HARBOURING UNCUSTOMED GOODS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14924, 29 August 1910, Page 6

HARBOURING UNCUSTOMED GOODS.

—-■ ■ EXPENSIVE CARELESSNESS. (Pib United Press Association.) WELLINGTON, August 28. Before 111 - \V. G. Riddell, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court • yesterday, Hamilton Smyly, fourth otficer of the New Zealand Snipping Company's 11.M.5. Turakina; 'was charged that' on the 25th August lie knowingly harboured certain uncustomed goods-namely, six gold bracelets and a gold match-box—of the total value of £14. Mr C. S. Nixon, Collector of Customs; prosecuted, and Smyly was defended by Mr G. H. Fell. The informntioit was laid under section 236 of the Customs La.ws Act, which provides a penalty for knowingly harbouring any uncustomed goods. : Evidence was tendered by James ICagar, Owen Jones, and Alfred Bacon, Customs officei'6, that they searched the Turakina on the 25th August. Defendant when asked to declare what dutiable gocds were in his possession had stated that lie had six pieces of silver goods, the list whereon this declaration was made being produced. Asked if he had any other goods, Smj;ly replied in the nogative. A search was then made in the safe in the chief steward's room, and there the Customs officers found 11 packages of jewellery. They were informed by the chief steward that the goods belonged to the defendant, who had deposited them for safe custody, 'l'he searchers again asked Smyly if lie had any other goods which he had not declared, and the latter replied " ivo"; the silver goods for which he signed were all he had. Subsequently the officers found the three packages (declared) in hie room. Defendant said that these consisted of wedding presents which 'had been bro'ught out from England. He intended to take these back to England, but the gold articles he intended to land in New Zealand. Smyly had stated that lie' did not know how many packages \u-ve in the sate. Counsel for defendant submitted that mens rea would • have to be proved by the prosecution. The failure to declare was quite innocent and unintentional. Frederick Hamilton Smyly said that three of the gold bangles he bought himself. The' others were wedding presents given to him. The former only he intended to land after paying duty. The presents he meant to take pack to England, whither his fiancee was to follow him by the next steamer. The silver goods m his cabin lie gave to the steward just before reaching Hobart, but one big package he kept in his room. When signing the declaration lie only remembered the silver goods. • It did not occur to him to declare the goldware given to the steward seven weeks before. Had he intended to smugglo the goods he could have gone to the safe and put the jewellery in his pocket. To Mr Nixon: Witness did not remember telling the cross-examiner that he (Smyly) intended landing all the goods. He had been to New Zealand three or four times, but had never taken the trouble to read the top of the declaration list. Witness had forgotten all about the gold articles. His Worship said it seemed to him that the defendant must be convicted. Smylv, 'knowing thiit he had to make 'the declaration, had not. taken . the trouble to find out what goods lie intended to land and to pay duty on. Or, if his explanation was correct, defendant had acted in a most grossly careless manner. His method was the essence of indifference. For all Smyly knew, the goods might have been overboard so far as lie lias concerned. Defendant was convicted and fined £42 (three times tlio value of the goods), but as tlio presents were wedding presents the magistrate was prepared to reduce the fine to one-fourth a.s provided by, section 282'0f the statute. An order to pay court costs (7s) was also imposed, and default was fixed at seven days imprisonment. The undeclared goods are conSscated by law.