RECEIVED FROM BOY

Dominion, Volume 25, Issue 169, 13 April 1932, Page 6

RECEIVED FROM BOY

Stolen Motor Accessories SALESMAN TO PAY FINE “There seems to be a sori, of mania on the part of some amateur mechanics to secure, quite honestly, of course, tools of every description,” said counsel for the accused in the Police Court yesterday when, before Mr. E. Page, S.M., Arthur Gustav Meir, a salesman, aged 25, pleaded guilty to a charge of receiving a quantity of motor accessories valued at £lB/4/-, knowing them to have been dishonestly obtained. Sub-Inspector Ward said the goods had been stolen by a 16-ycar-old boy employed by a firm of motor accessory suppliers. In November Meir, according to a statement made by him, had got into touch with the boy as the result of a purchase he made at the shop. Later he drove to the shop in his car and sat in it while the boy came out and sold him a set of spanners for 5/-. 'These were worth 18/-. On subsequent occasions he received goods from the boy and, iu return, had agreed to put a wireless set in working order. All the goods, except a few things, had been recovered. Meir’s home bad been searched and though other tools had been found, these could not be identified by the police as having been unlawfully obtained. “Before November this boy had been stealing from the firm employing him and selling to others,” said the SubInspector. “We think it likely that the accused heard about ibis and decided to get into touch with the boy. Meir is a single man living with his parents. He admitted the offence at once and has not been under our notice before.” Counsel for Meir said that the articles were supplied by the boy from November to February. Meir thought for a time that they were friendly gifts but iu February he began to realise that they could not have been honestly obtained. Accordingly he ceased having anything to do with the boy. During March he had had the opportunity of receiving more goods, but did not take it. It was a case of Meir having drifted into the affair. His were not the actions of a criminal: rather were they the result of foolishness. . Ho was prepared to pay for the goods, such as grease, that could not be restored. He had had a severe . lesson and had spent 48 hours in gaol before bail could be arranged. Counsel submitted that, at most, a term of probation would fit the case. Mr. T. P. Mills, Probation Officer, said the serious feature lay in the fact that the goods were received from a boy of sixteen, also that it had been going on over a fairly long period. Meir was fined £l5, in default two months’ imprisonment, and ordered to make good the value of the stolen goods and pay costs amounting to £2. He was given a month in which to find the money.