GOLD IN CHOCOLATES

Greymouth Evening Star, 23 February 1937, Page 7

GOLD IN CHOCOLATES

UNUSUAL THEFT CHARGE

YOUNG MAN CONVICTED The discovery of five small pieces of gold, hidden in chocolates, a box of which were received as a birthdY present, led to an unusual case being heard by Mr. Raymond Ferner, S.M., in the Magistrate’s Court, Greymouth, to-day, when a young married man, was charged that, on October 2, 1936 he committed the theft of gold valueat £6 14/9, the property of a minin o company. The prosecution was conducted by Detective-Sergeant H. L. Knight. , 4, , Mr. T. F. Brosnan, who appeared foi the accused, asked that the case be dealt with summarily. Detective-Sergeant. Knight said tha-, in October last, a young lady at Cobden, who was a confirmed invalid, had her 21st birthday. She received a number of presents, including a | small box of chocolates from a young girl friend. On opening the box, 13 fully-wrapped chocolates were discovered but they were not then touched. Some days later, three of the chocolates were taken by the young brother of the invalid girl. The latter started to eat one of the chocolates, and found a hard metallic substance inside As a result, the chocolates were handed over to the police. Witness examined the chocolates, and obtained .from them five pieces of retorted gold weighing 19dwts 6 grains, and valued at £6 14/9. Inquiries showed that the young lady who made the pi esent of the box of chocolates visited a shop in Greymouth, and when gathering | up her parcels, she also gathered up ' a parcel containing the box of chocolates, and took it home. She saw they were addressed, but the wrapping paper could not be recovered, as she destroyed it. As the result of witness’s inquiries, accused was interviewed, and made a statement, in the course of which he admitted that he put the five pieces of gold in the chocolates, and that he obtained the gold from his employers’ property. He said that ,his employers had . no knowledge of the matter, . up to the day before witness was mak- ' ing inquiries. The gold had been recovered. Accused had borne an excellent character, and nothing was previously known against him. The S.M. agreed to deal with the < case summarily, and accused pleaded , not guilty. < John Tennent, jeweller, and licensed gold-dealer, stated that on December , 11 he saw the five pieces of gold (produced). They were brought to him by Detective-Sergeant Knight. Wit- * ness weighed the gold, and valued it. The weight was 19dwts 6 grains, and the value of. £6 14/9. The managing engineer for the Company, said that until Oct. 21, he had not seen the pieces of gold produced The secretary told him about the matter about Oct. 20. Accused had no right to use the gold, by retorting it and sending it away himself. Detective-Sergeant Knight said that, on October 6, 1936, he received the box, which then contained ten chocolates, v He found the five pieces of gold hid- , den in the chocolates. On October 21, ( he visited accused’s home. His wife was there, but accused was not present. , On the following day, at Greymouth, 1 accused made and signed a statement, . in which he said that he put the gold in the chocolates, at his home, and , ' addressed the parcel to his brother. He , gave the parcel to his wife, to post. ■ She told him shortly afterwards that ( she had lost the parcel. His reason , for sending the gold to his brother 3 was that he wanted the latter to test ( it. Accused said that he had purified ] two of the larger pieces, so / far as - he could do so with the apparatus available. He did not inform his em- , ployers of his action. He had not pre- ■ viously sent gold to his brother. He , said that he concealed the gold in the chocolates, to avoid any chance of the > parcel being identified as containing ( gold, and being stolen. The gold was , the property of his employers, but he made no official record of it. He reported the loss of the gold when he knew that the matter was. in the hands of the police. An advertisement was inserted in the Greymouth “Star,” asking the person who took the parcel from McKenzie’s to return it, to save further trouble. Accused said that his wife was told by an assistant at the shop that a lady had taken the parcel. As the parcel was not recovered, accused decided to inform his employers.

To Mr. Brosnan: There was no record of the gold having been sent away, until October 21. Before that date, the Company did not know anything about the gold. Accused had no authority to take the gold. If accused had been dealing with the gold in a legitimate manner, there was a legitimate way to do so, and he should have made a record. Mr. Brosnan submitted that there was no case to answer. It was worthy of comment that four and a-half months had elapsed between the alleged theft and the taking of the proceedings. Why the delay? Counsel suggested it was clear that accused’s employers had been satisfied with his explanation, but that the police determined to proceed. There was nothing to show that his employers had sworn any complaint against accused, and nothing to show they were not satisfied. On the contrary, accused had been retained in the Company's service. It was serious to set the wheels of Justice rolling, when it had such a devastating effect on a young man’s career. Counsel submitted that it was only a matter of suspicion. The S.M. said he did not agree that there was no case to answer. Evidence had better be called for the defence.

Accused, in the course of his evidence, said that he had been told by the general manager that he could send samples away, if he wished to do so, for assay. The gold produced in Court was that he addressed to his brother, with the object of having it further tested, as he (accused) did not possess the necessary apparatus. Mr Brosnan: Why did you adopt this rather extraordinary method of Sending the gold away?—lt occurred to me that it was a good way. I had attempted to put the gold in a box, with cotton-wool, but it could be noticed what the contents were. How did you come to hit upon the

chocolates?—l had the box of chocolates there, and, it just came to me to push the gold l into the chocolates. Why did you not register the parcel?—l very seldom take that projcedure. I generally send things by ordinary post. Have you ever sent anything else to your brother for examination? Accused replied that he had, and instanced an occasion on which he sent a fossilised for identification, which had been found in a bore-hole. The written result of another test, made by accused’s brother, in response to accused’s request, was produced in Court, and Mr Brosnan described it as “an interesting scrap of paper.” In reply to .further questions, accused said that when his wife reported that she had lost the parcel, he told her to advertise for it, and that was done in the “Star,” a copy of .which was produced. His wife returned to McKenzie’s store, to see if I the parcel had been left at the office. She was told that a country lady had found the box, and that, if she left her address, the country lady would return the parcel. His wife made further inquiries, and was told by McKenzie’s that the lady had not come in. Later, he was told by DetectiveSergeant ’ Knight that it was his arrangement about the “couhitry lady.” When the parcel was lost, continued accused, he realised that the circumstances did not look very nice, but he thought it would be better to leave things alone, as he thought that, the parcel would be returned to him. That was why he did not go to the police about it, or report to his employers. He did not realise, when he put the gold in the chocolates, how: suspicious it looked, but he did realise it when : the parcel was lost. It was intended that his brother should bring the I 1 gold bacK personally, after testing it. To the Detective-Sergeant: He ] made a record of the gold, in his own ] personal notes. It was an accumu- ; lation of various samples. i

To the S.M.: He was sure he still had the piece of paper forming hisi .private record of the gold, but he had not brought it to Court. The brother of accused stated that he had passed the examinations for . his mining degrees. He was fully qualified to undertake assaying work. He received advice from accused, stating that he intended to send the gold, for testing purposes. Witness was to return the gold, when he visited Greymouth in two or three weeks’ time. To the Detective-Sergeant: He was unable to produce the correspondence from his brother, when questioned by the police. Mr Brosnan contended that the evidence fell far short of . what was required to show felonious intention. What accused had done, he had done in the interests of the company. Counsel quoted legal authority, in support of his contention.

The S.M. said that he would take time to consider the legal authority. When the Court resumed after luncheon, the S.M. reviewed the evidence, and went on to say that accused’s story was quite unacceptable, in the circumstances. If the accused had really been honest in his intentions, there was no need for such concealment of the gold in the chocolates. It could have been sent through the ordinary channels, and could have been insured against loss. Accused must be convicted.

Mr Brosnan applied for the prohibition of publication of the accused’s name. 1 The S.M. said that accused was a young man of education and high qualifications, and was on the threshold of his career. No punishment the S.M. could inflict would compare with the punishment which would come to accused as the result of this exposure. Nothing was previously known against accused, and the gold had been recovered. In the circumstances, said Mr. Ferner, he proposed to release accused, and to order him to come up for sentence, if called upon, within 12 month. He had no doubt that the ordeal accused had been through would be sufficient deterrent against any lapse in future. In view of counsel’s representations, added the S.M., he thought it was a fit and proper case, in accused’s own interests and those of his brother, to order the prohibition of the publication of the name. Such an order would be made. An order would also be made for the return of the gold to its lawful owner.