THREATENING LETTERS.

Evening Post, Volume LXXIX, Issue 82, 8 April 1910, Page 2

THREATENING LETTERS.

■ ' ■♦ A CURIOUS CASE A rather unusual case, the King v. Arnold Hare, was before the Appeal Court yesterday afternoon. Hare .had been indicted at Auckland 3«. follows :— (1) That, on. 28th August, 1909, at Auckland, he stole a letter; (2) that he had in his possession a stolen letter; (3) that, on 28th August, with menacee, he demanded £25 from Thomah Edwin Clark, with intent to steal the; money ; (4) tnat, on 30th August, with menaces, he demanded £26 from Thomas Edwin Clark, with intent to steal the money ; (5) that, on. Ist September, with menaces, he demanded £5 from Thomas Edwin Clark, with intent to steal the money; (6) that, between 28th August and Ist September, he attempted to steal £26 in money ; and (7) that, on or about Ist September, he attempted to steal £25 in money On being arraigned, the prisoner liad •pleaded not guilty. Tbacas* was heard before Mr. dUfltic.o Cooper, who, in presenting the case to the Appeal Court, said the following facts had been proved : — A letter in the handwriting of Mr. R. O. Clark, a shareholder in the company known a" R. O. Clark, Ltd., was found by .he prisoner on 27th August, 1909, on the platform of tho Government Railway Station. It was enclosed in an envelope, which was damp and ungummed. It bore no stamp, and did not appear to have, been posted. The letter was .iddressed to "T. E. Clark, care of R. U. Clark, Queen-street," and dealt with •business matters, the writer remarking at one stage, "Be extremely careful not to carry any «of these letters in your pocket, or 'leave any about, but stow them away at your place securely.*' "The prisoner read it, and then wrote an anonymous letter to T. E. Clark, by devious means attempted to extort money from him. The police were informed, and Hare .vas eventually arrested. The jury found the prisoner guilty on the first, third, fourth, and fifth counts of the indictment. The coiirt was now asked to decido the following questions :—: — 1 . Was there- evidence to go to ' Ihe jury upon which they could pioperly convict the .prisoner of the theft of the letter? 2. "Was there evidence to go to tre jury upon which they coulu rncner'.y convict him of the offence set out in eection 268 of -the Crimes Act? 3. Were the communications >ent by the prisoner tc T. E. Clark threats? The court unanimously nmnnci the conviction, and Hare, who "& npw out on bail, will bo sentenced. Mr. livers appeared for the Crown, and Dr. Bamfora for Hare.