STOLEN MEDICINES

Evening Post, Volume XCII, Issue 40, 16 August 1916, Page 8

STOLEN MEDICINES

SEQUEL TO WAREHOUSE THEFTS

CONNOR BEFORE SUPREME COURT

As a sequel to the recent thefts from Sharland and Co.'s warehouse, James Connor was charged at the Supreme Court to-day with receiving goods valued at £61 lls 6d, comprising patent medicines and patent foods, between 15th May and 15th June, 1916, knowing them to have been dishonestly obtained. His Honour Mr. Justice Chapman was on the Bench, and the foreman of the jury of twelve was Mr. Jos. Fitzsimmons. Mr. V. R. Meredith, of the Crown Law Office, appeared on behalf of the Crown, and Mr. P. J. O'Regan represented accused.

The history of the case as outlined by Mr. Meredith was on the lines of the evidence heard in the Magistrate's Court. It would be shown, he said, that the goods were actually stolen, and the allegation was that they had been sold to iour different grocers at prices not only below those asked for by wholesale houses, but actually below those for which Sharland and Co. could obtain them from the manufacturers. The thefts had been discovered as the result of discrepancies in the amount of stock in the warehouse and the amount that should actually be there. The evidence of William H. Boyd, grocer, Hataitai, was that he gave accused an order for £21 worth of patent medicines, which were quoted at fully 20 per cent, less than he could have purchased them wholesale. No payment was made.for the goods. Other storekeepers also gave evidence as to purchasing patent medicines from accused at low prices. Detective Mason said that when arrested accused told him he was a stonemason by trade, and he had been out of work owing to ill-health. To Mr. O'Regan : Witness knew thai accused's wife was in ill-health and in the Otaki Sanatorium, also that two of his children were in an orphanage. He .thought that accused only knew the man from whom he obtained the goods, and not where they came from. For the defence Mr. O'Regan called accused, -who stated that he was M a stonemason and had been employed on the Parliamentary Buildings. About the end of January he met a man named Hill coming from the Upper Hutt in tho train. He entered into betting transactions with Hill, as the result of which the latter eventually owed him £47. Witness laiter asked for payment, "but Hill replied that he had no money.' Hill told him he had a line of goods which he could have if he "brought the orders to him. Witness afterwards met him and gave him a parcel. Hill told him he did not want it to be known that he paid his gambling debts with goods, and that was why witness gave the wrong name to Boyd. At the station, "witness ha-d not told Detective Mason that, a statement made by him about getting- the goods from Hill was incorrect. . Witness believed that the goods were honestly obtained. He had not seen Hill since,, although' he had tried to find him. (Proceeding.)