BETTING SUBTERFUGE

Dominion, Volume 27, Issue 74, 20 December 1933, Page 19

BETTING SUBTERFUGE

Chinese Sent to Prison PRISONERS SENTENCED For attempting to obtain 1150 by means of a false pretence, Joe Hoe, a Chinese, was septenced to six months’ imprisonment by Mr. Justice MacGregor in the Supreme Court yesterday. By substituting a pew address on an envelope already bearing a dated and timed postmark, and usipg it for posting a bet, Hoe had attempted to back with a bookmaker a horse that he already knew had won.

Mr. A. Hogg explained that accused had come from Canton 20 years ago, had-settled in Te Kuitl, and by houest dealing had acquired considerable property. Prisoner had been given testimonials by such men as members of Parliament and bank managers. The reason-why a man of such a record and such means should do what he had done was that he had fallen on bad times. The property he owned was uutenanted or let for small rents, and he had helped his poorer relatives to his own detriment. Hoe was educated In China, where

the proverb, “He who steals from a robber need not answer to the Mandarin,” was taught, and counsel said that prisoner, hearing of a case in which a bookmaker’s illegal occupation had placed him out of court, had conceived the idea that he would not be punished for ap offence against a bookmaker. He asked for probation to be granted on account of prisoner's large family, the fact that It was his first offence, and because of his unfamiliarity with the law. Failing that, he suggested a light fine. His Honour, before passing sentence, remarked that Hoe had caused suspicion to be cast on postal officials, and such a thing could not be treated lightly, At the same time, he was a Chinese, and might have had some perverted idea as counsel had described Imprisoned for Bigamy Commenting that prisoner had committed a serious offence deliberately, and had deceived two women and the authorities, his Honour sentenced. Edward Reginald Burt to imprisonment for six months. Burt had pleaded guilty to a charge of bigamy in the Petone Police Court recently. The offence was committed more than ten years ago. Mr. W. P. Rollings, for Burt, said that the prisoner’s first marriage was a war-time one in England, and, like many others, bad been lightly entered into. His second “wife” was a fine

woman, who intended to marry him as soon as that was possible, and they had been living happily. Career Ruined On behalf of Gillies Francis Nicole, who, in the lower court, had admitted the theft of £65/8/5 from his employers, Fashions, Limited, Mr. J. Dunu said that before he was employed by that firm he had been out of work and, his family being poor, he had contracted debts. Unable to live and pay his debts on the remuneration, he had taken small sums from the cash box. He had then resorted to gambling in the hope of retrieving his position, but when he saw it was hopeless he had explained matters to the auditors. The prisoner had lost his position and the hope of getting anything better, while his work for the degree of Bachelor of Commerce was now nullified. Nicole was sentenced to nine months’ Imprisonment, his Honour saying that the class of offence was altogether too common. Failure to Account

A plea for probation to be granted Arthur de Vine, who came up for sentence on six charges of failing to account to Smith Wylie and Co. for money totalling £lO2/10/- was made by Mr. J. D. Willis, who said that prisoner’s age was 58 and he had had an unfortunate family history, several relatives

having been inmates of mental hospitals and he himself suffering from periods of loss of mejpory. His Honour said that it would lie quite wrong to grant probation. Prisoner bad robbed his employers some years ago and had gone to Australia. The sentence was 18 months’ imprisonment ou each charge, the terms to be concurrent. Sentence Suspended Arthur Oliver, for indecent' assault on a female child, was ordered to pay the costs of the prosecution and to come up for sentence within two years if called upon. His Honour said he was satisfied from the probation officer’s report and a medical certificate that the man was not altogether responsible for what he had done and that he was justified iu treating him leniently. Mr. R. L. A. Cresswell said that Oliver’s offence was an isolated one. He was mentally dull and the only evidence against him was his own statement. Theft from Dwelling The explanation that he had “just had a little too much drinking” was given by Harry Collins, whose offence was theft from a dwelling. The Crown Prosecutor, Mr. P. 8. K. Macassey, said the prisoner had had 23 convictions since 1920. A sentence of eighteen months’ hard labour was passed.