MORLAND GUILTY

Grey River Argus, 15 May 1943, Page 4

MORLAND GUILTY

THEFT OF GOLD Remanded for Sentence JURY CRITICISES DREDGE SUPERVISION. P.A. CHRISTCHURCH, May 14. Leo Edward Morland, an Australian metallurgist, aged 42, was found builty in the Supreme Court to-day on a charge that, on or about October 29, 1940, at Aarahura, near Hokitika, being a servant of Arahura Gold Dredging Ltd., he stole 3650 ounces of gold valued at £31,496, the property of the company. The jury retired at 11.47 a.m. and returned at 3.21 p.m. with a verdict of guilty. Mr Justice Northcroft remanded the prisoner for sentence. The jury added the following rider: “The jury views with concern the state of affairs which existed at the Arahura dredge and which facilitated the accused yielding to a strong temptation, and considers that more protective supervision was warranted.” The Crown Prosecutor (Mr. Donnelly) addressing the jury, said 'that if Morland has been building up a stock of gold over a period of years in ordinary trade, he would never have taken the risk, a continued one, first of theft, and then by loss through misfortune, such as would have been occasioned by taking gold from Australia to New Zealand and then to Canada and America. A fortune comprising £30,000 in gold was worth £l5OO a year of any man’s money, invested, and yet the Court was asked to believe Morland had kept it in a back room in his house, and not made any use of it. Mr. J. A. Scott, Counsel for Morland, said: Even if it was not that Morland had smuggled the gold into New Zealand, he had certainly smuggled it out when he arrived in Canada. He had recourse only to the black market. It was not theft to smuggle, said Mr. Scott. A person might smuggle stuff legally obtained but that would not make nim a thief. Morland said that he had deliberately hidden the money away. _ That was not an unknown characteristic in 'the make-up of some people. Morland never had been destitute, but would not pay his debts. Mr. Scott submitted that Morland never had sole control of the gold winning process at Arahura from start to finish. Counsel said it was not true to say that. Morland had the sole control of the gold winning from the time it entered the dredge, and no single witness had said that he had ever seen Morland do a crooked thing. If the allegations made against Morland were correct he was taking 100 ounces of gold a week. There was no suspicion, and the Arahura Company had not known that it had lost a farthing until it was noticed in the newspaper that Morland was arrested on a smuggling charge. Company officials then put on their thinking caps, and said it must be their gold. Mr Scott contended that it was significant. in view of Morland’s contention, of which the Crown was aware, that the gold had been obtained in Australia, that no gold had been brought from Australia nor any assay called for. “Do you not think it is a fatal flaw?” he asked the jury. Summing up, His Honour said that the fact of the accused having an abnormal quantity of gold in his possession was unusual. Accused was in a trusted position, but if he had a mind to be dishonest he had the opportunity. The difference in the weight of the luggage brought to and taken away from Hokitika by the accused was live hundredweight, and that increase was significant. During the time the accused was at Arahura the winnings dropped from fifty-six to forty-four per cent., and that difference was not explained. The difference was large, and it was amazing that the company had not detected it, and curious that the company was shown to have lost so much without becoming aware of it. The secret method of removing the gold was consistent with the conduct of a thief, and consistent with a love of seeing that which is hoarded.