DOUBLE-HEADED PENNIES

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 813, 6 November 1929, Page 10

DOUBLE-HEADED PENNIES

COUNTERFEITING CHARfr BROUGHT

WORTH FIVE SHILLINGS EACH

rrcss Association NAPIER, T uesdav A charge of having in his posses,;, an instrument adapted for and • " tended for counterfeiting copper was preferred against Philip Ph., Dairagh in the Supreme Court tod, A detective stated in evidence th he had occasion to interview accuiL' in Hastings, and in the course 0119 interview Darragh produced a , soldering tools, stating that tn e \- «... for making double-headed p’enni. which, he said, were worth five shi ,f' ings each.

Questioned by Mr. Justice o*tl. witness stated that the. set was tom plete with the exception of certs' solder. There was some very fine 2-'' solder found in accused's bag, but t?' was not produced in the lower com? Accused at this stage pointed o„.' that the split pennies found i n [J possession had rings upon them pointing to the fact that they hS. been turned on a lathe. He asked hi honour to examine the pennies His Honour did so. remarking that three certainly bore the mark of w' ins been turned on a lathe, but th fourth looked to hint to have been c-u by a hacksaw.

Accused (.to witness): How coulri you make a job of soldering two sobpennies together?—l am not a plumber neither am I versed in counterfeit ing.

His Honour, after an examination if the hacksaw', said it appeared th. blade was too thick for sawing down the centre of pennies. It certain!-

, . . fainiv appeared to him as though it warn ore adapted for woodwork. Accused in evidence stated that the day in question hr was arrested and took his bag round to the po]ir* station. He showed the police hit outfit and said he was going to ex periment with these pennies., to to join them together. The tail* were ground off on a lathe i n an en. gineering shop.

The Crown Prosecutor: Where they ground down?—l will not divulte that.

Counsel: What were you going to do?—I was going: to make doubleheaded pennies, but 1 had not mad* any at that time.

Counsel: What was the blow lamp for?—lt is part of the soldering outfit.

•‘TOOLS NOT SUITABLE” Accused went back into the dock and addressed the jury, pointing out that the tools he had vere totally unsuitable for making “double-headers “There is a, way of making them, and I could demonstrate it there.” he said pointing to the solicitor's table, “but it is not that way.’*

Summing up. his Honour said th# case was a simple one. First of *n prisoner said he was intending tn make double-headed pennies, and then said the tools that he had wer* not suitable. It looked to hint a< though accused was right, and the saw was merely a fret saw for cuttinc wood. That, however, did not finish the matter, for accused had in his possession a complete soldering'outfit, with solder, and he had told them hs intended to attempt to make doubleheaded pennies. There was, then, the. question as to whether the making of double-header; pennies constituted counterfeit, and a court of three Judges in New South Wales had decided that it did, continued his Honour. The whole question for the jury to decide was whether or not the instruments found in accused’s possession were suitable for the work for which it was alleged they were intended. The jury returned a verdict of m gtiilty and the prisoner was accordingly discharged.