MISSING POSTAL NOTES

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 8738, 21 May 1914, Page 6

MISSING POSTAL NOTES

LETTER SORTER COMMITTED FOR TRIAL. A postal officer, Frederick David Plimmer, was arraigned on three charges of theft before Mr IN . G, - Riddell S.M., in tho Magistrate’s Court yesterday. The charges wore that on May loth, 1913, ho did steal a postal packet, to wit, a letter addressed to Mias May Hannan, 13, Martin street, Wellington, which contained written matter and two postal notes for 10s and 5s respectively; on October Bth, 1913, he did steal a letter addressed to Mrs D. Kitto, 47, Matai road, Hataitai, which contained written matter, two £1 banknotes, and two postal notes for 10s and 2s 6d respectively; and on October 11th, 1913, he did steal a letter addressed to Mrs J. Hastings, Roseneath which contained written matter, two £1 banknotes, and on© 5s postal note.

Chief-Detective Broberg appeared for tho police, and said that ho did not propose to offer any evidence with regard to the last charge referring to Mrs Hastings’ letter, and the magistrate allowed that charge to be withdrawn.

Mr W. Perry appeared for the accused.

Mrs Annie Hannan, who resides in the Taumarunui district, said that on May 15th 1913, sho wrote a letter to her daughter. Miss May Hannan, 13, Martin street, Wellington, and enclosed were two postal notes for 10s 1 and 5s respectively, numbered 269953 and 589058.

Cecilia Hannan, daughter of tho previous witness, deposed to having posted at Taumarnnui the letter addressed to her sister at Wellington. May Hannan, of Matapuna, Taumarunni, said that she had never received the postal notes alleged to have been enclosed in a letter sent to her by her mother, while she (witness) was living in Wellington. THE SECOND CHARGE. Evidence was then taken in connection with the second charge. Maggie Mildred Hughes, schoolteacher, of Shannon, said that she had purchased two postal notes which she had sent in a letter to Mrs D. Kitto, 47, Matai road, Hataitai. The counterfoils of the two notes were produced. Mrs D. Kitto gave evidence that she had not received tho letter or the postal notes, Joseph Hardie Fletcher, clerk in the Post Office at Wellington, said that the accused was a letter-carrier and sorter at tho Chief Post Office, Wellington. Accused was on duty on May 16th between 1 p.m. and 9 p.m. A letter posted at 3.30 p.m. of the 15th at Taumarunui would reach Wellington at 4.50 pun. on the 16th. Acnsed would assist in sorting that mail. A letter addressed to Hobart, containing postal notes, was here produced, and shown to bo dated 1.30 p.m., August 3rd. On October 7th accused was also on duty from .1 p.m. to 9 p.m. On October Bth he was on duty from 5 a.m. to 1 p.m. A letter posted at Shannon on October 7th at 4 p.m. would reach Wellington at 7.23. Accused would assist in sorting that mail. , A letter posted at 6 p.m. at Shannon would reach the General Post Office at 11.5. This letter would not be sorted till 5 a.m. the next day, when accused was on duty. Another letter to Hobart containing postal notes was produced and was dated November 13th

Leslie Holmes, a clerk employed by Laery and Co., said that about November 13th, 1913, he received a postal note, produced, from a Chinaman named Young On, in payment for goods received. The note was for ss, No. 589058.

Young On, manager for Sing On Tie, Cuba street, said that during November he received this postal note in tho ordinary course of business.

John Johnson, officer in charge of letter-carriers- at the Wellington Post Office, said that any letter-sorter would have an opportunity to steal letters passing through the Post Office. He produced three documents containing specimens of accused’s handwriting. TATTERSALL’S EMPLOYEES’ EVIDENCE. H. V. Anderson, clerk in the employ of Tattersall’s, at Hobart, said he remembered the letter produced, which was addressed to himself at his private address, by the writing and by the name on it of the “Eileen” syndicate. On receipt of the letter he handed it in to Tattersall’s' office. He only remembered one letter of the kind. The second letter addressed to him ho did not open, but remembered the envelope. Dorothy Alice Allan, opening clerk employed by Ta-ttersall’s, Hobart, said her duty was to open all letters and note the applications for tickets- She remembered receiving a letter from Mr Anderson addressed to him. It contained a postal note numbered 269953, (the number of the nolo which had been sent by Mrs Hannan to her daughter), and an application from the “Eileen” syndicate, Donald McLean street, Wellington, for two tickets. There was no chance of the postal notes sent by anyone being confused with other letters. During August and September last year, only one application was received from New Zealand in the name of the “Eileen” syndicate. Tickets numbered 51362 and 51368 were allotted to that syndicate, and they were on tho Kalgoorlie Cup No. .2 sweep. An application for three tickets in Tattersall’s by P. Davidson, Normanby street, Wellington, New Zealand, was here produced. Accompanying it was a postal note for 10s, issued at Shannon, Now Zealand, on October 3rd, 1913. The hooks of Tattensall’s proved that ■ note accompanied the application, and there was no doubt about this.

Alexander Forrest, handwriting expert, with an experience of thirty years in the Bank of New Zealand, said that he had examined specimens of Plimmer’s writing in the official documents, and the writing of the application for sweep tickets by “F. Davidson,” and was of opinion that they were all written by the same person.

ACCUSED COMMITTED FOR TRTAT, Detective-Sergeant Rawle said that when he interviewed accused on November 30th last on the subject of the first charge accused made a statement in writing. In this be said that ho bought a postal note for 10s- from a stranger, a young lady, in the general office, which he had sent to Tattersall’s in the name of the “Eileen” syndicate Accused was arrested on May 4th. The second postal note, the property of Mrs D. Kitto. had not been traced. No such person as F. Davidson lived in Normanby street. This concluded the evidence, and

the prisoner, who pleaded not guilty, was committed to the Supreme' Court for trial, bail being fixed in two sureties of £SO each.