BROOCH OF “RISING SUN.”

Gisborne Times, Volume XXXVI, Issue 3993, 25 July 1913, Page 8

BROOCH OF “RISING SUN.”

RESET OF VALUED GEM. WHO REMOVED THE MARKS? Great public interest lias been aroused by a case which came before Sheriff Thomson and a jury in Glasgow Sheriff Criminal Court, a welldressed man. named William Riley, having jeweller’s premises at 6 Queen’s Arcade, Glasgow, being placed in the dock to answer a charge of having concerted with Julius . Louis Zetland and another man now in prison, of resetting a large quantity of stolen jewellery, to the value of £350. The case arose out of the extensive theft of jewellery from the premises of Messrs R. W. Sorley and C 0.., St. Vincent and Renfield Streets, Glasgow. Riley pleaded not guiltyto the charge, but Zetland, who was also indicted, failed to appear, and his bail of £6O was forfeited, and a warrant granted for his arrest. The first witness was John Galletly, formerly assistant salesman with Messrs Sorley, and he admitted having pleaded guilty to the theft of £I2OO worth of jewellery from his employer’s premises, for which he was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment. On the same occasion Leopold Reich was also sentenced in connection with the thefts for reset. In May, 1910, witness had his first transaction with Reich, selling him a quantity of old gold, for which Reich gave him -2s per pennyweight, the market price at the time being 3s 9d- per pennyweight. The name he gave was that of Thomson, and Reich did not ask any questions as to where witness got the articles he sold him. W-i tness afterwards identified a number of articles of jewellery which he stated he had stolen from Messrs Sorley and sold to Reich. On one occasion witness took a brooch valued at £55, and he sold it to Reich for £5. Messrs Sorley had a special mark on their jewellery, and this mark on the rings witness identified had been obliterated or partially scratched out. Detective-Lieutenant Trench spoke to having apprehended Galletly on the charge of stealing He afterwards saw Reich, who admitted resetting • the jewellery. Accompanied by Mr. Steele, of Messrs Sorley, he went to Riley's shop, where,' in the window, Mr. Steele identified a brooch as belonging to Messrs Sorley, and, on going into the shop, they asked Riley to show them that brooch. Mr. Steele and Mr. Syrne, also of Messrs Sorley, picked out, from among various articles, shown them' in the shop, some which they identified as being the property of Messrs Sorley. Mr Riley was quite frank all through. V ith respect to the ‘‘Rising Sun” brooch identified by Messrs Sorley, Mr Riley said that he had got it from Zetland. He also volunteered the statement that he had purchased articles fro:-i Reich. On the occasion of their second visit Mr Riley was again quite frank, and freely allowed them to.inspect his stock. Other evidence of identification was then given, after which Leopold Reich said he had had dealings with Riley. He told Riley he had got the articles he wished to sell from “a gentleman in the trade.” In answer to his Lordship witness said Riley was the only dealer'to whom lie sold the articles brought to him by Galletly.

Mr Riley entered the witness-box, and stated that lie was fifty years of age, and had been in business for thirty years, during which he had gained a large experience of the trade. He had been in the habit of doing business with dealers, and most of his stock was exhibited in the window. Until this case arose he had never been in any trouble, having always conducted his business so as to avoid giving offence to anyone. He had examined the articles produced in court, and in his opinion-there was nothing on them by which they could be identified as belonging to Messrs Sorley. With reference to “Rising Sun” brooch, he did not think there was anything peculiar about it. It had been in his possession for about a year and a half, and during that dime had been displayed in the window. AH the articles were in the same condition in which he received them. He had never tampered with them, and he had never had any suspicion that any of the goods had been stolen. In cross-examination, Mr. Riley denied having conspired with either Reich or Zetland to reset the goods, and he identified a number of the articles produced in court as having been purchased by himself from makeis. Evidence was given by a number of witnesses connected with the jewellery trade that the prices given by accused for the articles were fair as between dealer and' dealer. The jury, after an absence of over half an hour, returned a verdict by a majority, of guilty. Sheriff Thomson passed sentence of six months’ imprisonment.