The Strawbridge Cases.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 5, Issue 1400, 9 June 1883, Page 2

The Strawbridge Cases.

CARTERTON-FitIDAY,. (By Teleorap.ii.) Continued. Eli Strawbridge was charged with receiving one pair of boots,;value 9s, knowing them to be stolen, Accused pleaded not guilty, George Matthew Gardener, on oath, deposed: I have missed about £3O wotth of; goods since Chistmas last. The goods have disappeared at various times. I lost some boots about Christmas. Several pairs, of all ;Bi?efeand kinds, men, women, and', • dhiiqjen's. Mrs Joseph and Mrs Thomas'Strawbridge were in my. store about Christmas time, I don't remember what they bought, but could tell from my books, .(Referring to day-book and ledger,) : I find there is no entry ?of boots being sold to them, or either of them in December or January, By the Court: I reported these losses to Constable Bennetts verbally. I gave him no written particulars. Examination continued: I saw some boots at Greytown Police Station last Sunday—a lot were shewn me. I identified one pair by tho mark made on the bottom by me in ink. They were a pair of children's elastic-side boots, with buttons on them, I never; sold those boots to any. of the Strawbridges. (Boots produced). I identify these boots as the same—if the bottom is wetted you can see my mark. I never.Bold them to the Strawbridges, or anyone else j and never authorised 'any of the Strawbridges to take them from my Btore. Both the Mrs Strawbridges were in my shop about Christmas. The boots were hung up on the drapery side of the store,: . ."• •"-" - A ., By,, Mr Beard: I never sold, those .boots to any one.' They*'might'have : "been sold by my brothers. I remembervthiß pair;because they were unsaleable. I believe tHem to have been stpleh. I do not remember every pair tjiave sold. I have sold. several pairs ;o.f this kind. lam not'eertain whether I had any more of this size, but. don't s think so; ; they are the -.first size in maids. I identify by th§ mark on the bottom made by me in ink; it is my own mark—X—l, Iknow from my books (produced) the Strawbridges were in my shop on the 18th and'2Bth ,of December. Goods; were entered as 'sold to them on those dates,. I believe Mr'aridMrsJoseph^Strawbridge live with accused. They have" bought stoods from me both on cash and credit. To tho best of my knowledge they I did' notbuygoods;for cash oh those;dates: The boots would be. 'considered, a large item in their general dealings; with nie. They only -pay cash • for small things—lollies or cotton. By the Court: I never 'sold theso boots to anyone. ' ' Charles Gardener deposed: I remember boots being missed from our store about Christmas. Tbey bore my brother's mark. Saw them next when ,you (Detective Chrystal) brought them tome, (Bootsproduced and,handed to witness') These are like .the boots, but the mark is not plain, i could see

to ijl'canriot:''identify the know Bay if where in a pair like these to"either of them. By* Mr Saddilahds: I believe these iuas." : 'I could hot swear that I ever personally misß&d these Vbdbts. My lather- M : :I ; were;.''talking:-about 'boots ; being missed about that time. Can't say;; who': first found out boots were: missing, -We might; have had half-a-dozen, or a'dozeri pair similar. to these in the shop. I can't -identify these now. I see a mark but it is not plain enough for,,meto say-if it is wy : brother's, ;,; The Strawbridges were not likely to have bought them for cash. They only, so. far as I can jswear, paid cash on small items; they, did not pay cash, on largo, amounts. We. missed boots of all kinds, VI should not like to accuse, anyone of stealing these boots, The Strawbridges/were fair customers: we have better. The women were in our shop buying about Christmas,; I do. not know what they bought.' So far as I know'they did n6fc take the boots.

'; iDetective Chrystal; It. is possible for - 'anyone to : havV taken the boots 'without my.'knowing it. I should' !knbw if they were sold to the Straw-' bridges on credit from the books, All cash' takings went into the till. No entry would be in, .the books if the: boots had been sold for cash.

Basil Gardener: I was away from the Carterton store from October to January last. I have not since sold' boots to the Strawbridges. I cannot identify the marks on these boots.

• Constable Eccleton deposed to seizing eight or nine pair of childrens 1 and womcns 1 boots in a sort of lumber room at the residence of accused, and six or seven in a room adjoining. Some apparently had been used onco or twice, but they were generally new. Accused said he could not account for so many boots, but none were from Caselberg's. Ho told me I could take them ff I liked. I took eleven pair of various sizes. Gardener said he had never sold those produced.

By Mr Beard: I was told there were five or six children at the houss. There might have been eight..

Constable Lathy: I wont to the house of accused on Sunday. Told him I was looking for boots stolen from Caselberg's. He said if I thought any of them belonged to Caselberg I could have them. I did not ask what store they camo out of. I heard Eccleton ask him where he had got them from. He declined to answer, but said they never came out of Caselberg's store. He said if we thought they were from Caselberg's we could take them.

By Mr Beard: He was ■ outspoken with us, He gave.us every opportunity to take them if we wished, Mr Beard submitted that there was no case, ant! would ask for a discharge. The case was even weaker than the previous ono, since less attempt, had been made to prove that the goods'had been stolen..: The evidence of, Mr Charles Gardener was weak as to the identity of the boots, and their having been stolen, Neither he nor his brother could swear as to whether they had been stolen or. not. All the evidence went to show -was that the women had been in the shop on the 18th and 28th of December, and therefore they were supposed to have stolen them. There was no evidence to show that they were not hi the shop on January 7, and in fact none to show that the boots produced were stolen The. accused was living in the same house with- his brother and wife, and to say that he would know whether they had taken them from anywhere was preposterous. Constable Eccleton had endeavored to show a sort of admission by the accused, but Constable Leahy had sworn that the accused had given no difficulty; had denied they had come from Caselberg's; and if they thought they had they could take them. The boots had been worn, and the marks were pretty well obliterated. How could accused know whose they were, or where they came from 1 He would ask that the case be (dismissed. The Court: There was no evidence to fix the receiving of the boots on the defendant with a' guilty knowledge. Whether they were stolen or not, was | not the question the Court had to deal I.with. They' could only' consider whether they were unlawfully come by I or not by the evidence. It was seldom ih.a case of this kind direct evidence i cojjld be given, tho Court must judge from surrounding evidence. In this the pair of boots alleged to have beeri stolen, had been found in accused' house, .but there was no evidence to show that they were there within his guilty The information nmstfe'dismissed.' ! r .. Thomas Strawbridge was charged with receiving flannel to the value of M, knowing it to be stolen. Defendant guilty; , f ., This,.case was withdrawn by Detec'tive'.pßryiital by leave of Court. : Elizabeth, wife of Joseph Strawbridge,-) (was charged with stealiug a pair ofi'borsets on 4th May, 1883. She pleated not guilty. The witnesses examined were G. M., 0,, aittf B. Gardener. Tho examination iir chief was almost identical to that of; accused's husband, In crossexamination Mr, Sandilands elicited the following evidence, viz,, from Mr Q. M. Gardener: I could not swear the corsets were in my store on the. 4th May. I first, missedHheni oh tlie. 11th. 11 have never known the Strawbridges'.to pay for anything but small articles. Mr. .Sandilands L Will you look at that account! what is the amount 1 :;G. GardfeneriJEl 145.8 d, Mr Sandilands: Who's is the signature to the accountf 6. Gardener: It is in my writing. ;; i Mr Sandilands: Then that was a cash transaction. ; ,/,; ~- .'. G; Gardener': ; YesV; ;v ; : ■ : Z Charles': crosa-examined: ;tho 'date I 'sold .the, corsets*: to Mrs .Field j ;1 do hbtj remember missing 'the-pair, protht best' 'of my recollection.ineverremember selling them^toi; theV; Striawbrid^: or j anyone

elso for castor otherwise, ■■ I have sold small articles of drapery to the Strawbridges' for cash.;; -When I say I raissei them, I mean'they werei gone when ; l went to look for them;; I .cannot say positively whether I sold the corsets or not;;. : :VV.:.ox : :: ..,-V ; ;''■:'' 'li^'-U

By Mr Beard: I last saw the corsets I: in the first week of May, after I came from.Waihenga. MybrptherjiadJaid, s them put on the Carterton. store coun-; ter, andlhad : beenup'aday Wtwo when I went; through them;"' L "-'~ ;:r By Detective, ChVystal: I saw accused in the jtoieon 4th May. '.."■;.''-."■ . Mr Sandiiands submitted there \jf& (}.; no'evidence on which to find' the'-'ac- * cusedgiiilty of the charge. The evidence: was • obscure, that of Mr G. Gardener being that he had seenaottt- ■'.•' ing of the, corsets from'the 29tb>iAprii ■ .to the 25th; May...,' . ■.■" .?!"".■ ;,■..*. Detective- CJnystel :'. '£ [ think: ■ G}\\ . Gardener swore to'the ' date and Gi '/J Gardener said the middle of May., G-. Gardener, recalled by" r C6urfc: I missed them before Charlie said anything about them, but;th6ugjit they f might have been sold, f:;' V; ;',!■) ~ ■..'. v, Mr Sandiiands submitted:that the.;. last 'evidence of Mr G. : Gardener sup.ported;his. claim for a dismissal', for al- =, thougkVhe.bad missed .thegoods, 'he' "•'•s. had said: nothing, thinking they .might '.'".*' have'been; sold. The evidence that j L : : the tfoVse'tf had not been sold was ~• ,'therefOfo.'Vßry slight. He had put in -.. 'a re|eipie'd : account for'£l-83 4d, '■ whichjishowed that considerable cash ■'•■ payments,had been made, and it was ... quite .possible that these corsets might ; have been sold and therefore not entered.. He submitted that the Court „;i mtist'be satisfied that the goods: wore ! o stolen, and there was no evidence to show that the goods were stolen by the ,v accused. If the case was sent to a jury, on the present evidence he thought : anyjudge woujd direct _\ an acquittal He admitted the stays were found at the house, but that there"), was no evidence to show they were";? stolen by this woman. >. ; . :'' V. The Cpurt: They were found in her room,

Mr Sandilands: 'True. That might raise'another charge, but as regarded ■:. the charge of larceny with which they had to deal, they might have ; been l :i bought or stolen; He would ask with some confidence that the charge be o withdrawn. ■.-:...; .

The Court: There is just so much .-, doubt when I come to consider the. evidence'as will entitle the accused tOvi: • the benefit. Mr 0. Gardener cannot say whether he sold the corsets or ' ■ not, and just on that matter of doubt . he thought the accused was entitled to the benefit. At the Isamo • time', in ■.>'■• dismissing the charge he would not ''■ express a strong opinion on the' inrio- ;• cence, pf the accused, although'there • was enough doubt to sanction her : dismissal. Information discharged. ".' The same prisoner pleaded not •; guilty of stealing a pair of boot Hi. .•- 'Withdrawn by Detective Chrystal : by leave of Court. ; Painelia, tho wife of Thomas Straw- >>.v bridge was charged with stealing a |: piece of flannel to the value of £% ■'• Pleaded.not guilty. i Withdrawn by Detective Chrystal <.-;:>:: by leave of Court. Messrs Beard and Sandilands ap-,„< peared for all accused. Detective rChrystal conducted the cases for the... prosecution. Detective .Chrystal, at the conoliK.... sion of the cases, asked the decision of. : the Court as to whether the articles v': seized wero to be delivered. The Court: In the face of the evi-.-,-, dence given this day they must bo' . delivered to the parties from whom . they were taken by the police.