THEFT AT PETONE

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 7865, 29 July 1911, Page 1

THEFT AT PETONE

RAILWAY WORKSHOPS ROBBED / MAGISTRATE INFLICTS SUBSTANTIAL FINES. Richard Davis was charged, before Mr \V. G. Riddell, S.M., in tho Magistrate’s Court yesterday, that (1) On. divers dates between April Ist and July ,12th. 1911, at Pctone, ho stole two rolls of wire netting, one carriage cushion, two carnage mats, and throo tins of paint, valued at Sil, tho property ot tho New Zealand Government; (2) on divers dates between April Ist and July 21st, he stole a quantity of timber, two sheets of glass, three mats, one cushion and a quantity ot paint, valued at .£ll, tho property of the New Zealand Government: (3) on divers dates between April Ist and July Ist. he stole a screwdriver' and other carpenters’ tools, valued at 18s hd, tho property of John A. Campbell and Sons. Joshua Warren was charged with having received from Davis the articles mentioned in the first charge, well knowing them to have been dishonestly obtained. William Mallmder was charged with having received the articles mentioned in charges two and three against Davis. Tho articles were alleged to have been stolen from the I’etonc railway workshops, where tho accused Davis was a watchman. . . Mr J. J. McGrath appeared for Davis, who pleaded not guilty. Maiiinder, who wds represented by Mr P. W. Jackson, pleaded guilty, as also did Warren (Mr U. Beere).. Malliuder and Warren, in evidence, declared that the. goods had been given to them by Davis in the evenings. Mallinder stated that on ono occasion, when an official paid a surprise visit to the workshops and found him in company with Davis, tho latter stated that ho (witness) was a surfaceman named Bird. Davis, in evidence, admitted that ho told the official that a man whom he found in his company in tho yards was Bird, but contended that his statement was correct, and that ■ Malliuder was not with him. 1 This statement was corroborated by ganger Bird, who stated he , was in Davis's company on the night in question. ■ Davis directly denied that he had supplied tho other two accused with anything from the workshops, or that ho had stolen anything himself. Bis Worship said it was doubtful if Davis could bo convicted of theft. He had certainly been careless, and had so acted that The others were placed in possession of information that enabled them to obtain the goods. There was some doubt as to what Jiarf Davis, actually played, and ho must be given the benefit of that doubt. Warren and Malliuder were convicted ot thoft. Warren was fined .&>,, or fourteen days’ imprisonment. MaUmder was fined XI. or forty-eight hours’ imprison-, ment on tho first charge, and, on 'the second, 4)4 or fourteen days. Each was given seven days in which to find the money. Thq information against Davis was dismissed.