STILL IN HOUSE.

Auckland Star, Volume LXV, Issue 224, 21 September 1934, Page 8

STILL IN HOUSE.

TRESPASSING FAMILY

MAGISTRATE'S DECISION

A SUSPENDED SENTENCE. Walter Woods, the young man who, with his wife and two children, moved into an empty house owned by the State Advances Department at 9, Reimers Avenue, Kingsland, and refuee'd to leave when requested, appeared again in the Police Court this morning on a charge of trespass. Last Friday the magistrate, Mr. W. R. McKean, in telling Woods that he was really in the position of a burglar in the house, adjourned, the case until this morning, and added that if Woods was etill in occupation lie would bu punished. Woods informed the magistrate today that he was unable to obtain another house, because of the publicity given to his case last week. He had tried to get work to give security to his wife and two children. Senior Detective Hall said Woods had been offered work at Hobsonville, and had turned it down. Quoting Halsbury. "I deny that," said Woods. "It is not true.' . He submitted that he had a moral and legal right to remain in the house, and he quoted what he said were Halsbury's ''Laws of England," submitting that the passages which he road were applicable to his own position. He said lie had worked as much as 18 hours a day since coming to New Zealand, and that' both his parents were dead, and that he had to battle for himself. "I came here four years ago in the middle of tlio depression, and what lias happened to me is not my fault." The magistrate told Woods that his interpretation of Halsbury was not the correct one, and that it was obvious he did not appreciate the real meaning of Halsbury's laws. "I submit, sir, that my action is justified by British constitutional law," said Wood's. "I am Milling to move to another house if any landlord will accept /is rent what I have left after paying for food and clothing for my family out of £1 (>/" per week." Another Opportunity. Mr. McKean: You have committed an offence, so I must impose a penalty. Woods: According to Halsbury it is no offence. Mr. McKean: According to Halebury it is an offence. I don't want to argue with you. You arc quite wrong and do not appreciate the real position. Defendant: The matter i> «till in the hands of Mr. Coates. Mr. McKean: Well, if it is, then the Government can deal with it. It is no use imposing a fine, as you cannot pay it. You "will be sentenced to one month's imprisonment, _but tlio warrant is not to is«ue for seven days. Thi* will give you an opportunity of doing something.