SUPREME COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 133, 5 June 1907, Page 5

SUPREME COURT.

CRTMTVAT; SITTINGS.

The criminal sittings of the Supreme Court were continued "before Mr. Justice Denniston yesterday afternoon, the Hon. J. A- Tole appearing for the Crovra.

•SHORTAGES" AND "OVERCOUNTS."

THEFT CHARGE DISMISSED.

In connection with the trial of Mary Anr, Glover, on a charge of stealing about £18 worth of household lineii sent to her laundry. the accused, eoncuming her evidence, said that when she included her own articles in the Glenalvon parcels to make up shortages, they were marked with the Glenalvon mark," and sent back for washing in the ordinary course. Three lots of collars, some underclothing, and a blouse had been paid tor by the witness, because they were said to have been shortages from the Glenalvon pateels. The accused added that on four occasions, while she had been doing Glenalvon work, she had been ill for a month at a time. Ihiring the time she had been running the laundry she must have put in £50 worth of her own linen to make up shortages. Three sheets which she loaned to Whitehead's were returned marked "Whitehead," and one of these had been seized by the police. Dorothy McLean, a. married daughter of fhe accused, said she .ormeriy assisted her mother in the laundry. She corroborated the accused as to the system pursued of making up shortages and appropriating "overcounts-' , Similar evidence was given by William Glover, son of the accused, who added that there were never any complaints of shortages at Glenalvon.

Alfred Duckett, a carter employed by the accused, also gave evidence.

William. Wilson, a former porter at Glenalvon, spoke to the method of counting the linen at the boardinghoose. and said he had never heard of shortages. He had tafcen bundles of dirty serviettes to the laundry, when they were included in the list, but not placed in the hamper.

Mr. Lundon. in addressing the jury said that if the accused thought she had a right to appropriate the articles in question, in view of the system of replacing shortages, she was entitled to a verdict in her favour.

Iv summing up, his Honor remarked that though the ease was very simple, it had taken six. hours. As to the alleged custom of keeping "overeounts"' to replace shortages, anything more immoral or ridiculous than this it was impossible to suggest.

The accused was found not guilty by the jury, who, in. a rider, suggested that the system of appropriating "overcounts" in laundries should no: be allowed to continue. The accused was discharged. His Honor remarked that he would go further than the jury, and say the custom never existed. TO-DAY'S FROCEEnDsGS. ALLEGED PERJURY. A well-dressed voting man named Frederick William "Lucas was charged with having committed perjury at the Magistrate's Court, Pukebohe, on March 7th and Bth. The accused, defended by Mr. J. R. London, pleaded not guilty. The Crown Prosecutor, in opening the case, informed the jury that the accused was the defendant in a paternity case heard at Pukekohe, and in giving- evidence he swore that at no time had he been alone trith the plaintiff. Eva Hart, and was not called to Hart's gate on August Bth, 1906, by Kellie Hart, but went there of his own accord. Thcsse statements were in contradiction, to the witnesses for the plaintiff, and were the subjects of the charge. The accused swore to these statements on March 7 th, and repeated them next day when he was cautioned and examined by the plaintiff's solicitor. Constable McGovern "Tirf Frederick W. Brookfield (the plaintiff's solicitor in the original trial) gave evidence as to the accused's statements on oath. Eva Hart, aged 17, deposed that on February Ist, 1906, she was alone with the accused, whom she met when she was returning from the railway station, about two miles from her home. As to the incident at the gate of the house, the witness said Lucas did not come voluntarily. She saw him passing the house, and requested her sister to run out and shout to him to stop. This was done, and witness had a conversation with the s. .used about her trouble. The first remark made by Lucas was, "What do you want mc for?" Nellie Hart, sister of the last witness, said she accompanied her to the railway station on February 1, 1906. On the way back they met a number of friends, and witness eventually rode on, leaving her lister behind. The ai/.-used had overtaken them before they met the friends, and half-an-hour after witness arrived home hex sister rqtle up, accompanied by Lucas. She corroborated the previous witness' statement that it was upon her request that on August Bth the accused came to the gate of their house.