GROCER GUILTY.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 253, 26 October 1933, Page 8

GROCER GUILTY.

PROCURING CHARGE.

STOLEN GOODS IN SHOPS.

ACCUSED'S EXPLANATION.

A leakage in the stock of Irvine and Stevenson, Ltd., had a sequel in the Supreme ■ Court, when John Edwin Lester, aged 30, was charged with counselling or procuring Allen Walter Adams to obtain a quantity of jam, fruit and other goods, valued at £10 3/0, from the firm. Lester' was* alternatively charged with receiving stolen goods knowing them to be stolen. Accused, a grocer, of Great North Road, was represented by Mr. Sullivan. The case was heard before Mr. Justice Herdman. Mr. Meredith, for the Crown, said that Adams, a (storekeeper in the firm's employ, pleaded guilty to theft. It would appear that he was working in collusion with accused. Evidence was given by Eli P. Titehener, Auckland lhanager for Irvine and Stevenson, that when visiting Lester's shop on August 22 he saw. that more stock was being carried than would bo expected in a chop of its size. ' His firm was then supplying Lester for cash only. Two days later, after a shortage in the firm's stock had been "discovered, the police took possession of a case of jam and one of plums at Lester's shop which bore the firm's, marks. Evidence By Adams. A. W. Adams stated that when acting as a traveller he called upon Lester, who asked him if he could steal something for him from the store, and suggested that they should share the proceeds. Witness refused. On a subsequent occasion accused repeated the suggestion, and witness agreed, and received £3 for his share. On 'August 23, said witness, accused visited the factory and asked for five cases of jam and one case of plums. Witness procured the goods and gave them to accused in the belief that accused had arranged about them with Mr. Witness received nothing for them. To Mr. Sullivan, witness denied that his statement about a "fifty-fifty" share with accused was a pure ninventio which, witness had created in order to make things easier for himself. To his Honor, witness said accused was aware that the goods which witness supplied him with on the first occasion were stolen.- - Evidence was given to-day by two grocers who said they had purchased goods (Irvine and Stevenson's braiid) from Lester when he offered them at better prices than they could buy. " To Pay Later." Detective-Sergeant McHugh stated that he searched Lester's shop on August 25. In the back of the premises he found three cases and these were identified by Mr. Titehener as his firm's property. Lester said he had obtained six cases from Adams at Irvine, Stevenson's factory on August 23. The other three had been broken up and placed on the shelves. No receipt or invoice was made out, but he had made an arrangement to pay later. The accused in evidence stated that in August Adams called at his shop in Great North Road and took' an order, tho value of the goods being £(S 3/. There was no conversation about "split-' ting" the proceeds. Adams gave him a discbunt of 20 per cent and was paid later in three instalments at accused's shop in the presence of accused's wife. To Mr. Meredith, accused admitted that .he had accepted the goods, with a 20 per»cent discount, when his credit had been stopped by the firm, without getting any invoices.

At 3.10 p.m. the jury returned a verdict of guilty on both counts. Sentence was deferred.