast from the pound.

Peter Jorgensor, head beef slaughterman at the abattoir, produced a record to show that a cow and a heifer had been slaughtered for accused on the 13th April. Witness the brand on the heifer well (Ridiiir'oiu's) - en of ihc troublesome disposition of the animals. Accused told witness on (he Saturday afternoon previous that ha had purchased a couple of nice beasts from the pound that day. Only sheep were slaughtared for Ogilvy on both Saturday, the 11th April, and Monday, 13th. There wsre no beasts in Ogilvy's yards on those days, nor on the Tuesday. By Mr Holluigs: Morris paid he was bringing the two beasts from the pound next day, and witness was not surprised to see them come next day. The beasts were put in accused's own pen, right opposite Ogilvy's pen. Each butcher knew the others' pens well, and most of the butchers were at the abattoirs daily. The beasts were there on Monday morning.

tly Mr Logan: Witness cid not see the beasts unti the Monday morning' early. George Wishart, slaughterman at the abattoir, did not remember accused mentioning where the two beasts slaughtered for him on the 13th April came from. William A. A. Davidson, County and Borough Ranger, deposed that he was present at the pound on April 11th, when accused bought two cows. One was a dark roan, and the other a light strawberry, the latter being the elder beast. There was no visible brand on cither animal. Witness knew the Riddiford brand well, having actually helped to make the brands on the station, when blacksmithing there. The dark roan mal was rather a lively beast, and was not a heifer. Witress examined the beasts to see if there were any brands and was certain neither of them was branded. Witness impounded the two beasts, which he found on the riverbed near Win. Perry's property, Penrose. Witness had never impounded a beast with the Riddiford brand on. By Mr Hollings: He did not always give the poundkueper a lescription of the impounded animals. The two cows had been handed to Mrs Savage, the pouudkeeper's wife, who was now dead. The poundkeepe'r was not there. Witness was not required to give a written description of the beasts, unless there were brands. Savage had complained on occasions about witness not giving a proper descrioiton of brands. Witness found the roan beaut fairly wild. Hi took particular notice, and saw no ear-mark on the roan cow, nor was there on the othyr cow. Witness put the cows into the pound yard, and entered the number, but not the description, thinking they belonged to Mr Narbey, and that he would discover them at the pound next day. By Mr Logim: Had there been any marks oi' brands on the beasts they would have been entered in the book. He judged that the cows were mates by the way they stuck together. The roan was very troublesome and endeavoured to break back occasionally. By the Magistrate: Witness'was quite certain neither of the animals

he impounded was a heifer. Cornelius Savage, poundkeeper, said that on March 30th the ranger impounded two cows, one a roan and the other a strawberry. Witness thought they were both aged beast 3, one being sold for £1 ss, and the other for £1 6s. (A copy of the Wairarapa Age of March 9th was produced to show that two cows were advertised for sale at the pound on the 11th). Witness said he examined the beasts to see if there were any ear-marks or brands, but he couid not discern any.

By Mr Hollings: It was hard to distinguish between a cow and a heifer when the latter was a certain age. Witness did not profess to be a good judge of the age of beasts, but he put down the age of the roan at about five years and the other at six years. Witness said he had been greatly upset from about the 4th to the Bth April through his wife's death. On the 9th he inserted the advertisement after having examined the cows, and found no brands. If the ear had been cut he would have noticed it. It was the ranger's duty to give the brands and marks. When he advertised animals which had been impounded he notified the apparent marks. When he sold the cows, he said, "Now we'll put up the roan cow." He was not quite certain as to whether the beast referred to was a cow or a heifer. The ranger's description of animals impounded invariably satisfied him. By Mr Logan: Witness was quite close to the cattle when they were put up for sale. He examined them superficially, but not strictly. There could have been marks on the beasts by which they could have been distinguished, but witness did not notice any. By the He did not sgg any ear-ma:*!:."! on tha roan animal. William Perry, sheepfarmer, deposed that he had let to the informant two of his paddocks at Taratahi. He was well acquainted with the gates connected with the paddocks, and had never seen them left open during the past six months. The fences were in good order and were cattle proof. Witness had noticed a mob of cattle in the paddocks since the commencement of informant's term of occupation, but had not been sufficiently close to notice any brands. He had assisted informant to put the cattle in the paddocks. There had been three cows wandering about the riverbed adjoining his property about the end of March. One was red and white in colour, the second a yellow and roan, and the third was black and white. The roan beast appeared to have had one calf. She was a little shy. It was at his instigation that those cattle were impounded by the ranger. By Mr Hollings: It was difficult to say whether the roan animal was a "poly" or had been dehorned. She was very wild, but witness could not say she had jumped the fence. He did not notice any brands on the cattle, on his property owned "by informant.

Cornelius Savage, recalled, said the roan beast impounded was either a "poly" or had been dehorned. The other animal had one horn broken. Witness did not think they were fat. Had they been fat they would have realised from £3 10s to £4 each. Witness recognised that some beasts "killed" better than they looked. John Ellesmore, farmer, residing on Gladstone road, stated tiiat he had seen the animals in question on April 11th. They were in the pound. One was a kind of berry or roan), c:;d ihc other wa£ between a yellow ar/.l red and white colour. WhGn looking at the beasts witness did not notice any brands on either of them.

Joseph Billington, farmer, Manaia, deposed that he saw the cattle referred to, about the end of March. Witness did not see any brands or ear-marks on either.

By Mr Hollings: Witness saw the ranger driving ths animals to the pound, and the dark roan gave him a lot of trouble. Witness thought she belonged to Mr Perry, as she resembled those in the mob that were in Mr Perry'a paddcck. Witness told the ranger so. He was present at the pound the day the animals were purchased by the accused.

Peter Jorgensen, re-called, stated that the brand was quite visible and could have been seen two chains away.

Archibald Donald Gillies, manager of the abattoir, stated that on April 13th accused slaughtered one heifer and one cow. The hide was taken away by accused's son. This was the case for the prosecution. For the defence Mr Hollings called —

William Morris, accuse.d, daposed that ever since the abattoir had been established he had had his stock slaughtered * there. On April 11th he attended a sale at the pound. There were two animals submitted to auction, one being a strawberry and white cow, and the other a red-roan heifer. He purchased the two beast 3 and also nine sheep. The heifer was very wild. Accused and his son, J. G. Morris, drove the cattle to the abattoir the day following the sale. On the road to the abattoir, accused passed Mr Winteringham and Mr Cameron. Anyone could have seen him driving the cattle to the abattoir. The cattle were put into his pen. Informant could have seen the cattle in the pen when he got there. There was no other roan cow or heifer in accused's possession at the time. On May Gth he had purchased a roan cow at Dalgety's sale, and on May 10th he bought a roan cow from Mr Donald. A few days ago Sergeant Miller and informant waited upon him (accused) and made enquiries as to the number of cows he had killed. He replied to all the questions put to him, and offered to give them all the information they required. He heard nothing further until he received a summons. Mr Winteringham saw the cattle the day accused was taking them to the abattoir, and passed the remark that the roan heifer was "a nice piece of stuff." By Mr Logan: Accused lived at Kuripuni. He had two paddocks, one at the abattoir and the other at Manaia. Hp knew informant had some paddocks in that portion of the district.- Witness left the abattoir on Sunday about 11 a.m., after having yarded his cattle, and did not return to the works that day. Witness was unable to say whether his soi/i did. He could not say whether Mr Winteringham saw any brands on the cattle. He could not account for 3ome witnesses setjing' brands andi others not.

It was the bjsiness of the slaughterman to notice the brands. The hides were salted on his South Road section, and when cured were sent to Hurst and Co., of Kaiwarra, Wellington. He did not know there was a brand on the roan heifer. If the brand was looked for it could have been found on the hide. He denied having told C. Savtge to stick to him as he was in trouble. Charles' Winteringham gave evidence to the effect that he saw accused and his son driving the cattle along Pownall Street on the Sunday in question. They were coming from the direction of the pound. One of the beasts that accused was driving was a dark roan. He asked accused where he got them, and he replied from the pound. Witness then said the roan beast was a nice piece of beef. He did not see any brand. By Mr Logan: He did not know whether accused could get from the South Road to thf> abattoir without crossing the bridge on the main road.

William Cameron, blacksmith, stated that he remembered Sunday, April 12th. He was on the corner cf Pownall Street and Upper Plain Road. He saw accused and his son coming up Pownall Street extension. They were driving two beasts, one of which wa<s spotted, the other being a roan. They went in the direction of the abattoir.

Henry Hilton stated that he knew the cattle purchased by Ogilvy and Sons and Holloway and Son. Witness did the yardinir of cattle for the latter firm. The cattle that Holloway and Son purchased were brinaed with the Riddiford brand and were also ear-marked.' In the early part of April he went to the public pound, and a roan heifer he saw there attrated his att?i:tion as he thought that it belonged to the same mob as those which Holloway and Son had purchased. Thinking that the one in the pound was one of Holloway and Son's line witness went and counted the line, but found none missing. '

By Mr Logan: Witness saw the ear-mark quite distinctly. It was a V shape. He could not see any brand as the b°ast was facing him. At this stage of the proceedings, Mr James, SM.., intimated to Mr Hollings that there was no necessity for him to call further evidence, as the prosecution could not hope to succeed in the face of the evidence given by the last witness. In His Worship's opinion the charge was brought about through the failure of the poundkeeper and ranger to furnish a correct description of the animals impounded, together with brands and earmarks, as was required by the Impounding Act. * Had those officials carried out their

duties in a proper manner the chajge would never have been instituted. They knew what was requirej when advertising a sale of impounded stock, but had failed to comply with the conditions of the Act, and were thus largely to blame for the acticn that had been taken by the informant. The charge would be dismissed.

Mr Ilollings applied for costs, but the Magistrate said that he knew of no authority in support of the application, and could not, therefore, grant it.