STAMP DEALER FINED £2OO.

Hawera Star, Volume XLIX, 18 July 1929, Page 5

STAMP DEALER FINED £2OO.

FOR USING CANCELLED STAMP. (By Telegrapn—rresh Association.) DUNEDIN. J ll4 v 17. A difficult question put to Air J. R. Bartholomew, S.AE, in the- Pol ice Count) this 'morning was whether a stamp that had been placed on a- parcel by a stamp dealer had been previously cancelled or not. He decided it had and fined \Y!iiiiam Lawrence Hooper £2OO. Hooper was charged with fraudulently fixing 1 or placing upon n postal packet a postage stamp which hacl been removed from some other postal packet cover, paper or other material. He wa-s represented by Air B. S. Irwin and p.eaded not guilty.

Hooper said ho was a. buyer of used and unused stamps - . Lately he iliaci been almost- deluged with -stamps, collection's in books containing both used and unused stamps. He -received a parcel from a neighbour to post and lie said it would east- about 2s. Hie submitted a, stamp to his two head girls and lie noticed that it. was a little faded and slightly torn at- one corner. There was an infinite variety in the shades of stamps. A stamp slightly soaked in hot water was inclined to become lighter in shade. On the back of this stamp there' was a little gum:. Hooper drew the attention of a- man at the counter to the stamp, and -he found nothing wrong with, it. When Hooper posted the parcel' lie way convinced that- the stamp west good. They were very .careful in his office.

The magistrate -said Hooper was charged with having fraudulently used a- previous;!v-cniuoiled stamp. There seemed to he a double defence-: That the stamp had not been previously used and was genuine, and! that- Hooper

jj acted in good faith. : Evidence -that the stamp had been I fM-r.vio'iislv eancoi'iiod bad been given in ■very minute detail and on the other band evidence had boon given by two printers' who criticised the evidence given hv postal -officials and disagreed ) with them. The magistrate did not think the very exp'icit and detailed l evidence of the postal officers bad been mot.- by the witiK'Siseo for the defence. Gliisl'-Dcrt'ctivo Cameron handed over a- hist- showing seven convictions for previous offences. Th. m a cist rat-"- isabl that in view of Hoe-ner’s v-evo'd he did not know if he was justified in dealing with the case l»v wav of monetary penality. Hooper sinoniod to have a 'mania, for this class of offence.

On" this occasion a monetary penalty would 1)0 ini]'"'«?(l. hut it must lie a heavy one. Hooper would he fined £2of) 'and costs-. A week was allowed to miake payment.