WAREHOUSE THIEVING.

Auckland Star, Volume LII, Issue 281, 25 November 1921, Page 2

WAREHOUSE THIEVING.

INDENT AGENT CHARGED COMPLICITY ALLEGED. An allegation that ho -was implicated in tho theft of merchandise valued at £662 8/7 from the firm of Smith and Caughey, Auckland, «as made against a young man named William John Rushton, who was tried at the Supreme Court to-day on a number of charges of theft and receiving goods knowing them to have been dishonestly obtained. The prisoner, who wae defended by Mr. Singer, pleaded not guilty. Another employee of the firm, William Leslie Foster, was sentenced to a years imprisonment earlier in the week, for having stolen the goods, a charge which he admitted. The Crown Prosecutor, Mr. V. R. Meredith, said that the allegation against Rushton vas that he acted in collusion with Foster, and had eatabJiehed a drapery business in Hamilton, under the name of Mingay's, to sell the goods. When irregularities were investigated, Foster eaid that he and the accused were to go into partnership, and a document setting forth the terms of partnership was actually prepared, but had not been signed. liu3hton had made a statement purporting to explain his dealings with Poster. He said the latter informed him that- he could get goods at a discount from the firm for which he worked, and suggested that Riishton should open a shop which Foster would stock. This was agreed to, it being understood that the account with Smith and Caughey was not to exceed £500. Rushton stated that he •had made payments to Fester on account of the goods received, and had no idea the goods vere stolen. A remarkable feature of the explanation, said counsel, was that the accused took no part in the selection of the stock he was supposed to open business with. It was also remarkaWe that he had received no invoices. Another feature of the transactions was that parcels were sent by Foster to various country post offirew, bearinu fictitious names, and eventually found their way to Mingay'a at Hamilton. CONVICTED MAN'S EVIDENCE. William Leslir Foster, aged 28. formerly in charge of the mail order department 6i the firm, gave evidence on the lines indicated by the Crown Prosecutor. Cross-examined by Mr. linger witness said he had been a page-boy, then a. valet, after which he joined the Mercantile marine and was quartermaster bo'swain, third mate and able seaman. Mr Singer: And you finished up by being an able salesman! Foster denied that > having come from London, he represented himself as a former employee in William Whiteley's emporium and that hie testimonials had been lost when his ship was torpedoed off the coast of Spain.

Mr. Singer: Before giving evidence I why did you want to know whether you were proteqfcgd against any further prosecutions?— Because when a man is already sentenced to a year's imprisonment he does not want the police, when they have a hold on him, to put any further charge against him. Witness added that he had no apprehension in regard to matters not yet disclosed. He retnenibered dispatching to his lodgings at Shelly Beach Road a wardrobe, valued at £26. which he had stolen From Smith and Caufjhey by means of a fictitious order. He had distributed articles among some of his friends and had once exchanged a sports coat for a set of spoons. Witness declared that the scheme was suggested by Rushton and that when he saw what, "a £ood thing ,, it wa-i. he had no hesitation in falling in with it. .lames Marsder. Caughey. in answer to Mr. Siiieer in cross-examination, stated that Foster, when applvin? for ft position with the firm of Smith and Caughey, said he had been 7 months in the counting-house and 2j years in the mail order department of William Whiteley, London. Foster also said he had been in his father's office as seed salesman. Mr. Singer: And this is the fruit, no doubt. (Proceeding. }