SUPPLIES OF CREAM.

Otago Witness, Issue 3661, 13 May 1924, Page 32

SUPPLIES OF CREAM.

ALLEGED CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD.

PALMERSTON NORTH, May 6. The local sessions of the Supreme Court opened this morning before Mr Justice Hosking. True bills were returned in. five cases in which Henry Simpson was charged, with Arthur Melvin Taylor, John Jens. Sorens Thomasen, Otto Greegher, Richard Gairgan, and Alfred Wright, with conspiring to defraud in connection with the supply of cream to the Cheltenham Dairy Company. The first case was heard against Simpson and Thomasen, who were charged with that during October last they conspired to defraud the Cheltenham Dairy Company of £B9 18s by means of false cream tests. Simpson pleaded guilty, and Thomasen not guilty. The trial of 'thomasen was then proceeded with. Addressing the jury, the Crown Prosecutor said that while there was no question the company had been defrauded of a certain sum, the amount set out in the charge was merely speculative and represented the probable loss by the company by the accused’s alleged conduct. The way the alleged fraudulent conspiracy was found out was somewhat unusual. When Simpson was absent from work at the factory owing to illness the tests went down, but, when he returned a few weeks later the tests immediately went up again. The suspicions of the c mpany were aroused, and defendant, with the others involved, was given an opportunity of explaining when at a meeting of the directors, and counsel claimed .hat the offence was practically admitted. There were no witnesses for the defence. An extraordinary legal situation arose when the jury returned with a verdict in the case of Thomasen of “not guilty of conspiracy, but guilty of defrauding the company through Simpson’s neglect.” The verdigt caused some consternation, his Honor confessing that he could not understand it, and he pointed out that the question was whether the accused Thomasen had conspired with Simpson with intent to defraud.

The Foreman: The jury finds no agreement bet\v«en the two men. His Honor: In that case I shall take the finding as one of not guilty. Does the jury understand that Simpson has already pleaded guilty to having conspired with Thomasen?

The Foreman; The jury dealt with the case from Thomasen’s point of view and found that he was no party to a conspiracy. The Crown Prosecutor suggested that the jury be asked to reconsider fts verdict, but this was disallowed. His Honor said that the better wav would be to discharge Thomasen, and as other charges were pending against him that he be detained till to-morrow.

The Crown Prosecutor said that Simpson should be allowed to withdraw his plea and be discharged. His Honor; But he will have been arraigned on a criminal charge and discharged without trial or plea. As it required two to form a conspiracy, Simpson, according to the jury, was not guilty. In addressing Simpson, his Honor Sir John Salmond said: “You have pleaded guilty to conspiracy. You may have thought you were guilty, but the jurv has found that there was no conspiracy.”

The Crown Prosecutor searched vainly for a parallel case. Both prisoners were discharged, though Simpson was detained on other similar charges in respect to several other farmers.