PETTY LARCENY ALLEGED.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVI, 30 September 1926, Page 6

PETTY LARCENY ALLEGED.

SEVEN CHARGES COVER £4 15s 6d

INFORMATIONS DISMISSED

Seven allegations of petty larceny, involving the total sum of £4 15s fid, were made before Mr. J. S. Barton, S.M., in the Police Court, Hawera, this morning against Leonard Lyle Mackay, who was formerly engaged in business at Hawera. Ihe acts of victimisation alleged to be attributable to the accused were not discovered until after his departure from the district in August. He was arrested in Wellington and returned to Hawera to face the court. Mackay was charged that at Hawera on August 3 he stole a pair of gum boots valued at £1 ss, the property of Gertrude E. Jones. On six other counts lie was charged with having fraudently converted to his own use sums of money, received at Hawera on terms requiring him to account for the receipts to The Taranaki Car Cleaning, Greasing and Oiling Company in which he was a working partner. These charges related to sums received at Hawera as follow: July 10, from Henry H. Bramivell, 10 s: July, from John A. Duff ill, 6s 6d; July 27, from Norman Coburn £1 ; July 29, from William E. Buist, £1 5 August 7, from Alexander R. Elgar, 7s 6d; August 9, from Bernard A. Faina., 6s 6d. Accused at first pleaded guilty to all of the charges, but after examination by Mr. O’Dea, who took over the case as a subsequent juncture, the plea of guilty was withdrawn and one of not guilty was entered. Sergeant J. Henry conducted the prosecution. BUSINESS IN A SMALL WAY. Sergeant J. Henry explained that the accused had in June last entered into .partnership with Horace C. Philips in a business registered us the Taranaki (Jar Cleaning, Greasing, and Oiling Co. The accused bad no money, but Phillips borrowed £2O from a relative, and a bill of sale was given to cover the chattels. On August 10, Phillips was taken ill. and confined to Jpa bed. While be was ill, the accused went to Wellington and entered a. hospital lor an operation. The day following his departure, Phillips received a letter from the accused to the ell'ect that he had been called by the Pensions Board at .Wanganui c-o hospital lor an opertaion. He was eventully located by the Wellington Police, and there made a statement admitting . collecting certain amounts for which he had not accounted. He had previously .been convicted for theft, and was .at present under a warrant of commitment for failure to maintain.

In answer'to the charges, the accused said that he had found on his return to work after a bout of influenza that the .business had fallen off very much, only about 10s having been -taken on the books during the fortnight. Phillips, being a married man, had decided to pull out and leave him to carry on in a.n endeavour to pull up the business, -while he (Phillips) tried to secure another job. He had qjily taken the money to pay for food. He had .been called to Wellington, and after an operation he was detained the Pensions Board for further treatment-. To the magistrate he said he passed practically all the transactions through the ,books and gave receipts. The sergeant '.said that only two receipts had been given, and none of the transactions had been entered through the books. The magistrate, in view of the peculiar circumstances, requested to learn the attitude of the partner Phillips, who said that the business had at first paid, but got worse towards the end of the period. Both were working, partners, but during the last month neither drew out anything for living expenses. MONEY TAKEN TO PAY FOR. FOOD. The magistrate felt that the facts •hardly justified a conviction and, on his suggestion, Mr. P. o'’D'ea elected to conduct the case for the accused. In evidence, Mac Kay said he took the money to pay for food and was quite prepared to refund the amount. The business had been alright at first, but after Phillips had practically pulled out, although he tried to. do his best, he could not build it up. Mr. O’Dea asked leave to withdraw the pleas of guilty. Cross-examined by the Sergeant, accused said that tools, hoses, etc. had been bought, but he had sold these a! the second-Ihand shop. Mr. O'lDea submitted that a conviction could not be recorded." “I ami of the opinion that this main should not be convicted,” said the magistrate in delivering judgment. His dealings had come perilously close to I'jishonesty, but he, being a partner, bad a proprietary interest in the business, although he was morally responsible ito account to his partner. He had certainly committed a- breach of his partnership duties, but, as he had '•©>!>!ie<l the money taken to pay for food, the offence was not serious. He advised him that as soon as ho was in a position to do so, he should refund to his partner the latter’s share of the money taken. In the meantime the thanks of the court were due to M-. O’Dea. The information was dismissed.