FORMER PARSON.

Auckland Star, Volume LXII, Issue 46, 24 February 1931, Page 9

FORMER PARSON.

SENTENCED FOR THEFT. DETECTIVE REBUKED. "WILD STATEMENTS" ALLEGED. Robert Louis Irvine, aged 35, described on the charge sheet at the Police Court as a labourer, appeared to-day oil a charge of stealing a suit, razor and six ties, of a total value of £2 13/, the property of Leslie Wells McCormick. Accused was represented by Mr. W. Noble, who intimated that Irvine pleaded guilty to the theft of the suit only. Detective-Sergeant Kelly said Irvine was given employment on Mr. McCormick's farm at Pukekohe on November 3 last. On November 18 he disappeared, when it was discovered that the articles mentioned in the charge were missing; "Irvine says lie sold the suit at a pawn shop for 5/," added Mr. Kelly. "He is an Australian, and came to New Zealand two and a half years ago. When in Australia he was a minister, but owing to some trouble over church affairs he was deprived of his ministership. He also got into trouble at Christchurch. This man is a type of parasite that permeates the atmosphere of Auckland. He lived at the shelter, and while there he stirred up some trouble and strife. He got up a petition protesting about, the food and other things, and got 126 men to sign it. I would suggest that this man should bo given a period of reformative detention." Air. Noble: He did not start the petition. The petition may be true, anyhow. Mr. Noble protested at Mr. Kelly's remarks. "These wild statements are not supported by one scintilla of evidence," ho said. "Ho is merely before this Court charged with theft of a suit of clothes. He says it was an old suit given to Va when he started work on the farm. He certainly walked off with it, but his employer was owing him a week's 'wages at the time, so he is not a loser."

Counsel added that Mr. Kelly suggested Irvine was dismissed because he had misappropriated church funds. "That is not correct" said Mr. Noble. "Irvine says that the church could not pay him his -wages, so he left. He thought of suing for it, but was informed that as it was a stipend and not a contract, lie could not do so. It is a cruel, scandalous thing that such remarks should bo made unsupported by evidence."

The magistrate remarked that the statements were certainly vague. Irvine was sentenced to two months' imprisonment.