A STOLEN DOG.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXI, Issue 84, 10 April 1911, Page 7

A STOLEN DOG.

APPEAL BY A DROVER. In the Court of Appeal to-day, William. Howard, otherwise known as Wilson Shepherd, appealed against his conviction at Palmerston far receiving a collie sheep dog knowing it to have been stolen. A charge of theft v.-as preferred agaioet him, but the jury held that there was . not sufficient evidence to prove it. The | questions for the court was whether j the evidence was sufficient for the case to have gone to the 'jury, and, secondly, -whether the verdict amounted to one of guilty. The dog was' owned by a drover named Olliver. Accused was also a drover, and he wanted to buy the dog. The owner refused to sell, but subsequently lost it, and it was found in -Howard's possession. Mr. J. W. Salmond, who appeared ior the Crown, submitted that there was abundant evidence to go to the jury on any of the counts. The verdict was a reasonable one. The Chief Justice said that in his opinion there was a case to go to the jury. The verdict seemed ambiguous, and it would be safer not to say that the verdict amounted to one of guilty, but to order a new trial. Mr. Justice Edwards, in agreeing, said that a verdict of ihis kind was generally the result of a compromise in the juryroom, and as a rule the jurors did not intend one letter more than the finding expressed. Mr. Justice Cooper, the Judge who heard, the case, agreed, and said he ha-d thought it only right that the prisoner should raise the point. The other Judges agreed.