ALLEGED SHEEP STEALING.

Otago Witness, Issue 3774, 13 July 1926, Page 57

ALLEGED SHEEP STEALING.

CENTRAL OTAGO CASE. ACCUSED COMMITTED FOR TRIAL. At the City Police Court on July 7, before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M., John William M’Lennan was charged (1) with on January IS, at Miller’s Flat, he did steal 480 fleeces of wool of a total value of £216 11s lid, the property of Geo. Albert Kain and another, and (2) with between January 11, 1925, and January 4, 1926, at Miller’s Flat, stealing 493 sheep of a value of £675 4s 6d, the property of Geo. Albert Kain. Mr A. C. Hanlon appeared to defend and Chief Detective Lewis to prosecute. Richard Nicholos Snow said he was manager of Kain Bros.,’, Beaumont, sheep station, situated at Miller’s Flat. He had been managing the property for about four and a-half years. The station was owned by Geo. Albert Kain and his brother, Carlton Kain, and they had been in occupancy for about 16 years. It was of 69,900 acres. The stock now consisted practically of Corriedale sheep. The station carried from 15,000 to 20,000 sheep. They were expecting to shear between 17,000 and 18,000 sheep last shearing. They actually shore 15,024, including all stragglers. The Beaumont earmark consisted of two forebits out of the left ear for wethers and on the opposite ear for ewes. The earmark was registered. There was also an age mark, which witness introduced. He described it at length. Sheep were bought in at various times having different earmarks. The age mark was put on the bought-in sheep. Most of the sheep had been so marked, but some were missed. Witness said he owned a sheep run at Rae’s Junction. He had sold sheep to Beaumont. In 1923 he sold n line of 1200 mixed wethers to Beaumont Station. Those sheep bore witness’s earmark, which was a fork on the right ear and a punch hole on the left ear. These sheep were not age-marked. In 1924 he sold between 700 or 800 lambs to Kain Bros., and they were taken to Beaumont. They were earmarked with witness’s registered earmark, and they also had witness’s age mark. The Beaumont age mark was not put on these sheep. Beaumont was bounded on the east side by a run owned by Mr Arthur Adams, also by Rocklands Station. On the north side it was bounded by a run owned by Mr Chas. Hore; on the north-west side by the accused’s property; on the west side by Messrs Davidson, M’Lean, and Richardson Bros, properties, and on the south side by the Clutha River. The length of the boundary between the accused’s property and Beaumont Station would be about four miles. It was unfenced. This boundary consisted of the south branch of the Teviot Stream. It was quite possible for sheep to cross when the stream was low. He had occasionally got stragglers from accused which had strayed across the stream. Each year after shearing the sheep were turned out on the summer country, three miles of which was bounded by aocused’s property. Their tallies ran from shearing to shearing. His books showed that for 1924-25 after allowing for sales and purchases and a seven per cent, death rate, there were shorn 14,622. They should have shorn 17,062. In 1925 they shore 15,024. Ihere was a shortage of 2038 sheep. He considered this an exceptionally heavy shoitage. Witness was on the look out for a •leakage. From something which came to his knowledge witness went to Ormaglade station, owned by Mrs Fraser and managed by Mr Murray. He there saw seven sheep in charge of a shepherd named M‘Carthy. The sheep were branded ML conjoined. in black. The brand was quite distinct. They had what witness considered the Beaumont earmark defaced. One fore bit had been cut out to the tip of the ear, and some of them had two punch holes in one ear. He knew the brand mentioned to be accused’s brand. He knew also that M‘Lennan used the two punch holes as his earmark Witness took no steps with regard to these sheep. On April 14 witness mustered the summer country adjoining the accused’s property. He drafted some of the sheep at the Taieri yards at the back of the run. anjl noticed, as they ran through the race, about a dozen marked similarly to those he saw at Ormaglade. One of them was a woolly sheep which had missed shearing. Two of these were sheep which had been bought from Rae’s Junction. On May 27 witness made application to the stock inspector at Roxburgh to call on the accused to muster his sheep. Witness, with the assistance of others mustered accused’s flock. Detective Sneddon, Inspector Fleming and the accused were present. The sheep were driven to the Ormaglade yards at Mount Teviot. Witness examined the sheep and claimed some of them as the property of Kain Brothers, of Beaumont Station. He questioned 474 sheep; these were not all the property of Kain Brothers. Some belonged to other settlers in the district. The following day. May 30, he mustered accused’s front property in the presence of aocused. These sheep were taken to Inder’s sheep yards, these being the nearest. Witness questioned 62 sheep. Some were the property of Kain Brothers and some of neighbouring settlers. That completed the muster of accused’s property. The whole of the sheep questioned were taken to Mr Davidson’s Bheep yards. Witness, assisted by Stock Inspector Fleming and Detective Sneddon, made a close examination of the questioned sheep. The ears, mouth and brand of each sheen were examined. Detective Sneddon was charting each mark as it wns called out. He claimed 493 sheep as the property of Kain Bros. Witness considered that the ears of some of the sheep had been tampered with. Some of the ears bore the straightout Beaumont earmark. There were 67 of these, 29 of which bore the Beaumont age mark in addition. These 67 sheep were paint branded with ML conjoined. Of the total sheep 489 were so branded, the remaining four were woollies and the paint brands were indistinct. While witness was examining one sheep at Inder’a yard witness asked aocused if this particular sheep was in the line he had bought in the spring. He said it was. He then asked him the ages of these aheep he had then bought, and he said they were 2,4, 6, and 8-tooth, and full-mouthed. Witness said» “Well, this sheep must have been • lamb when it a as bought." Aocused replied: “There might have been one or two."

The Beaumont paint brand was the figure one with a dot over it. Witness also took possession of nine sheep branded with a rough resemblance of the Beaumont brand. His experience of sheep convinced him that this brand had not been put on immediately after the sheep had been shorn. On some of the sheep the paint was still damp. These sheep bore the Beaumont earmark. There were other sheep which witness was of opinion belonged to Chas. Hoare, a neighbouring settler. There were 15 nnbranded shorn sheep bearing the Beaumont station earmark. Had they been shorn at Beaumont they would have borne the Beaumont brand. These sheep were not included in the 493 mentioned in the charge. All these sheep were now on Beaumont station and were being kept separate from the other portion of the flock. The accused claimed all the sheep bearing his brand on his property. On June 3 witness went to Mr Hugh Armitage’s property on Teviot Settlement, and there examined 11 sheep, nine of which he claimed as Beaumont sheep. Some of them were branded ML conjoined, and other two were unbranded. No age-marked sheep had ever been off Beaumont. No sheep had ever been sold to accused. MT.ennan had no authority to put his brand on any sheep bearing the Beaumont earmark. Accused had never returned any wool as having been taken from Beaumont sheep. The 6heep mentioned in the charge, with the exception of the four woollies, had been shorn last shearing season. Henry Thomas Davidson, a runholder at Miller’s Flat, said his property adjoined the Beaumont Station, and also that of the accused He h„d been on that property for eight years, and had been among sheep all his life. In March of this year he mustered that part of his property which adjoined the accused’s property. He found among the stragglers 12 sheep bearing _ M'Lcnnan’s paint brand. He examined some of the earmarks, and considered that half of these were Beaumont Station sheep. He sent all the stragglers to Ormagladp Station, which was the usual custom He assisted in the muster of accused’s property as referred to by the previous witness. He was present practically the whole of the time. He saw a number of sheep bearing the Beaumont earmark, not defaced in any way. He also saw a number bearing earmarks which had been defaced. He wa9 familiar wilh the Rae’s Junction earmark. He also saw a good number of sheep which bore the Rae’s Junction earmark. Detective Sneddon said that he was present when the Beaumont run was mustered. All the sheep on the an, with the exception of three, were taken to the Ormaglade sheepyards. When the first pen was being examined he heard Snow isk accused where he had got sheep he was raddling. Accused replied that he had bought them in the spring from a man named Connolly, who was a sheep dealer at Oamaru. He received 64J, and 18 were old ones. Accused had said that he had only put his car registered mark on the sheep—two holes in the ear. He said a man named Dale w<as present on delivery. Mr Snow questioned 474 sheep at Ormaglade. Witness heard Snow ask accused if there were any lambs in the sheep he had bought, and accused replied no. Witness went to accused’s home, and accused had produced a receipt which ho said he had received from Connolly. Witness told accused he wanted him to give all the information he could about the sheep. He said he first met Connolly at Oturehua about two years ago. He said that he met him again about Waipiata. The next time he met him was m Dunedin in September, 1925. He said Connolly had tola him that he had two mobs of sheep, one at Oamaru and another at Alexandra. Connolly had drivan him to Alexandra in his car, and that when they got to Alexandra he had seen the drover Dale, who was just bringing sheep into Alexandra. He examined them on the road, and decided to take them at 25e per head. Asked as to his banking account, accused said he did not draw money from the bank; he got it trom his brother Thomas in cash. He said Connolly was a man between 35 and 40 years of age, and came from about Oamaru. He described his personal appearance. Asked if he had made inquiries at the Land Board about Connolly and Dale, accused replied he did not know anybody who knew Connolly or Dale, and that he had not made any inquiries. Witness had invited accused to make a statement, and he had said that he had no statement to make; anything he had to say would be said in court. On June 26 witness had arrested accused on warrant. There were 949 sheep on accused’s property on the baek blocks, and 302 on the front block. That did not include 115 lambs. Accused had told him that he went to Christchurch and met his brother there, who, it was alleged, had given him the money in cash. He met accused’s brother in September, 1925. Hugh Armitage said he was a settler on Teviot Settlement, and he was engaged in sheep farming. He remembered mustering his sheep on May 4 last. Among them were nine sheep which he considered belonged to Beaumont Station. There were also other stragglers belonging to other settlers. Seven of the nine sheep were branded with M.L. conjoined. They had been shorn at the last shearing. Some of them bore the Beaumont earmark, and some had the ears mutilated. He passed accused about the end of April with a mob of sheep going out to his (accused’s) run. He was assisted by his brother Thomas. Accused had to pass through witness’s property with his sheep. He had notified Mr Snow concerning these sheep. He had had a lifelong experience with sheep. It was on account of the earmark that he considered they were Beaumont sheep. These sheep were still on witness’s property.

Walter Finlay Murray said he was manager of the Ormaglade sheep station. Ormaglade adjoined the accused’s pr >• perty. He was well acquainted with the Beaumont; registered earmark. He knew the accused well. He had on occasions shorn his sheep on the Ormaglade Station. Accused shore his flock there in December, 1924. He also shore some stragglers there in February, 1925. He thought there would be about 80 stragglers. He noticed several wethers among the lot, with the Beaumont earmark. He passed the remark to M'Lennan that he was shearing Beaumont sheep, and he replied: “Well 1 know it; they shear a lot of mine, and I want to get even with them." Witness passed the remark that it was scarcely a fair thing to do that, but he did not think accused heard him. He

thought about 70 out of the 80 were Beaumont sheep. Jeremiah Connolly said he was a farmer and sheep dealer at Rakaia. lie did know the accused. He was not in Waipiata or Alexandra at any time during 1925, and he had never made a sale of sheep to accused. He had been stock-dealing in Canterbury for 30 years, and did not know of any other stock dealer of the name of Connolly He did know a drover named Dale. William Carline, jun., said he was a butcher residing and carrying on a business at Alexandra. He held the grazing rights over the recreation ground at Alexandra. As far as lie could remember accused did not have a mob of sheep there. He had never had any dealings with a man named Dale or with accused, or the previous witness. Connolly. Matthew Robert Findlay, registrar of brands for the Clutha, Tuapeka and Bruce branding districts and resided at Balclutha. He had examined the books of the branding districts of the three districts named and there was no brands with the P.H. and an addition indiscipherable. There was a brand P.H. without any addition in the Bruce district. M'Lennan’s registered brand was M.L. conjoined and his earmark was two punch hoh>3. He also described Kain Brothers’ registered earmark and brand. Accused had had his present earmark since July 22. 1924; prior to that he had a slanting fore bit. The only other settlers in the district who had two fore bits as an earmark was Mr William Haugh, of Crookston. He would assume that Mr Haugh’s sheep were crossbreds. William Hutton said he was a sheep farmer residing in the Glenledi district. He ran about 400 crossbred sheep of mixed sexes. His paint brand was P.H. and his earmark was three bits—one out of the back, one out of the front, and one out of the tip. He had not sold any sheep since January, 1925. Prior to that he had 6old small lots. He did not know the accused. Sidney Maxmillian Taylor said he was registrar of brands for the Waitaki County, and was stationed at Oamaru. He had searched his records for a brand with the letters P.H. with an addition and failed to find any. A settler at Maheno had a brand P.H., which was registered on December 6. 1905. Peter Michael M'Carthy said he was a farmer residing at Kakanui. He had 287 acres. He ran from 350 to 400 ewes, mostly crossbreds. His earmark was a fore-bit and back bit, V shaped He sold about 400 fat lambs and about 30 or 40 fat ewes during 1924. In 1925 he sold a similar number. He did not know of a dealer named Connolly or a drover named Dale. , . . . f Rupert George Fountain, registrar oi brands, gave evidence as to the registration of brands. He could not find any brand “T.H.” without an addition. He did not know J. Connolly, neither did he know a drover named Dale Constable M'‘Mahon, stationed at Roxburgh, said he had interviewed accused. Accused said he claimed the sheep, though he was aocused of stealing them. . Aocused, on being further questioned, said he would not say anything more. Witness said to accused: “Do you own the sheep?" and he replied: “Yes, and I will have them.’’ Aocused said to his father, “Do not open your mouth.” Accused then added: “You came to pump the old man.” and further said: “Leave the old man alone.” He said: “Good God, my father never knows where I am.” He did not know Connelly, or Dale. John M’Leari Kennedy (Stronach. Morris, and Co.) said accused put his last year’s wool clip through his firm. There were 41 bales It was generally estimated that 50 fleeces went to a bale. T’-e sum realised for the wool was £529 6s 4d. This closed the evidence, and accused having been cautioned in the ordinary* way, Mr Hanlon stated that accused reserved his defence for the Supreme Court. He was then committed for trial, bail being allowed accused in his own recognisance of £2OO, and two sureties of £IOO each on the first charge, and his own recognisance on the second charge; accused to report daily to the police.