WHO WAS THE THIEF?

Evening Post, Volume XCIX, Issue 77, 31 March 1920, Page 6

WHO WAS THE THIEF?

£214 WOETH OF APPAREL STOLEN. . Following on -the ■ case against Morgan, a ■ charge was laid against a young man named Dennis Quilligan, of having on or about 21st February broken and entered the preDiises of Mathewson's, Ltd., in Lambtonjuay, .and having stolen furs, blouses, sports coats, and skirts, of a total value )f £214 3s. . , ; Accused, for whom Mr. H. F. D'Leary appeared, pleaded not guilty. ' Mrs. Margaret Mathewson, in her evidence, said that she had left the premises between 5.50 and 6 p.m. on 21st February, and that everything was then m order. She identified the articles of • clothing produced, and valued them at £145. ■ ... ; . :•; ,; : Thomas Martin, employed at Young's Private Hotel, was the next witness called by Chief-Detective Ward. On the morning of 22nd February, he said, he found several blouses in a rubbish tin in a cellar on Young's premises, and" noticed that a window at the; rear of j Mathewson's premises bad been interfered with. He therefore called Constable Marshall, who found that an iron bar had been partly sawn through and that the premises had been ransacked. Thomas John Jenkins, a salesman, detailed various purchases he had made from Quilligan, whom he knew as a sailor. In.all he purchased nine .furs, for a total sum of £29. He understood that Quilligan had purchased the first furs offered at San Francisco, and that, the other fnrs had been obtained from ■the "boys," meaning other sea-faring tmen^ ;.. John Henry. Morgan, the accused .man in the first-:case, was ■then- called as a witness, for the- -prosecution.- -He-knew (Juilligan slightly, he said, but had never had any transactions with him ■with regard to the disposal of-furs or any other goods. Witness knew that Quilligan had said that he obtained the fnrs from him (Morgan),- and -that all-• the money .obtained, by their, sale! .was handed to him, but he denied that anything of the sort had happened, and that furs had even been mentioned between "them. : " In answer to Mr. O'Leary, Morgan could not remember details of conversations, but, he said, he did remember that furs were never 'mentioned. ■•' Plain-clothes Constable. Holmes said ho interviewed Quilligan, who made a statement to the effect that, .with the exception of the first set of furs, .which lie had obtained-from a man in-Auck-land, all the furs and other goods he had handled had been handed to him lay Morgan. Witness was with Quilligan when the latter confronted Morgan, but the latter denied any connection with Quilligan. .... Accused, said witness .in answer,.to. Mr. O'Leary,. had .been .truthful, as far as lie could judge, and had given the police all the assistance be could in the Matter of .finding Morgan. -'• Chief-Detective Ward said- th.lt there ■was a possibility that an alternative charge would be laid against QmUisran were he sent on to the Supreme Court. . The man was then formally committed for trial, bail being renewed in the sum of £100, with sureties of, a ..like amount..