THEFT OF MONEY.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXV, Issue 14038, 19 April 1906, Page 5

THEFT OF MONEY.

THE CHARGE ADMITTED. At tYe Lyttelton Magistrate’s Court yesterday, before Mr H. W. Bishop, S.M., a well-dressed young woman named Lilian M Mahon, alias Martin, for whom Mr Cassidy ap- , pea red, was charged with having between March 29 and April 9 last stolen from the dwellinghonse of Catherine Buckley, Lyttelton, tho sum of'£6B 10s, tiio property of the said Catherine Buckley. Catherine Buckley stated that she resided in St' David Street,' Lyttelton, with her husband. The accused, whom she Iniew as Miss Martin, went to her house on March 24 to stop with witness, and said she had nothing. Witness agreed to let her stop, and gave her a -room to herself. There was a chest of drawers in the room. They wore not locked. Some .money was in a purse in a bag in the drawer. There was £4l in gold and £4 in notes. There were some cough lozenges in the same drawer, and witness gave Miss Martin permission to take them for her cough. On April 14, 1903, witness drew £2OO out of the Post Office Savings Bank. | She kept tho money in the house, and | the £45 was part of it. The accused j left the- house on April 9, and witness i missed the money two or three ' hours after. She reported the matter to the police. That evening l she examined a portmanteau in the iic- | cused’s room, in which she had £SO in ' a box. Sbe found the box broken open, | . and only £lO 10s left. When the accused came she said she had no money, but while she was staying with witness she bought a quantity of good clothes. Witness gave her no permission to use any of the money. | To Mr Cassidy : Witness was quite certain as to the amount of the money. She counted the £45 in the drawer the day that Miss Martin, came, and the ' £6O four days before. Witness knew Miss Martin twelve months ago, when * she was travelling for a firm of corset ' makers. Witness did not know her by 5 any other name than Miss Martin. She 5 boarded with witness three times. William Buckley, husband of the pre- * ceding witness, gave corroborative evi- * dence. | Detective Mitchell stated that, in company with Detective Connolly, ho arrested the accused at Dunedin on April 10. She said that she had been stopping at Airs Buckley’s house at .Lyttelton, and had paid her £l. She said'she had taken about £2O from a 1 purse in Mrs Buckley’s bedroom, and > had spent it on her teeth, and in buyl ing dress and jewellery, and that she ; had been constantly taking money duri iug the fortnight she was there, but - did not think it amounted to £69.; She i /said silo would pay Mrs Buckley what- ) ever she had taken. When she was

searched at the station sbe had three sovereigns and 6s 9d in silver at)d copper. She said this was some of the stolen money. She also had one opal ring, one gold band ring, one gold necklet and pendant, one gold brooch, one greenstone bracelet, one gold .curb, bracelet, one gold-mounted tusk, one long gold muff-chain. She had two card-board boxes and a dress-basket, containing clothing. To Mr Cassidy: The accused had never been in any trouble before. Her people in Dunedin were respectable..^' Mr Cassidy submitted that the evidence did not disclose theft from a dwelling, as there had been no illegal entry on the part of the accused, who was living in the house. Sergeant Rutledge said. that the police had no objection-to altering.the’ charge to one of Ordinary theft. The charge was accordingly, and the accused then admitted it. - She was remanded to the Supreme Court for sentence. Bail was ' allowed, the accused in £IOO and two sureties of £SO each. • ■ • • ' '