THEFTS AT AUCTION.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 50, Issue 154, 11 April 1930, Page 2

THEFTS AT AUCTION.

TWO OFFENDERS FINED. WARNING BY MAGISTRATE. 4 (Special to the “'Guardian.”) CHRISTCHURCH, April 10. “If an.v mere of this sort of thing goes on in auction rooms and I am satisfied of the guilt o 1"" the accused persons, they can expect to be very severely dealt with,” was the warning issued by M,r E. D. Mosley, S.M.. in a case in which two persons were charged with stealing from an auction market. Charles John Wendt, aged thirtythree, and Patricia Wendt, aged thirtythree, pleaded not guilty to a, charge of stealing two bags of potatoes and four bags of peas, of a total value of 16s, the property of Radley and Friimpton. Mr C. S. Thomas appeared for the accused, Chief-Detective Carroll said that goods had been missed from a fruit mart and someone was s placed on watch.

Ronald. Fisher, storeman, said that lie was instructed to watch certain, parties who were suspected of taking goods from the mart without paying for them. Witness saw Wendt taking peas and later potatoes. Witness found out that the auctioneer had not sold these goods to Wendt. The accused had taken bags of potatoes on which the initials “W.J.M.” had been placed. Wendt’s initials were “WCW.” Mr Thomas pointed out that the initials on a sack of potatoes produced could be taken for “W.C.W.” Police evidence was to the effect that Wendt’s wife did the buying and Wendt took the goods out to" the lorry while his wife packed them. In this case he had taken the goods out before his wife tad time to pack them. The case against Mrs Wendt was dismissed.

Wendt was convicted for stealing the peas. Defendant was given the benefit of the doubt as far as the potatoes were concerned. A fine of £3 and costs was imposed, in default fourteen days’ imprisonment. E. D. Harvey S. Batchelor pleaded guilty to stealing four bags of ueas valued at 6s the property of Radley and Frampton. Chief-Detective Carroll said this case was in the same category with the other. Accused was given an opportunity to state that he had taken the goods, but when he went next day to pay the account he made no reference to the peas. Mr Kennedy for Batchelor, said that the offence was a technical one. He would ask for suppression of the accused’s name. Accused had a good war record and was given a fine character.

The Magistrate imposed a fine of in default seven days’ imprisonment. No order was made for suppression of the name.