FARMER CHARGED.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIV, Issue 88, 13 March 1934, Page 2

FARMER CHARGED.

Per Press Association. TIMARU, March 12. The case against John Simmons, a farmer, of Makihihi, who was charged that, on or about February 7, with intent to defraud by falso pretences, ]i<e mad© representation that wool in thirteen bales branded “SS,” which actually contained several classes of wool, was lialfbred ewe wool, which representation was known to be false and was made to certain prospective buyers with fraudulent, intent to induce buyers to act upon it, and did thereby attempt to obtain the money was concluded to-day. The first witness was Ivan Simmons, a son, who detailed the method employed in handling the sheep and the disposal of the wool after shearing, asserting that all hands in the shed, including his father, helped to place the wool in packs. In the course of cross-examination he stated that it was possible some inferior wool had got into the packs, but he would not say this had been done deliberately. He denied making a statement to the agent of the firm which handled the wool that his father had done the packing. The Magistrate (Mr C. R. OrrAValker) asked witness if, as alleged, fine wool was on the outside of the bales and coarse wool was in the centre, coluld this have happened accidentally. Witness: It may have. AVould this not have had to be done purposely by someone ?—I would not say it had been done deliberately. The Magistrate: It would have been a strange coincidence for such a thing to have happened in the case of 13 bales?—Y r es.

Frederick Cecil May, in charge of the auction wool department of . the Canterbury Farmers’ Co-operative Association, said accused had 39 bales in the February sale. He saw a number of bales opened up the first day the buyers arrived. There was finer wool on the top and bottom of the 13 bales. There was about a foot of fine wool at each end, that in the centre being coarser wool, chiefly crossbred and partly three-quaterbred. There was a decided difference in the value of the wool. The finer wool showing he valued at about 21d and the coarser wool lie valued at 9d to lOcl. Quite half of the wool in the packs was inferior wool. AVlien he saw the packs the inferior wool was wholly hidden, and there appeared to be a dividing line

Edwin Milnes, wool buyer, Christchurch, said that when valuing wool at the Canterbury Farmers’ Co-opera-tive Association stores prior to the sale another buyer called his attention to the fact that the wool in the centre of the bales of the lot was not equal to the wool displayed on the outside. Witness added that not being satisfied that the centres of the bales were equal to the ends, he climbed on top of the bales and cut several so that the insides could be examined. He found the wool on the inside of a lower quality than that on the outside. Ho had already examined accused’s lot, which had shown nothing but fine wool. When valuing it\ he had gone deeper into the bale than the other •buyers and found some wool of a low quality. Witness valued the fine wool at and the coarse wool at 9sd. There was every possibility that the wool would have been purchased on the basis of the better wool displayed.

Accused was committed for trial at the next session of the Supreme Court at Timaru. Bail was allowed.