A SELF-ACCUSED THIEF.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIV, Issue 179, 29 July 1903, Page 8

A SELF-ACCUSED THIEF.

PuEMARKABLE REVELATIONS.

RECEIVER CONFESSES.

Some interesting revelations were made at the Police Court yesterday

afternoon in connection with the alleged robberies at Messrs. John Burns and Company's warehouse, Customs-street, when a salesman named James E. Wheeler was charged with receiving a large quantity of articles, the. property of Messrs. Burns and Co., knowing them to have been stolen , . There were separate informations in connection with each article, those specified being a lawn. mower, value £ 3 10/, an Orion range, value a cruet, value £2, electro-plated biscuit barrel, value £1 15/. a dressing companion value £1 '15/, two kegs nails, value £1 10/; and another lawn mower valued at £4 10/, the total amount being £25. The dates of the alleged offences ranged from February to November. 1902. Mr A. Blair (on behalf of the Hon. J. A. Tole, Crown Prosecutor) prosecuted, and Mr J. C. Martin defended. Benjamin Nashelski, a salesman employed by Mfcssi'S. John Burns and Co., stated that on May 20, 1902 he sold an Orion range and six sheets of galvanised iron to the accused, the transaction being carried .out in the usual way. A record of the sale was made, and it was j usual to send this to the ofiiee, so that I the account could be entered. He could I not say that he had done so upon that occasion. The slips were kept for the day on witness 5 desk, to which- all the salesmen had access. They were sent to the office in the evening, and if any i were destroyed, the goods entered upon them would not be charged to the purI chaser. Important evidence was given by j Gordon Duncan Chirk, who st.atcd that Ihe was a salesman at Messrs. Burns' warehouse in May, 1902, when Wheeler told him he wanted a range, and would i give him "so much" if he could get it I away for him. Witness said he would try. "and he refused to tell Wheeler how .he* could do so. Wheeler subsequently told him that the stove had been delivered, and witness promised to "fix it up" so that he would not be charged for it. By destroying the sheet before it entered* the office this was effected, and witness was given £2 or £2 10/ by the accused. Asked by Mr Blair if he had had other transactions of a similar kind with the accused, witness replied in the affirmative, mentioning that five weeks ago he took an 18-inch lawn mower over to Wheeler's place of business at his request, and 12 months ago took a 16-inch mower to the same place. Wheeler asked for a dressing companion, saying it would come in handy, as he was going for a trip South. Witness got it for him, and also secured a cruet and biscuit-barrel, which Wheeler said he wanted for the purpose | of giving as prizes in exhibitions. Upon j each occasion witness omitted to enter J the goods in the ordinary course, and I Wheeler was never charged for them by j the firm. Witness, however, was paid, but Wheeler never gave him anything | near the proper value of the articles. For two kegs of nails, value 16/6 each, he received 10/ each, and he was paid 20/ for a lawn mower worth 00/, and 15/ for another lawn mower valued at SO/, Wheeler knew the goods were being dishonestly obtained, and cautioned him to be very careful, as he did not wish to get into trouble.

Cross-examined by Mr Martin, witness said he had the right to purchase goods from Messrs. Burns at less than the ustial price, but he iiad never told Wheeler this. All the goods excepting the, range and acilg were stolen from bis department. Hp did not arrange with anyone else to steal the range.

Particulars of some admissions by the accused were given by Mr Robert Burns. a director of the prosecuting firm, who said that Wheeler, after being brought to the office by Detective Hollis. Lα connection with the stove, told him he would make a clean breast of it. lie said ho paid Clark to destroy the sheet, and knew he was getting the stove on approval. Wheeler explained that he did not wish witness to cast any suspicion upon .Mr Nashelski. Detective Hollis put in a written statement which the accused had made in his presence. Wheeler, according to this, admitted that upon various occasions he had bought from Clark the articles enumerated in the charges, paying him small sums of money, which he knew to be much under the value of the goods. He knew, too, that they belonged to Messrs. Burns and Co., and that Chirk was stealing them. He arranged with Clark to destroy the order form for the stove. It was the first dishonest transaction he had been connected with. Detective Hollis added that the goods were recovered from the accused's residence in Mount Albert. This completed the case for the prosecution. Accused pleaded not guilty, reserved his defence, and was committed for trial at the Supreme Court.