SUPREME COURT.

Press, Volume L, Issue 15139, 1 December 1914, Page 4

SUPREME COURT.

CIVIL SITTINGS. (Beforo hie Honour Sir Justice Dcnniston). ACTION UNDER A CUSTOMHOUSE BOND. H.M. tba King proceeded against - Arthur H. Turnbull and Norman Lindsay Mcßoth, under a Customs house bond of £1000, in respect of a bonded warehouse at Lyttelton, providing soeurity over goods stored therein, tho duty on which had not been paid. It was alleged by tho Crown that, on December oth, 1013. certain goods were taken out of tho bond without having beon cleared, and without the duty having been paid. Mr S. G. Raymond. K.C., appeared for tho Crown, and Mr G. T. AVcstofl appeared for defendants. Mr Raymond said that the warehouse named in the security was the Gladstone bond, on the corner of Norwich Quay and Oxford street, Lyfrtelton. and was*n part of the warehouse of H. L. Owen and Company. Owen and Company took possession of it 'in June, 1912, and tho present defendants went surety for them to tho Customs Department. Stock was taken in June, 1913. and the goods in respect of -which duty was claimed, were thon in tho warehouse. Early in December, 1913, Owen was arrested for certain Customs fraucte. Thereupon a landing waiter made a search of his warehouse, and tho floods were not in the bond. Tho duty involved amounted to £SG lls lid ; tho* goods were 13 cases of sausage skins, one box and a part bos of cigars, ant! two bottles of whisky. They tvero deposited with Owen and Company by "Wolfe, Saver and Helyor, an American firm, tho 'manager of which paid tho equivalent of the duty to Owen on or allont Decomber 14 th. 1912. Owen never accounted for this money in his books. The Customs officer at Lyttelton at the timo was Hill, who had been since convicted of other offonees. The defence was a denial of all the charges by the Crown, and it was contended that it fraud had been committed, such fraud was made possible by tho connivance.and collusion of officers of the Crown. "Mr Western submitted that tiie bondholder* wore entitled to the protection of an honest officer of the Crown, fie out in numerous authorities ou winch he based his defence. Mr Raymond contended that the authorities quoted by Mr Weston were authorities dealing with fidelity bonds. Tho statements quoted from Halsbury really bore out the contentions of tho Crown. After his Honovir had heard counsel, ho said that the case was one on which ho felt very little doubt as to his lecieion. The doctrine of the defence was an exceedingly dangerous one, and if upheld would certainly deprive , bonds

of this character of their value. As the matter was of some importance o~: account of thero having been, a considerable number of Customs frauds, ho thought he had better commit his findings to writing. His Honour reserved his decision, Jin 1 tho Court adjourned till 10.30 this morning.