STOLEN AGAIN.

Evening Post, Volume LXXIX, Issue 74, 30 March 1910, Page 8

STOLEN AGAIN.

A VANISHED "LEADER." ART GALLERY BURGLARISED The first act of the "Leader" drama, acted here in 1908, ha* been iepeate<l. The pretty picture, by Leader, "Southward from Surrey*. Pleasant Hilk," entrusted to the city by Mrs. Rhodeo, has again vanished from its groat frame in the Art Gallery, Whitmore-etreet. When the caretaker unlocked the doors at 1 o'clock this afternoon, he 6aw the frame hanging in its customary placo on the itouth wall, but the "Leader" had left. The canvas was in its place last Sunday when the Gallery was open to the public. On Sunday evening the doors were locked, and remained fast till 1 p.m. to-day. "Southward flew southward when it last created interest which extended far beyond New Zealand. The thief entered a window at the south end (the back), rolled up the picture, and crept quietly away. This time, apparently, the flight of "Southward" has been jiorthward. A side window, facing north, on the west side of the porch, has been broken just below the catch, at a point to conveniently allow a hand to pass through and push back the fastening. The dust coating tit the top of the lower panes shows marks recently made ; they very strongly suggest the trail of tinge re, and look as if they had been put on from inside, on the return jouriiey by the robber. The disappearance of the picture was at once reported to the police, but the detective* this afternoon wete true to their hnbit of reticence. No further iufoi mat ion waa available. THE FACTS OF 1908. The "Leader" picture disappeared in April, 1908, on a Saturday evening, under circumstances which have never been explained, and its finding was as mysterious as its disappearance. Without beat of drum or any indication as l-o what had happened to it iv the meanwhile, though various rumours were circulated, the picture «&» quickly restored to its gilt setting about tho middle of July oi the tame year. The then Mayor (Hon. T. W. Hislop) stated that three weeks after the picture disappeared, onfe "A. G. Ransom" sent him ;i letter staling that, without admitting that he waa the penon who took the ''Leader," he could get the picture restored for £100. Air Hislop paswd "Ransom V ■ letter on to the police, and a watch was sot at the Sailoiii' Rest, as the writer had mentioned, that if the Mayor would communicate with him by advertisement in a local newspaper h« would 6end a messenger to the ' Sailors' Rest for any letter. A detect ivo was engaged, and instead of "shadowing" the messenger, he arrested him. The emissary turned out to be ju*t a casual person whom a man had met by night and asked* to go to ;he Sailors' Rest for a letter. Ho told the police where he was to deliver the letter, and the police went there, but the chi-ef actor did not appear. Subsequently "Ransom" wrote to the Mayor ridiculing the attempt that had been J&atte to catch horn, and further correspondence took placo. The upshot was that the thief agreed to have the picture returned for £50 if he was subjected to no trouble., Ho also stipulated that thtio should be no delay in the surrender of the money, nnd that the matter bo treated confidentially. The thief got ftomebedy to represent him. The money was placed at the disposal of an intermediary, "who agreed to act because he thought, on the whole, the matter was for the public good," as the Mayor &aid, and the "deal" was effected. The Mayor stated at that time that he had not the slightest clue to the identity of "Ransom," and he understood that the intermediary did not see that individual. It may be added that at the time of the negotiations the thief threatened to destroy the picture, and, as Mr. Hislop remarked, it was a choice between v contribution of £50 or no picture. "Tho danger in," said Chief Detective j M'Grath then, "that the grant of money may tend to encourago trade in this line J of "business. " His opinion wnii that tho i thief wax not necessarily n person with ! any previous experience in burglary, Jnit . wuk endowed witK btair.* far iv exces» ', of thosv poMBMtd ty the M'.;r»ge criminal. AUo, at the sume time Mr. C. Wilson, tieasurer of the New Zealand Academy of Fine Art*, maintained lh?t the .ewarding of the thief constituted a dangerous , precedent. It would have been twenty time* better, ho said, to lose the picturo than to make v baigain with ,« thief or icpiej-er.tiitne of n thief. The picture is valued at £1000. 1