ALLEGED THEFT.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XXXXVII, Issue 11745, 23 September 1902, Page 7

ALLEGED THEFT.

May iMerritt was pLaced in the dock on ■a charge that on March 16th, 1901, she stole from the dwelling house of Margaret Walkley a. ring owned by E. M. Henderson. She "was also charged with" having received the ring, knowing it to have been stolen.

The accused, who pleaded "not guilty," was defended by ivlr Hurley.

The following jury was empannelled: — Herbert Dymock, William Goldsack, George Morgan, S. Carrell, W. J. Moosman, H. Corrigan, T. W. Perm, S. Phillips, W. James, J. Ellis, S. Walk Mr Dymoclf was chosen foreman.

The evidence for the Crown was to the effect that in March, 1901, the accused was living at the Commercial Hotel, Palmerstoni North. At that time a lady named Miss! Anderson was also living there. . On March 4th Miss Anderson, who is a dressmaker, went to the bathroom to wash her hand's before going to the dining room. She put two rings on the edge of the bath, and forgot' to put them on her finger when leaving. On noticing that the rings were missing she arts once made search for them, but they had disappeared from the bathroom. An advertisement was inserted in the "Standard1" and general inquiries were made. Some time after one of the rings was found on Miss Merrittfsi finger. Miss Merritt was then in Stratford, where she was barmaid at a local hotel. The accused gave contradictory stories' .to different witnesses, stating to various people that the ring was presented to her at Palmerston North, that it was given to her by a man named Brown, who had been at the .Commercial Hotel when she was there; also that she had bought it. Evidence was given to. show that the ring had not been presented by Mies Crawford, and that no person of the name of Brown had been at the hotel aifa tiie time mentioned by the accused. Evidence for the defence was) given by Henry Cartel* and the accused, Henry Carter, a jewe'leay stated tihat while in the train between New Plymouth and Wellington he was conversing with a man, and in the course of the conversation this mam showed witness a ring he had. The ring was very dirty and had apparently come from a pawnshop. The man said he was going to make the ring a present to, a young lady. The ring which witness saw in the train was of the same kind as that which was produced in Court and said to be the one lost by Miss Anderson. Some time later witness! was in Palmerston North, and in the course of conversation with the accused was given a ring to repair. This ring was identical with that which he had seen in the train. This man referred to was dark, and about five feet eight inches in height. The accused gave evidence to the effect that when in the Comroercttiil Hotel she was presented by a jman named Brown with the ring in question. This man was dark, and about five feet eight inches in height. She did not know where he was now.

After a short retirement the jury returned with a verdict of not guilty. Accused was accordingly discharged.