MUST PUT THEM BACK.

Auckland Star, Volume LIV, Issue 213, 8 September 1923, Page 5

MUST PUT THEM BACK.

ENGINE TANK AND "JIM CROW." REMOVAL FROM A QUARRY. XO CRIMINAL INTENT. "This man has a bee in his bonnet, and has been writing these letters when he had no right to do so." remarked Mr F. K. Hunt, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court yesterday afternoon, in dismissing a private prosecution for theft against Frank Harris. The information was laid by Richard Robert Hunt (Mr. J. Stanton), who charged Harris with the theft of an engine tank, valued at £15, and a ''.Jim Crow," valued at £5. There was also an application asking that Harris be ordered to find eureties to> keep the peace, Mr. McVeagh said that the charge of the theft of the "Jim Crow," an appliance for bending iron rails, was quite new to him, as was also the charge of using abusive language and application to have defendant bound over. His Worship: All right, you can have the hearing of those charges adjourned. Let's hear what the other charge is about. Mr. Stanton, in outlining th c case for the prosecution, said that Hunt was the owner of quarries at Coromandel. Ono of the quarries, the Moehau, he had licensed to a man named Collings, who had been introduced to Hunt by Harris. Collings had placed Harris in charge of tlie Moehau quarry, but eventually surrendered it, and then the rights of the property were sold to a man named Goodacre. Harris Inter removed the engine tank and "Jim Crow," which he had no authority to do. Harris had also written a sheaf of letters which Hunt considered abusive. Counsel then read about, a dozen letters. His Worship: Why don't you sue him civilly to recover the goods? Mr. Stanton: He is an undischarged bankrupt. His Worship: Well, you have tc< satisfy mc he had the mind of a thief when he removed the goods. Richard Robert Hunt, quarry owner at Coromandel, but himself residing at Auckland, said that on his property at Moehau he had an engine tank and a "Jim Crow." the latter being an appliance for bending iron. The engine tank was part of the steam crane, and was valued at £15, while he valued the "Jim. Crow" at £>. He lißd never at any time given Harris or anyone else authority to remove the machinery. In answer to Mr. McVeagh, witness stated that the articles were taken quite openly, and that Harris was engaged in floating companies to work, the quarries. Harris had introduced a Mr. Collings, who negotiated for the purchase of the quarries, and took them over. Harris then had an interest in the quarries. He did not know that the "Jim Crow" was now only 50 yards from where it originajly stood. Arthur Collings said that when he secured the rights of the Moehau quarry in 1022 he gave Hnrris his power of attorney and made him manager of the qtiarrv but that was revoked before witness surrendered the .property. Harris never had any other interest. His Worship: What about these g °Mr McVeagh: I would first submit ther" is no case of theft to answer. His Worship: That's all right. This man has a bee in his bonnet. Put him in the box. Harris then stepped into the box. His Worship: What about sending these godso back? Harris: I can't put them back. His Worship: Oh, well, you've just irot to put them back, see? The position Fβ quite clear, in my opinion. He has taken these goods under the mistaken idea that he had some right to them. I don't think he took them with any criminal intent. He niust return the goods. ■ Harris: I can't put them back. His Worship: Mr. McVeagh, you din it into your client that he must return them The charges of theft are dismissed but the application for sureties ca n «tand over for a week. You tell htm to return the goods and leave the neighbours "lone. If he doesn't, well— we will see about it next week.