THEFT OF A JAR OF BEER

Northern Advocate, 21 March 1931, Page 3

THEFT OF A JAR OF BEER

THIRTEEN MONTHS OLD OFFENCE. A YOUNG MAN CHARGED. At the Magistrate’s Court yesterday, before Messrs C. R. Thornton and C. H. Chissell, J.P.’s, James Edward Simpson was charged with having, on the 19th February, 1930, stolen a jar of beer at Wcllsfovd, the property of the Railway Department. Mr L. A. Johnson appeared for the accused, and Detective-Sergeant Robertson for the police. Two railway guards, F, W. Munits and J. J. Bovaird, gave evidence as to the carriage and loss of a jar of beer off the railway on the date mentioned. The latter also stated that at Wellsford he had found a tag that had been attached to the jar. Kenneth W. Roberts, timber worker but now on relief works, deposed j that on the evening of February 19, Show Day at Wellsford, bo bad drlv- 1 en accused from a dance to the rail-1 way station and the accused had returned with a jar of beer, from which they all drank. He drove accused down in a car belonging to a ( man named Scott. Scott himself was j asleep on the back seat. Cross-examined witness stated that he did not recognise accused as the mau he drove down to the Wellsford railway station. He could not swear that the accused was the same man who brought the beer to the car at Wellsford. Scott, whose car witness was driving, was drunk. James Scott, truck driver at Wellsford, remembered the 19th February. He attended a dance and had been “celebrating, ” after which, ho had got into his car in the back scat and gone to sleep. When he awoke, be found a jar of beer in the car that had not been there when he went to sleep off hi s “celebrations.” Everyone asked lain to have a drink. In fat, it was quite a “chorus” of invitations. Accused was there, and said he was getting married, so they had more drinks. Then ho went into the dance and went out and had more drinks. The jar was half full then. Accused suggested that witness should take it home. He took it home. Witness rang up accused and asked where ho should leave the jar. Accused told witness to keep it. The jar remained at Witchman’s, the boardinghouse, till November, when witness, hearing that the police were inquiring about it, sent it to the railway station. ■ ■i ■■ ■■imirnnii— iih— wmii II—II'IIIIIHPhWII I — II'IIIIIH PhWIM 1 IWH i injurin' W'H i'IIIWTO

To Mr Johnson, witness had a few drinks, but wag not drunk. Roberts, in saying he was drunk, was wrong. Yfitncss had put in for a keg of beer, not a jar, and they all drank from It, too. Mr Witehman, Norman Drearer and two others drank the rest of the beer from the jar that he took home. This was the next day. He and Roberts had a number of drinks. They really drank a ‘'dead heat.’' Detective-Sergeant Robertson deposed that he had interviewed accused in January concerning the matter. Accused denied having taken the beer, :,and refused to make a statement.’ Mr Johnson, for the accused, reserved his defence and elected to be tried by jury. The bench, stated that the condition of affairs at Wellsford that night, judging by the evidence was very bad. They could not commit anyone on such evidence. The> men were evidently all intoxicated and there was not enough evidence to connect the accused with the theft. They dismissed the case.