ALLEGATION OF THEFT.

Auckland Star, Volume LV, Issue 179, 30 July 1924, Page 7

ALLEGATION OF THEFT.

CHARGE AGAINST CARRIER. HOUSEKEEPER AS WITNESS. "SPITE," SAYS COUNSEL. The jury Tetired at noon to-day in the Supreme Court to consider their verdict in the case of John Onslow; Wheeler (Mr. Singer), charged in the Supreme Court before Mr. Justice Stringer with having broken and entered the warehouse of Tunibull and Jones, Ltd., on April 8 and 14, and | having stolen electrical equipment valued at £30 7/5, also with having stolen ei;iht coils of lead-armoured cable. Wheeler was at one time employed as a casual carter. The case commenced yesterday, before noon. -Mr. V. R. Meredith conducted the prosecution. Evidence was given by ?. E. Langstone, transport officer for the St. John Ambulance Association, to the efl'cct that he had seen accused at the warehouse of Turnbull and Jones, Ltd., on several occasion?, early in the muriiin , -'. Accused had a horse and cart, ar.d he appeared to act furtively when loaling the vehicle with parcels from the warehouse. Mrs. Margaret King said she had been housekeeper at a house at Morning-ide where Wheeler had lived. Some coils of wire were brought home by Wiiee er one evening. He lit a lire in a hole in the back-yard, and suspended the c-oil* over it on an iron bar. The leal which was melted off was caught in a tin. Wheeler said the coils had been thrown out by Turnbull and Jones, Ltd. Witness and Mrs. Ivy Jiairnson drove in a taxi with accused on April 8. They pulled up at Rutland Street, accused went away, and later she ?a»' him climb the fence of Turnbuil and Jones" warehouse, carrying parcels. Ho put the parcels in the car. Witness delivered a number of parcels to an electrical equipment shop on one occasion, doing it at accused's request. The proprietor gave her £4 10/ for Wheeler. Under cross-examination, witness admitted to Mr. Singer that one evening she had gone for a ride in a taxi to Kemuera. She could not remember the date. Mr. Singer suggested April 8. Accused and Mrs. Bairnsun were in the car. There were ten "squareriggers" of beer in the taxi. They drove to the outer Domain, where sonic of the liquor was consumed. In reply to Mr. Singer, witness admitted that she had been mentioned in divorce proceedings taken by Wheeler's wife. "I don't mind admitting, at this stage, that I intend to show that these proceedings were brought in the lirst place ■by Mrs. King out of spite," Said Mr. Singer. Mrs. King, counsel alleged, had lived with Wheeler and he had "turned her down." Kxbert J. Noble, Uixi-drivcr, pave corroborative evidence regarding the visit to Rutland Street. He also admitted the visit to the Domain.| It had been mentioned by Mrs. Wheeler that Wheeler had deserted her. Corroborative evidence was given by Mrs. Ivy Hairnson. ] Recalled this morning, the witness , Langstone said he had been taken by j Detective Barling to inspect a cart bearI ing the name. "CarlLon." The cart was I identical with the one witness had seen iat the warehouse early in the morning. J The owner of the cart was called. He i stated that it would have been possible for Wheeler to use the cart at the time of the alleged theft. Witness was ill in bed at that time. Accused lodged in witness' house. At the conclusion of the case for the. Crown Mr. Singer said he would not call evidence. Addressing the jury, Mr. Singer reminded them that Langstone's evidence had not been corroborated. The motive prompting Mrs. King to give information against j Wheeler had to be taken into consideration in weighing her evidence. It was an old saying that there was no fury like a woman scorned. The jury would have to consider the reliability of the evidence piven by Mrs. King, Mrs. Bairnson, and Noble. It was the duty of the jury to acquit if that evidence was not considered satisfactory. If the jury thought the trio were accomplices then a verdict of guilty could not be returned. There were three separate instances to be taken into consideration, said his Honor, in pumming-up. To his Honor's mind it was not true that there was no corroboration of the story told by Langstone. If, regarding the whole thing from first to last,' the jury thought there was a reasonable doubt they should acquit.