THEFT OF GOLD

Press, Volume LXXIX, Issue 23948, 15 May 1943, Page 6

THEFT OF GOLD

NORLAND FOUND GUILTY REMANDED FOR SENTENCE Leo Edward Morland. an Australian metalline;:t. seed 42. was found guilty in the Supreme Court yesterday, cn a charee that on or about October 29. 1940, at Arai'.ura. near Hokitika, being a servant in the employ of Arahura Gold rir-'Uninc, L*d , hr, stole SfiiiOoz of cold valued at £21490, the property of the comoanv. Hr iirnour Mr Justice Horthcrolt presided, Mr A. T. Donnelly, with him Mr A. W, Drown represented the Crown and Mr J. A. Scott, of Wellington, appeared for Morland. who pleaded not guilty. Ino jury, which retired at 11.47 a.in., returned at 221 p m., with a verdict of guilt••• The fallowing rider was added: "Tim itiry vi<nv.' with concern that state Of a flair:, 'which existed at the Arahura dred-e. and which facilitated accused a yielding to .-tri its temptation, and consider.- more protective supervision was, warranted " Accused war. remanded for sentence. Case for the Crown “No substantial attack or criticism was ; made cn the Crown w itnc.-oos on any point of importance, a very rare thing in a case of cnxurr.oantial evidence." said Mr Donnelly in his address to the jury. He would remind the jury that the only evidence tnat had been Riven was on behalf of the Crown. In a case in which facts and urcums'ances were linked together it was mmt unusual for the defence not to show that the Crown care was weak in this or that theory in favour of accumd. Tne whole defence would be provided by counsel for the accused. He would remind them of the central facta on which the Crown case was hacked and the jury would he able to see where the defence met the important points put forward by the Crown. The story told by accused, that he accumulated gold by honest trade in Australia was untrue, the Crown contended, because accused was destitute in Papua in 1923, and had no assets in Hokitika In 1940. At no stage did he have capital or financial resources on a scale to secure this gold. He could not explain where and frem whom he bought this gold between 1922 and 1935. Therefore, if the story was untrue he must have got it in New Zealand, and then from what part of New Zealand? He had control from the time the gold came on the dredge until it was in the bank. The only place in which he did the smelting was in Hokitika and the only place he got the amalgam for smelting was from his employer's dredge. His method of transferring the gold to Canada was consistent with criminality and not consistent with honesty. If accused had been building up an honest trade he would never have taken the risks of theft and other misfortune. He would not have taken a risk in taking the gold to Australia, to Hokitika, to Vancouver and Into the United States of America. In 1923 accused had one bar of gold and 134 bars in 1925. so it was said, but if the stories cf barren gold could be believed then this was barren indeed. He kept one bar since 1923 and did nothing with it. Its value invested would have brought in an income of 5s a week, the whole year round, then 10 bars would have realised £2 to £3 a week, 20 bars £4 to £6 a week, and £30,000 worth £ISOO a year. He kept it in a back room In the house of his father, who knew nothing about the treasure. He asked the Jury whether they would have kept such a quantity of gold romewhere in St. Albans or Sydenham and have made no use of it. Tine story was a contradiction to experience and was untrue. Morland no sooner got to Canada, however, before he proceeded to turn it into something useful. He opened a banking account—he had not had one before—except one in connexion with the Sheffield Gold Company which went "bung." Then he bought a car and proceeded to make some use of it. The story was demonstrably untrue. In 1938 he went to PaPua leaving his fortune at the house of his parents, and although he was on good terms with them, neither knew anything about it. What a risk. The mother might, easily have had "that rubbish of Leo’s” emptied into a rubbish cart. He had said that Papua was within two days of his home and he could easily nip back if needed. All the facts subnutted were in favour of guilt. The facts pointed to the accused while at Arahura having a chance to take the amalgam and he took it from his employer’s dredge and had used it. On no important point —or on any point at all—was the Crown case challenged The case for the Crown nan been unanswered and was unanfiweraole. Counsel For Defence ’ , q U oted the . chai * e on which +i or i!, n ?. h f d been arr aigned—a charge of the theft of gold from the Arahura Dredging Company. He said the case had to be established by the Crown and not disestablished by the defence. The Crown must prove its case and leave no reasonable doubt m the minds of the iury. He would submit that a smoke-screen had been put up to distract the attention of the jury from the real kernel, the crux of the whole matter. The Crown had Brought m evidence to vilify norland’s wife with reference to a black market, smuggling, insolvency, etc. A man might marry a woman and he might treat her very shabbily, but he might still be honest and straight in other dealings. No one knew the underlying motives and it did not affect the present case: and might Pot the remarks apply to black-market which did not involve theft? Morland smuggled gold into New Zealand, he smuggled it out, and he certainly committed the offence of smuggling. When he accumulated gold it was for ultimate sale and he found In Canada a wide field for his activities. Morland had been a miser, he was never destitute, but he did not want to pay his debts. The °1 ly charge was of theft of nearly 400002 of gold from the Arahura Dredging Company. Morland started in New Zealand a perfect stranger. The dredge was a big "ship ’ and it had been said that Morland was the only one who had access to the gold. There were 25 men working on the dredge and always four men were on duty on the "ship” and their duties took them to all parts. Did the evidence prove that he had sole control of the gold-winning process? He lived eight miles from the dredge and always a man started work before lie did. A witness. SUcock. was always there before him. His honesty had not been questioned. Why should that of Morland? ■ The cage in which the gold was held was open to the view of anyone on the "ship.” and nu one had seen Morland do a crooked thing. Had anyone seen Morland in possession o£‘ a tin. and if lie was regularly taking the amalgam would not someone have seen him taking it? Anyone who vas on the dredee could go into the gold room, and the gold was earned to a shed a mile away to he dealt with by others. To say that Morland had sole control was not true. Daily, weekly, and fortnightly the takings at the mine were checked by experienced officers. They were n"t dealing with novices and surely if there were any grounds for suspicion would there not be something in the daily reports to excite this suspicion? In nine months it wms alleged Morland had taken 36‘00z of gold, an average of more than 400oz a month, and yet the Arahura Dredging Company did not know it had lost a farthing. Someone saw a report of the I arrest of accused in America and straightaway said "This man worked for us, it | must be our gold." In prospecting a field j it was the custom to dig a hole hero and! there and it was thus possible to estimate the value of the field. Accused came to Arahura in 1910 and he was so accurate in his c limates that "he was wrong half the tune," Then a boro plant was put in i which showed the field varied from nart ; to part. The jury was asked to believe that the company had lost o’fiJOoz of gold which they did not know' anything about. If any of the uirors had five articles and lost one wouldn’t he know about it? Morland and his hut had created suspicion. He had rented a hut 40 years old and] even the owner imuld not say for what I purpose it had been previously used. Mor- • land had said that tire stove in the hut | w.: nor giving enough heat and asked i to be .allowed to replace it. He war- an! Au-trahan and had felt the colri. When; the r.i nrr v »n» alone he found accused j busv or carom*rv. Certainly there was, a :T'e j onr.J Ihe stove but m> signs of] ! vo one I-..id seen a rv’.-rt or a ; erne.hie. ...ui :: i ■■ v. ot t; iivlu.nlv MnoilJ” .: ■W : .1 o| eo!.I i:i a tew | cw.v; mi! 1 , 1 1 v. *: "m i'‘ c; ‘v.on hi he 'ie- i qm.fd ■ , ; . io,o!:iv of gold, : f a. .o. ’I w,■ ■; he or,vri,' mil i J e h'.e weight | '■ r.e r- m I -P It was ' • fog the- mrv to rur-ss the difference m the- of the itirrar-y Was ;• :-ot atkod sir Sc-Mt. that eg a;sv- vi p.-r foon made of Au.-tra- | -;.'g ro!-:i w’--: n .ac.'nsrd had ;srd that he i had c-P-cto -i hi? go id >r Australia, a coun- j f."- man- a h-.-irs !’ mr dr-nnee away. . ••"■ni'sion? ■' • of -a,. V hr.w.-m,, bad riven ' v Lower Court and 1 h' rn’-d m Change i c anal, -.‘is. He; W ;oi a - ( .!. M .! . rui a I. 1,1 which j ’’■h ' - .-1 - -g'H i wiuid nibin.t that I • : ’ fi ’■ ■■ land’# u an a act ur. s | w omi li -.: t was nut a bieath of * J on i.:< v.as a set of circiun- 1! sWnocj ti.at ; . r » a,m.| m maw,; that 'm' 1 ’W...'v„v ; m.v '■“ i Lr- 11-jiii'm , 01i111111iik,-11u U-- r.j.ir -.- i r v c.m. v.,i. <-n the i la sat.:;.- •ae minds .md lon9ciei.ce cf -urems 'hat tne accused had j

1 committed the theft. There was the task of ascertaining facts and drawing inferences front facts. The fact of the accused having an abnormal quantity of gold in his possession was unusual. The Crown case pointed to the opportunity the I accused had to steal. He was in a trusted I position. It was suggested that he sought! (lie opportunity to work alone. If he had i a mind to be dishonest there was the I opportunity, but opportunity must not be I allowed to influence the jury that the man I was not honest. There was the case of i the replacement of an old stove for one that gcneralcd more heat, but it was walled round with asbestos to prevent the shed from catching fire. The hut was only 10ft x 10ft or Oft x Oft, and would not require much heating. The I asbestos sheeting suggested that the slove ' I was not for the comfort of accused but, for retorting and smelting. When he j vacated, the old stove-had been put back) in its place and the one accused had ; installed was not found again. This stove, 1 even if cracked, would have had some I value. It was said that it had been .' clumped on the beach and taken away i by someone. But'why remove it? Alter the inquiry in America suspicion had been aroused and sweepings revealed small beads of gold such as might come from smelting. Accused had admitted that boxes had been built for the purpose of l smuggling gold into Canada. He did not | I explain why if he came by the gold | I honestly, he should bother to conceal it.' I The difference in the weight of luggage 1 brought to and taken away from Hoki- i ’tika showed a difference of scwt. The \ carrying of books and heavy articles l 1 helped in the concealment of the gold, i i The increase in weight was significant. I ! Gold that had come from Arahura showed 1 'sinking similarity to that held by ac-; iriisjcl. The live golds produced were con- i ! sistent vn themselves in all characteristics, j j enr.r.istcn! with one another, and con-jsi-U’iU wiih Arahura gold. The bars 1 ! which hail hr on selected at random went ! a long v \ to negative the suggestion that ' ih.e gold had been collected at odd time? and w.i of ..dd varieties. During the ri'.-i r id i'.at M.irlancl was at Arahura there v,i ■< drop n the winning? from *n •It per cent,, and the difference was notexplained. The difference was large and o v. as .imaging that the company had not detected it, curious that the company should have lost so much without becoming aware of it. They were not getting the gold out of test tubes but out of borings and there must be fluctuations. There was an improbability of accused acquiring such an amount as £3(1.000 worth of gold in his dealings, and there was also to consider the improbability of his holding a considerable fortune instead of lurning if into liquid form. laving on Hit,' charity of his parents, Ins declaration of poveity, and swearing on oath that lie was destitute were other matters to be, considered. The secret method pf reir.jvm? gold was consistent with the conduct of a thief and consistent with the love of seeing that which is hoarded, amounting almost to lunacy. The secret i- ii.riva! was also consistent with having ...-ruii-il ii di-Tonesi ly elsewhere. War-, liu.,.- co'l uiiMim.- nnehl have hccii an ex- I in o lor Mali g-lin.'. bid eld was sold tor, ,£3 1: dd an ounce when the standaid , price was £lO 13s Sd.