ALLEGE PURCHASE OF STOLEN GOODS.

Auckland Star, Volume XXIV, Issue 50, 1 March 1893, Page 5

ALLEGE PURCHASE OF STOLEN GOODS.

SUSPICIOUS BUT NOT PROVED,

In connection with the theft of tweed reparted to-day in our columns another case wa3 heard at the Police Court this morning. Martha Lindsay was charged with having on the 21st February received from Joseph Reilly 9 l-3rd yards of tweed, which sho was aware at the time she bought it had been feloniously stolen. Mr Cooper appeared for the defendant, who pleaded not guilty. Elizabeth Speers gave evidence to the effect that she had seen Heilly go off to Mrs Lindsay's to sell a piece of tweed which he had in his possession. The piece produced in court was tho same the men had when sbo was in their company.

Detective Chrystal deposed that ha wenb to the shop of the accused, and asked her if she bought any tweed lately, sho said she had not. As witness was speaking Reiily cama in and exchanged looks with the prisoner. Witness questioned the accused at once if she had not received some tweed from Reilly, and she emphatically said " no." Later on witness obtained a search warrant, and went, in company with Detective Grace and Mr Meldrum, and examined (.ho premises of she accused, who denied having any tweed in her possession. On searching, however, the tweed (produced) was found. Accused then said that "Cock Reiily " had thrown it under the stairs, and that she had previously denied having it in her possession because she was afraid of getting into trouble. Accused, on being arrested, said " It's a long time since I was in gaol, bub I suppose I'll have to go there now." In answer to Mr Cooper witness denied that the accused had ever offered to geb the tweed when ho and Detective Grace were searching the house.

Mr Cooper pointed out fchab as a matter of fact Mrs Lindsay had never been in prison, but witness atill contended that} the accused had used the language he had mentioned.

Detective Grace corroborated the evidence of the last witness. In answer to Mr Cooper ho said that ib was only when he was about to open the small cupboard under the staira that Mrs Lindsay said she would get tho tweed. Mrs Lindsay had no communication with her daughter after the detective entered her shop.

Georgo White, the prisoner who at an. earlier part of the day had been convicted of stealing the cloth in company with Joseph Reilly was next called, but declined to givo any information on the subject. Ha subsequently admitted that he saw Reilly loave to soil the tweed, but did not know to whom he sold it or how much he gob for it.

Joseph Reilly when called, deposed thab he stole tho cloth r.nd went ts Mrs Lindsay's shop. There no one there. He lefb the cloth in the front room. He did not sell the cloth to Mrs Lindsay. He got no money from her. The first witness for the defonce was a Mrs Robinson, a dressmaker, who deposed that on the 21st February she wa3 working for Mra Lindsay. A man came into tho shop carrying a parcel. He asked for Mrs Lindsay, "and Miss Lindsay said her mother could not be seen. The man then wenb into the parlour and some time afterwards he returned to the shop and passed into the street. Ho had no parcel with him when he went out. Witness never told either Mrs Lindsay or her daughter that she had seen the man.

Accused's daughter in her examination deposed to finding a parcel containing a roll of tweed under tho sofa in the parlor about two days after the man mentioned by the last witness visited the shop. Witness took the parcel and threw it under the stairs. She never told her mother till the detectives were searching the house. She never had an opportunity to tell her. The accused, in her evidence, said she had no knowledge of the cloth being in her house till her daughter told her. SII3 was surprised when the detectives accused her of having the goods in her possession as she had never seen them at that time. When the detectives were going towards the stair cupboard her daughter told her thab there was a parcel there that mighb be what the police were looking for. Until that moment she had no knowledge that the tweed was in her possession.

Detective Grace (re-called) said he could swear that from the moment lie entered the shop to search for the tweed Mrs Lindsay and her daughter had no communication whatever.

The Bench having heard the evidence said that the case against the defendant) was most supictous, bub the evidenceon both sides was so conflicting that they would give the defendant the bonefit of the doubt. Mr Hannan stated that he believed there was a great deal of business done in stolen goods in the city, and it must be put a stop to. If there were no receivers of stolen goods there would be few thieves. He concluded by saying that if ever the defendant came before him on a similar charge ho would bo very much inclined to view the case with, still more suspicion and be prepared to give a different decision.