ALLEGED THEFT

Wairarapa Age, 15 November 1919, Page 6

ALLEGED THEFT

CHARGE AGAINST A DROVER

A drover named James Orr was charged in the Magistrate's Court at Masterton yesterday with the theft of a : cattle dog, valued at £ls, the of , Edward .George Thorne, farmer, of Carrington, Carterton. Tho dog in question was produced in Court.

Mr Thos. Jordan appeared for defendant', who pleaded not guilty. Edward George Thorne said that on 11th- April of this year ho attended a sale in Carterton. He tied his dog' up to the fence of the saleyard with a string. When he returned the dog had gone. Ho and his boy searched the district and advertised in the Carterton paper for the dog. Ho also notified the police. From what witness heart! ,he accompanied Sergeant Miller to Orr's house on the 4th of this month. Orr said he had no dogs but Inn own. Witness had a look at the. dogs, and. found his own dog tied up'at the back of the shed. Orr said the dog had been [ given to him by his brother about eight or- nine months ago. Witness , told Orr that he must have known the dog was his, as Clark (a drover) i had told him so.

Sergeant Miller corroborated fhr evidence of the last witness.' as/ to what took place when they went to Orr's house. When Thome said the dog had been advertised for in the Carterton paper, Orr replied that, the dog had not been advertised for in the Master ton papers. The dog. .followed him home from Carterton, and had been running about for about six weeks before he tied it up. The defendant, James Orr, in evidence, said the dog followed him from Carterton to Masterton. He first saw the dog wh<jn he was near the Clareville racecourse, and tried to drive it back, but it would not go. Witness told T. Caverhill and various stock agents that he had the dog. Witness had always taken tho dog with him to sales at Carterton and other places. The drover Clark said he thought he knew to whom the dog belonged, but he did not mention Thome's name. Thomas V. Caverhill, stock auctioneer, said that he first saw Orr with Thome's dog early in the winter. Orr said he had "picked him up," and did not" know to whom he belonged. «Orr said, "If you see anybody advertising for a dog, let mo know." Witness also heard Orr telling Caseley and Kelliher about the dog. His Worship said that if it had not been for the evidence of the last witness he would have had no hesitation in finding defendant guilty of theft. This caso wa -every near the line, but defendant apparently did tell the stock agents that he had the dog. This showed that defendant had some honest intentions in connection 1 with the dog. Defendant would be given the benefit of the doubt and the information would be dismissed.