A CUSTOMS' COUP.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 996, 10 December 1910, Page 6

A CUSTOMS' COUP.

RAID AT EASTBOURNE, ;::.; ■•■ PAINT FROM TRAMP BOAT; -, 3 The final scene arising out of the seizure of a' quantity of uncustomed paint by the Customs authorities in a building used by.the Wellington Har■bour Ferries, Ltd., was enacted in the Magistrate's ; Court - yesterday. The manager'of the company, Edward Good,win iFortescue Zohrab, . was to be charged: (I) That ho was. knowingly; concerned in fraudulent evasion of Customs duties during March last, namely," on- certain, paints, about 3Jcwt. in quantity;. (2). That, between March 3 and March 8 last he was concerned in the' unshipping, from- the steamer.'Neptune of-goods-liable to.duty, the duty for which had not been paid or secured, namely, a quantity of paint. The case for the-prosecution was conducted by Mr. C. S. Nixon, Collector of Customs, and Mr. A. L. Herdman appeared for defendant. ' No evidence was called, the first charge being withdrawn by leave of tho Court, and defendant pleading guilty to the second charge.. Mr. Nixon explained that defendant, the manager of the Harbour Ferries Company, was charged'with being concerned in tho unshipping of the paintfrom the Neptune, which arrived in the stream on March 3 for bunker cbal.' "ho paint in question' had been removed from the Neptune by one of the harbour steamers owned by defendant's company. Mr. Nixon ■ was understood to say that there was a. good deal of pilfering from these 'steamers,' and that if there were : no receivers, for such goods there would be much less loss in tin's direction'. He Kad agreed with Mr:Hcrdman'to' withdraw tho first information- with the leave' of the Court. . . . .

Mr. Herdman, remarking on the' suggestion of the Collector of Customs ..that the goods had -been pilfered, said. such .. was not the case, and there, was. no evidence at all that the goods were stolen. Defendant found himself in a peculiar position. In one seiiso he was guilty, and in another he was quite innocent. Hα did not know when ho purchased the goods that no duty had been paid on them. The captain of one of his company's vessels came to Mr. Zohrab when he was,busy. Mr. Zohrab bought the paint, but ho made no' detailed "inquiry about it as ho should have done. In the hurry of tho business in hand at the time ho assumed .that the paint was ■ the property of tho seller, and treated tho matter as.an ordinary, business transaction. From the day he bought it, up to the present, he had never seen the paint. After he bought'it "he told Captain Corrick of the. Pilot to. take it over to-Day's Bay,' where it was to be used for painting tho pavilion. Tho _ captain of tho steamer which earned the paint from the Neptune was the servant of defendant, and it was true that defendant ..should have mado .full inquiry before 'he bought tho paint. Therefore, after consideration, ho (Mr. Herdman) had advised Mr. Zohrab to plead guilty to the charge of unshipping, a-s, if .ho was not guilty,' another servant of tho company must bo held to bo so. Mr. Zohrab, as manager of the Ferry Company, regretted that tho breach of the law had been committed by him. Tho Customs wore suing for a penalty, of £100, but under the statntc it was within the power of the Court to reduce tho penalty to £25. He asked that; considering the circumstances, this should bo done. _ His Worship said that, taking the circumstances into . consideration, ho was prepared to exercise his discretion. Defendant would be' convicted and fined £100, and costs 275., but tho fine would be reduced to £25. . ' |