"SIT DOWN."

Auckland Star, Volume LIV, Issue 58, 9 March 1923, Page 7

"SIT DOWN."

A MAGISTERIAL COMMAND. BENCH AND BAR DISAGREE. The usually unruffled atmosphere of ' the Police .Court became electric for a few moments this morning, when Mr. iJ. W. Poynton. S.M., ordered a solicitor Ito "sit down!" I This incident was the outcome of a sentence of 14 days' imprisonment imposed upon a man who had stolen 13 fowls, valued at £3. When he was senj tenced. Mr. Dickson, who was appearing for t&cused, interposed with:—"l would like to draw your attention to the fact that only the other day you sentenced a man to only seven days' imprisonment for theft on the wharf, your Worship! Why, this man only stole a few fowls!" "You must not stand and argue. It's very improper, Mr. Diekeon. You could stand there and argue all day about cases that have been heard if you were allowed! Very improper! Fourteen days' imprisonment, said. That wi I do. Sit down!" LENIENCY ON HEALTH GROUNDS. The accused, Ernest Nottingham (30), pleaded guilty to the theft of 13 fowls, when he appeared earlier in the week. He was remanded in order that medical evidence might be adduced concerning the ] state of his health. This morning. Dr. ' Endletsberger stated that he had attended Nottingham, and as the result of examinations he was in a position to say that prisoner was suffering with rheumatism of the heart. He was an incipient tuberculosis case and should be in a sanatorium. It would be prejudicial to his health if he were put in prison. r Mr. Dickson asked his Worship to take this into account. The man had been in a weak state of health for some ! time, and it was largely owing to hie nervous condition that he had committed the offence. Only lately a prisoner in the Supreme Court, Jamieson, had been given leniency because of ! his ill-health, the judge remarking that ;it would be cruelty to imprison him lin that condition. In this case would his Worship view the matter in the same light? The man was a first of- . fender, and had a wife and four little girls, all of whom were under 15 years of ace. A fine or a period of probation would meet the case, and Mr. Dickson felt sure that if leniency were extended, Nottingham would not be seen in Court again. The Magistrate observed that this line of argument led to the contention that because a man pleaded incipient tuberculosis he could commit theft with impunity. That was not tenable. In prison men were well looked after, and if ill were attended by experts. After all, if he were fined, it would mean that his wife would suffer. Also, if he were given probation and ordered to make restitution his wife would suffer loss. Imprisonment was etich an offence was really the only remedy. Mr. Dickson: But, sir, the Supreme Court has established the precedent in cases where there is sickness. Mr. Poynton: That's all right. Mr. Dickson: Well, your Worship must follow the Supreme Court preMr. Poynton: Not at all. Some ot the Supreme Court decisions I entirely disagree with. I will not follow them. They do not follow our decisions —they upset our decisions on appeal! (Laugh, ter.) ' I will not follow- any one particular judge in anything. Now take the case of this man Nottingham. He has. been, a storeman for years, trusted by his employers. He betrays that trust by juggling and manipulating the books in a most ingenious *way, So ac to procure things for himself. Mr. Dickson: Yes, but I submit that The Magistrate: Fourteen days Imprisonment! ! Then followed the contretemps re- ; ported above. I SENTENCE REDUCED. Immediately before the Court adjourned, his Worship intimated to the clerk of the Court that he had decided to alter the sentence to one of seven days' imprisonment.