R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XV, Issue 4449, 20 June 1893, Page 3

R.M. COURT.

MASTERTON.-TUEBDAY, (Before Messrs Caselbcrg and Eton, JJ.'s.) ALLEQHD LABCIOT. Hurry lirown and Paul Sorgatz two young men, were charged will stealing an overco.it valued at &', from tho Hoarding House of Mrs C Gunther. Mr C. A, Po\vnnll appaared for the prosecution, and Mi Jackson for the defence. Accmcd both pleaded not guilty, MiPowimll Raid he did not propose offering any evidonco ngtinst Brown, who was accordingly discharged,, __ All witnesses were ordered out"of Court. Mr Fownall said the case was a very simple one, and thore would be no difficulty in aiming at a conclusion from llio evideuco. Caroline Qnnther, lii-oj-rioLrcss of the Union Boarding House, gave avideuce that the coat produoKl was the one left in her charge by a man named Whela'n, and which had been removed without her consent. By Mr Jackson: Had employed Sorgatz to do odd jobs. He had asked witness to allow him to stop at her house until he got some monoy for home, Would swear positively had never given the accused authority to wear or remove the coat. It had heen hung up in her bedroom, and left in her charge. Had recognised the coat on Sorgatz'fl back on the Sunday night, but did not raise any objection as she did not think lie would take it away, Hud never given the accused permission to wear the coat, Edwin Gunther, informant, said he had laid the information on behalf of his mother. The coat produced was the one misßerl. Solomon Solomons, general dealer, at present reaiding.in Masterton, said he knew accused, whom he understood was Mrs Gunther's manager, Saw accused putting the coat on and said, " It is too small for you Paul, I'll buy it from you," Accused had refused to soil, saying the coat was not his. Had seen it on him several times,

Hughio Brown, laborer, gave evidence that lie knew nccusecl. Had seen the coat produced and knew it as the property of' Jack' Whelan. Had seen accused wearing tho coat. The last occasion lie saw the coat was on Monday morning last, when the accused was rolling it in his swag. Accused was looked upon as manager and received monies from the hoarders, Constable Stewart' gave evidenoe that on the Ist of June, John Whelan had reported (he loss of the oveicoat. Had proceeded lo the Union Boarding House and interrogated the accused,who repudiated any knowledge of the coat, but admitted having heard it was stolen. Hud not spoken to Mrs Ganther about the matter, because witness knew that Soigaiz knew as much about the house bb Mrs Giinther. This closed the case. Mr Jackson submitted that the caso must be dismissed, because tbero was no ovidence to show that the accused was aware that the coat he was wearing belonged to Whelan, There was also, ns shown by tho ovidence, subsequent tacit consent to his wearing the coat. Mr Fownall, in reply, said that the argument raised by Mr Jackson must fail, because it was sufficient for a case, that the accused knew the coat was not his own, It was distinct appropriation to puck the coat iu a swag and lake it to Greytown, The Bench deoided to hear evidence

for the defence. Mr Jackson s»id they proposed to show that Mrs Gunlher hud given the accused permission to wear the coat. Paul Borgala, the accused, gavo evidence that Whelan hud stayed at the Union Boarding House on one occasion, leaving a coat hanging in the passage, He afterwards came and asked witness where it was. Told Whelan that he did not know, Subsequently Mrs Gunther told him that sho had taken the coat for money owing, and said to him, "Paul, here's a coat for you. It's all I shall get for my monoy." By Mr Pownall 11 did not know anything about the coat when Constable Stewart came to me. Mrs Gunther had not then told me about it. The coat is mine audi claim it, I am a seaman and was a second mate on board a man-of-war. I did de> sert the vessel, I did not wear tb< coatwhent was going away, becausi it would not look well to carry a swaf. and near an overcoat. By the Bench: I was allowed t< go in Mrs Gunther's bedroom to'keei the books, I did not tell Solomon oi any occasion that the coat was no mine, Harry Brovn, gave evidence tha ho knew the accused. Stayed at thi Union Boarding House. Hud seei tbo accused wearing the coat, llai asked " Who's coat is this." Acouwi replied that it was his. This ocourrei on Friday night last. Had asked to tho loan of the coat before M Gunther and sho raised no objeotioi when Sorgatz said lie might Lav it. After o short retiremont the Bono said that after careful consideratior the conclusion had been arrived i that there was not sufficient ovidenc to convict. The benefit of the dout I would therefore be given to accuse and the case would be dismissed. A the accused was a foreigner the Bene warned bin that bis escape, was

narrow one. He must in future bear in mind that he could not lawfully possess another person's property, evon if it had been given by someone else. : An order was made for tho reator- | ation of the ooat to