THE HORSE-STEALING CASE.

Waikato Argus, Volume XI, Issue 1106, 23 November 1901, Page 2

THE HORSE-STEALING CASE.

As tri<fly announced in yesterday's issue, William ami James Power were conjointly brought up at Cambridge, yesterday, before Mr H. W. Northoroft, S. M , charged with stealing three horses from Napier. The first case taken was the one of stealing a bay gelding, valued £2O, from David O’Dcnoghue, the evid nee being as follows : David O’Donoghuo, cib proprietor of Napier, deposed that he owned a bay gelding. On 12th January he sunt, him out to grass that day in Mr hj el Downing’s paddock, 5 or 6 miles from Napier. On the 9th March Downing told him the hnrse was missing. He advertised for the animal and informed the police. He next saw the the animal in the posses ion of M‘ Pi e at Cambi nlgo, about a e ■ k ago He valued the hoise ai £2O. He had not authorised anyone lo remove the animal from the paddock. The horse outside the Court was the one he lost.

Cross examined by Mr Swirl)rick : The owner of the paddock put the horse in it. He handed it to Downing in Napier. The horse is branded with a diamond on the near shoulder, and it is about 10 years old. It had a few while hairs on its forehead. Chan. Hunter, auctioneer, Cambridge, deposed : The firm of W. J. Hunter held a sale at Ohaupo on the 10th ami Iltli of last April, at which he was present. Doth the accused were present at the sale on the 10th. The hay gelding outside the Court was at Ohaupo sale, ind was sold by auction on the lUh. The animal was entered and sold in the name of D. Hutherferd, instructions having been received by letter. The letter produced, dated 10th April, 1900, was read at the sale by his brother, who was the auctioneer On the first day of the sale Mr Power told him he had been asked to bring the horse over from Cambridge by a man, hut he did not know the man or his name, and he brought the horse over. He remarked it was a great nuisance not knowing the man's name, as it could not be numbered. No one came to own the hois' on the first day of the sale, and in consequence of a conversation he had with his brother, it was offered on the second day, being knocked down to Mr Pike for £l3 10s. He did not know’ anyone in the district rained D, Rutherford. After the sale lj,e scut the horse to Mr Pike, who paid the money for the animal.

Henry Pike, of Cambride Wes , stated he remembered working in Cambridge on 9th April last. He saw the bay aiding in question between three and four o’clock that day near St. Andrew’s Church. It was in the the possession of a young man who was leading it and riding another horse. (Witness here picked out Mr Power as the one who was leading the horse). He was coming towards the town and went as tar as Young’s blacksmith’s shop. The horse’s mane was half hogged ; he thought it might suit him. The next time he saw the horse it was delivered to him in Cambridge, and he subsequently found it had been purchased for him by Mr Charles Hunter. About the 2n 1 November Constable McGilp took possession of the horse, but left it, in his (witness’) charge, and last Saturday Mr O’Donoghue took it away. Accused came down Thornton Road wdreo he (witness) first saw him with the horse.

Cross-examined by Mr Swarbrick : He had never seen the horse before 9th April, or the young man. He was not prepared to swear the accused (Mr Power) was the young man, hut he believed it was. He saw him go to Young’s blacksmith’s shop, and subsequently at Gemmill’s blacksmith’s -drop. Constable McGilp deposed he went to Pike’s place otr 2nd November to examine the horse in quetion. It was now outside the Gout. At that time he was enquiring for some horses th it bad been stolen from Napier, He laid an informa tion, and procured a warrant tor the arrest of William Power. When proceeding to execute it he saw him on the brow of a hill. When he saw witness he turned back suddenly. About a mile further on he came up with him. Asked him if he knew anything of a mare called Coquette. He said, 'No.’ He then arrester him. Afterwards he saw J rnes Power, who in reply to questions said he had a marc culled Coquetlo. It vas down on the run. He refused to help witness to catch tire mare, s,- ying he was tired. Witness subsrqueutly searched for the mate, hut was unable to find her. He knew the letter produced; it was addressed, ‘Mr T. Power, Manawatu,’ aud was signed, ‘ Your affectionate brother, Jim.’ On November sth James Power came to witness in Cambridge, ami handed over the mare Coquette.

By Mr Swarbrick : He was not in uniform when he went up on November 4th.

Thomas Dillon, clerk to Mr W. J. Hunter, deposed that a bay gelding was sold at the autumn sale in the name of Rutherford. A cheque was ’sent by post to D. Rutherford, Okoroire. The letter was returned, and marked ‘ unclaimed.’ The money paid lor the mare was still unclaimed.

Charles W. Kelly deposed that his land adjoined accused’s. About September or October last year W. Power left home, and James left in January last. They returned about March 3rd. He had seen James Power wearing the coat produced. Charles Bruuskill remembered MeNicol’s sale on March 6th. On March Ist he saw both accused—James on his own land in the forenoon, and William came to witness’ house in the evening. That was the first time he had seen James for a considerable time. He said he had just got hack from Christchurch, where he had been married. William left home some time before Christmas, and James afterwards. They had a black and w bite fox terrier. Herbert Sydney Brown, coach-driver, at Napier, deposed : The bay gelding outside the Court he first saw at Tarawera,onthe Napier-Taupo road, on the 25th February, in the possession of James Power; his brother was with him. Ho had two other horses. They had three horses with them ; they were each riding one and the chestnut was being led. The three horses were those outside the Court. When the Taupo constable spoke to him he remembered one of them was Dr. Ronald’s maie. , By Mr Swarbrick : He fixed the date, 25th February, as he went to Taupo that day as a passenger, being had with rheumatism. Charles George Blake, clerk at the Okoroire Hotel, deposed to having charge of the post-office. A letter came to Okoroire some months ago addressed < Rutherford,’ A young man called for letters so addressed, and he delivered the letter in question to him. He appeared to he about 23 or 24 years of ago and about sft 7>n in height. He wore a blue sac cloth coat and vest. When he left he went in the direction of the road leading to Cambridge. Shortly afterwards another letter came came addressed ‘ Rutherford witness believed that this letter was re addressed to Cambridge as requested hy the man who had called for the previous one. W mess here picked out a brother of the accused, w ho was standing in Court, as being like the man who called for the letter. . By Mr Swarbrick : It was not either of the accused who ea'led for the letter. Thomas Henry Dillon being re called said the cheque'fur £l2 14- 64 sent, to D. Rutherford, which had previously been missing, it had been re unit'd and was still unclaimed. Henry Wilding, an Auckland expert, in hand writing, deposed that on the 18th instant he examined the letters prodtund j„ Court. The two letters signed hy U. Rutherford, and the one signed ‘Jim, were, without doubt, written by die same person. Two other letters produced in Court, signed J. E. Power and

D. Rutherford, were also written by the same individual. That closed the first case. Mr iSwarbrick said accused would reserve their (b fence. Accused were tlicn charged with stealing a chestnut mare from James Brown, of Napier, of the value of £2O, James Brown, carrier, of Hastings, deposed that the mare was in his pad dock at Hastings on the night of 24th February last. She was missing, next morning. The gate was open. He next saw her in a paddock at Cambridge on the 14-th inst. The mare outside the Court was his property. Herbert Sydney Brown deposed to the mare being the animal referred to in his evidence in the previous ease. Constable McGilp deposed to visiting James Bower in reference to a horse he bought at Me icol’s sale at Camb idge i i March last Saw a horse heie, and, noticing the brand, said : ‘ This is the horse light enough, for here is the brand.’ Power asked him what: he was going to do, and remarked ; 1 She is the best bit of stuff I ever worked with. To whom does she belong ? ’ Witness replied : ‘To a man named Brown.’ Witness took possession of the mare and brought, her to Cambridge. Witness had been unable to find anyone of the name ol Rutherford.

Robert Bradley, accountant to McNicol and Co., deposed that on the 22ml and 23rd of March the firm held « ho. sa sale at Cambridge. They received a Utter signed P. Rutheiford, entering a light draught horse for sale. Another letter, signed G. G. Rutherford, asked that the cheque be sent to Cambridge ; this was done. The letter was returned marked ‘ unclaimed.’ Charles W. Kelly deposed to seeing the mare knocked down to Jamis Power at something like £lB.

Henry Wilding deposed that the letters produced in this case were written by the same person as that signed ‘Jim.’ This concluded the second case, and Mr Swarbrick again reserved their defence.

Accused were then charged with stealing a bay mare, the property of Dr. A. E. Ronald, of Napier, valued £25, who deposed to missing the mare on the 24th February in Napier. Much of the evidence in the previous cases was accepted as applying to this. The mare was sold at Hunter’s sale under the name of ‘ G. Duncan.' The cinque was sent to Cambridge as requested. It was entered as sold to Power. The letters signed Duncan and Jim were declared by Mr Wilding to have been wiitteu by the same person. The accused were committed for trial, bail being allowed in two sureties of £2OO each, and each of the accused in £200;