BETTER OUT OF UNIFORM.

Auckland Star, Volume XLVII, Issue 51, 29 February 1916, Page 6

BETTER OUT OF UNIFORM.

A RETURNED SOLDIER'S EXHIBITION. DRANK HIS CLOTHING ALLOWANCE "AND GAVE AWAY HIS BADGES. Whether or not a young man who has been walking the streets of Auckland in an Australian uniform is a returned trooper, as he alleges, or is an impostor, was the conundrum presented to Mr. F. V. Frazer, S.M., to-day when Arthur Frederick Neall (32) was charged that yesterday he assaulted James R. Whitlaw, and that he unlawfully wore, without the Governor's permission, the uniform of Hia Majesty's military forces. Neall declared that he was entitled to wear the uniform, and said that he was provoked to hit Whitlaw.

Whitlaw, a soldier in uniform, on sick leave from Feathereton, stated that he and a fellow-eoldier were in an hotel in Queen Street yesterday morning when Neall entered the bar with a civilian, and had a small beer at the civilian's expense. Neall had two pictures he was trying to sell at 1/6 each. They were drawings of "a bit of a river, or something," but witness didn't take much notice of them, because Neall had ro badges on his uniform and witness suspected that he was an impostor. He challenged NealVa right to wear the uniform, and aakcd him to go with them to the Defence office. Neall produced "a bit of typewriting," but witness didn't take any notice of that, and pressed Neall to go to the Defence office. They went there, and the sergeant-major directed them to go to ccc a man who had a full list of the returned troopers. They went there, but Neall's name wasn't on the list. Neall still maintained that he was a returned trooper, and as they were going along the 6treet witness told hie mate that he had better keep an eyo on Neall or he would run away. Thereupon Neall turned and hit witness on the jaw. Just then a policeman came up, and Neall was given in charge.

Neall: I showed him my pay-book and my disc, and showed him by provisional discharge. The witness, in reply to a question by Sub-Inspector Mcllveney, stated that h>j took the action he did in the interests of returned soldiers. "I might come back myself," he said, "and want a living, and lie ie just taking it away from

Accused: The pictures had something to do with the war. One was a soldier leaving his wife, and the other was of a soldier coming back. As regards the Defence people not knowing mc here, I joined at Palmerston North, and I was in the Dunedin hospital after I returned, from October 1 to December 17. I have been drinking a fair amount since 1 was discharged, and spent all my money. I got hold of a few pictures, and was trying to sell them to get enough money to buy myself a suit of clothes. I went to the Defence Office on Friday, and tried to get a suit of clothes, and ScrgtMajor Matthews told mc I would have to get a proper discharge before I could get a suit of clothes. 1 said I would write to Hastings for it.

His Worship asked for accused's paybook, which the Sub-Tnspector suggested belonged to sonic other man whose name the accused had taken, and then asked accused to write down his signature. Accused wrote down his signature, and his Worship, after comparing it with th<? pay-book, stated that the signature written in the Court was identical with that in the pay-book.

" How do you come to be wearing a uniform after your discharge; are civilian clothes not issued to you?" asked his Worship. Accused: N"o, sir. Sub-Inspector: You have civilian buttons on your uniform, I notice; This is an Australian funic; they have civilian bnttons. It is quite usual in Egypt to exchange tunics. His Worship remarked that it would perhaps bo as well to let 'the charge of unlawfully wearing the uniform stand over, pending further inquiries from the Defence Department. An official from the Defence Office \ stated that every soldier now got a suit of clothes or 30/, whichever he-preferred, on his discharge. » I His Worship: It would be as well for! the Deportment to take that uniform from him, and provide him with civilian clothes. The Official: We can't take the uni-1 form off anyone who has an honourable' discharge. His Worship remarked that the circumstances of the assault were probably such as to annoy and provoke Neall, though he might have known that Whitlaw was acting in good faith, seaing that he* was not in a proper New Zealand uniform, and had no badges on it. His conduct was unsatisfactory for a returned man, and tended to bring discredit on other returned men. It might be best to let the matter stand over a few days, to sec if the Department could do anything towards getting him civilian clothes. At this stage Neall remarked that he had taken the 30/ in lieu of a civilian suit, and had spent it in drink. At this the Defence Office representative pointed out that there was no claim on the Defence Department for a civilian suit of clothes. Hie Worship remanded Neall for sentence till Friday, and remarked that even though there was no claim on the Defence Department for a civilian suit, the case was one in which, for the credit of the service, the man might be supplied with mufti in order to get him out o! the uniform. If ho then continued his sponging mode of life he would be soon J picked up on a charge of vagrancy.