NOT WANTED HERE

Dominion, Volume 24, Issue 144, 14 March 1931, Page 9

NOT WANTED HERE

Deportation Ordered AUSTRALIAN IMMIGRANT An order for his deportation within one mouth was made against William Roy Carroll, a prohibited immigrant, by Mr. W. H. Woodward, S.M., in the Police Court yesterday. It was stated that accused was an Australian who arrived in New Zealand in 1929 at Bluff as a member of a circus. He had been convicted of theft, vagrancy, and drunkenness, and was at present serving a sentence of nine months imprisonment. He had served terms of imprisonment in Australia for theft and assault of a constable, and such offences made Carroll a prohibited immigrant. Had that fact been known at the time he would not have been allowed to land in New Zealand, It was expected that after accused’s release from prison he could be deported by the Ulimaroa on Friday. Young Trout Taken Charges of using the unlawful device of an iron bar or jag for the purpose of taking trout in South Karon stream, and of taking or killing trout of less than nine inches from tip to tail, were admitted by George Callan. Daniel Dean, Frederick Dean, and William Harry Douglas. Each was fined £4 in all. On the evening of February 21 a ranger, while patrolling the stream, saw defendants wading in the water and carrying a light The ranger waited and then accosted the men. They had in their possession 21 trout, of which 11 were under the regulation size, lhe defendants gave no trouble to the ranger. The stream was one stocked by the Wellington Acclimatisation Society. Mr. A. J. Mazengarb, for the two Deans, said the offence was regarded somewhat gravely by the Legislature, but the society was not pressing for a heavy penalty in the present case, lhe men had gone out with the intention of eeling. but had found there were more trout than eels in the stream. Defendants were not deliberate poachers. False Pretences Although the magistrate said that if accused had obtained the money to support his wife aud child he would not be too hard on him, Cecil Huia Tyler, a young mau, chose to tell the truth and disclaim that motive, and was sentenced to a total of 28 days’ imprisonment on two charges of obtaining a total sum of 14/6 by false pretences. , . . , , / It was stated that accused had voluntarily left the employ of a local firm, but had then gone round to clients of theirs and by representing that he was still employed with the firm had obtained money from them with the false pretence that lie needed benzine for bis car to completi his round. Actually he had no car. He toid the police later that he had wanted the money for food and clothing. H“ had been before the court in 1929 for false pretences and had been detained for reformative detention for twelve months. The magistrate imposed sentence of 11 days’ imprisonment on each charge, the sentences to be cumulative.