CRIMINAL SESSIONS

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 103, 28 October 1925, Page 11

CRIMINAL SESSIONS

SOLDIER DAIRY FARMER

CHARGED WITH DEFRAUDING CROWN

STOCK SUBJECT TO BILL OF SALE SOLD.

Farther evidence on the charge against Perry, a soldier dairy farmer Gn the Ahiarua Settlement, of selling stock constituting part of the security of chattel mortgages to the Lands Department, and thereby defrauding the Crown, was heard before his Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) yesterday afternoon. George Francis Glacken (field inspector to the Department) deposed that on a certain date he had found only 11 cows and a. bull on the farm, instead of the 42 head of cattle included in the bills of sale to the Department. Later he found that the accused had purchased 21 more cows, thus bringing the herd up to 32. He valued the stock at £6 a head at the present time. By Mr. O'Leary: Some of those were cattle that he had valued in 3921 at £19 a head, but cattle had fallen off very much in price since then. He had visited the farm later, and found 32 head of stock there; but the additional 21 were of very inferior qualit}'. Ho believed the accused had given up to £.6 10s a head for them, but that was not to say that they were worth that. Mr. O'Leary: "Why did you want the man to go with you to the police station?'' —"To try and get more information.'-'

Mr. O'Leary: "Information that you could not get from him yourself ?"—' '1 cs."

Mr. O'Leary: "Was it not your duty to report the matter to your Department 1?"—"Yes; but I wanted to get full information to report. I thought that the shortage wa3 so great that action should be taken."

The evidence of Francis Thomas Flayell as to stock he had bought from the accused was taken as given in the Lower Court, Playell having undergone an operation and being unable to appear. The cattle in question were poor, only "boners," as the farmers called them.

Constable O'Connor (Carterton) read a lengthy statement made by the accused when charged with the offence in August last. Perry stated that he had only sold culls, and that ho was going to buy cattle within" a fortnight to more than make up the number over which he had given se curity. He had seen the. accused pretty frequently in Cartcrton, about ten miles from the farm, and .■judged from that that he was neglecting the farm.

By Mr. M'Leary: Perry had told him that it was not the custom among soldier settlers to report to. the Department the sales of "boners." Detective Nuttall gave evidence as to a statement made to him as to what ho had done with the whole of his stock over a period of four and ~a half years. By Mr. O'Leary: From his expcrieuco of dairy farming, he would say that the carrying capacity of Perry'sfarm was 30 head of cattle. The accused said he had already made a full statement to Constable O'Connor, but the statement to tho constable only related to the 22 head bought for him by tho Department. Witness wanted a statement embracing the other 20. Perry said that he was going to buy another 20 in a few days to make up the number of his herd. Edward Condon, dairy factory manager, at Kaitawa, deposed to-buying certain cattle from the accused. By Mr. O'Leary: lie know that Perry was a soldier settler, lie hacl bought Rome cattle from another soldier settlor. The question of bills of sale over the cattle was never mentioned. They were mostly calves of tho dairy cows on their farms.

THE DEFENCE,

For the defence, Mr. O'Leary eontended that there was no fraud, and r.o intention of fraud in what Perry had done. Perry was only twenty years of age when he enlisted in 1014, and was discharged in 1919, taking the farm up in the following year. He was still on tho farm, still doing business with the Government, which was receiving part of his milk cheques. His was not the case of a man selling his cattle surreptitiously and then clearing out of his farm. Perry would toll them that ho was unaware of the clauses in tho bill of swle relating to selling stock, and did not know that a settlei who sold stock comprised in a bill of sale rendered himself liable to criminal proceedings. Perry and another, soldier settler would tell the jury that it was not the custom of the soldier fxtllerN to report to tho Department the sale of culls that it was their intentiori to replace. Perry sold his culls in April last, and the time to leplace them was till August or September. As a matter of fact, there were on the farm over 30 dairy cattle, though the witness Glacken described them as a poor lot. It would be ssid that ho had not replaced ille cattle till after this pro &ecutLon; but, as a matter of fact, he had discussed replacing them long before with his hither, lie had also

.-•ltended sales for that purpose, but the pries were not favourable. He had no intention to defraud. IT is Honour: "There is no word of 'intention [o defraud' in the Act. The Act assumes that if tho tattle are sold without the consent of the Department, and thereby become lost to the sei'.urily, tho grantee is thereby defrauded."

Mr. O'Leary: "Surely, defraud inusi, involve .t guilty mind." liis Honour: "Then, yuu have the right t«. appeal."

'Mr. O'Loary: "It: your Honour nil ok il.at, 1 will liaro" to ask you to stall* a rase for appea-l."

Aivlubjilii Siew;uf. Clarke, .soldi"?----pettier, was called to give evido.ncil as lo the lp'ul seasons, etc., which rendered the catilo valueless so that, they had to be sold. Mr. Macassoy protested thai, this

evidence kms irrelevant. Mr. O'Leary said thai, he railed it to show that, accused hail Hud no pi illy mind in t!ic matter.

IT.is Honour: "There is notiilnir hi the Act about a miilty mind." ft. assumes that to sell another man's property '.•(■•nstitutes I'iaud." Mr. O'Lcury: "Then if a man sells n worthless beast and at once replaces it by a beast worth £12, is that fraud'"

HLj UMPS^D. "&Q. few no right

soil another man's property. I must rule against you." Clarke, the accused, and the latter 's father gave evidence in support of Mr. O'Leary's statement, the lastnamed staling that early in June he had arranged with his son to restock the farm,' and had paid out cheques to do so. Pressed by tlic Crown Prosecutor r.s to the date on which he had paid out the cheque, witness said that lie could not give the dates, but Mr. Maeassey produced documents showing that they had all been paid after 10th September, the date on which tho proceedings were taken.

The case was adjourned to 10 o'clock this morning, prisoner being admitted to bait.