A YOUNG MAN'S TEMPTATION

Evening Post, Volume LXXII, Issue 4, 5 July 1906, Page 6

A YOUNG MAN'S TEMPTATION

FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES AND THEIR SEQUEL. Henrjr Robert Hall Oswin, charged with defalcations from the Public Trust Office totalling about £700, recently pleaded guilty to charges involving £450 of delalcations, and in respect of these charges lie was remanded to the Supreme Court ior sentence. He appeared this morning before Mr. Justice Cooper. Mr. Myers was present on behalf of the Crown, and Mr. Wilford appeared for the prisoner. Mr. Wilford read testimonials from, Messrs. J. K. Warburton, J. C. Martin, J. J. Wilson, William Kerr, and Fisher, all of whom had had official business expsrience of Oswin, showing that until lately he had been most exemplary in conduct. The cass of Oswin, said counsel, was one of those painful cases in which the Judges had laid it down that it would be futile to make application for the First Offenders Probation Act to be applied. But there wtre special circumstances in the case. Over twenty-one years ago Oswin entered the Public Trust Office, and he had continued in it ever since, and had behaved with circumspection and had displayed abilities that resulted in tbe testimonials being given which counsel had just read. Ihe question would naturally be asked : How does it come that a man in the position and with the character this man had should be before the court to-day on this charge? Unfortunately the story was not one we had not heard the like of before. Oswin was married, and had had two children. He ran into debt, and he went to friends — friends with a large note of interrogation — who lent him money at 40 per cent, interest, and in some cases 60 per cent, interest. Of course he could not pay, and as the- money became due some years ago he took from the Public Trust "Department the sum of £33; and then he thought to himself, How may I get this money back? Up to this time he had never drank or gambled or played, cards— and he dreamed of Tattersall's sweeps, and invested something like £30 in them in the food hope that he would pull off the money and repay what he had taken. He was unsuccessful. He then started thinking that this extra lot he had taken could be recovered by betting with bookmakers. •Mr. Justice Cooper : That's worse than Tattersall's ! Mr. Wilford replied that it was quicker at all events. Counsel did not know •what Oswin's state of' mind had been these past two years. He was plunging, plunging! The end came. The sum had mounted to such an extent that it was impossible detection would not follow ; and on a certain day he went' to Mr. Fisher and told him the story. That the colony h»d lost this money counsel conld not deny, but though his Honour might think what counsel was going to advance was a weak argument, counsel felt bound to point out that Oswin, by his action, had forfeited claim to about £400 retiring" allowance, to whkh ho wonld otherwise; have been entitled. In sentencing »- previous prisoner his Honour had said that a man's family was no special reason for showing leniency to prisoner, but counsel respectfully submitted that a man's family was a. special reason that shotdd be considered., Mr. Justice Cooper : I didn't say that ; I said a man's family made no difference so far as admitting a man to probation iras concerned. Mr. Wilford was pleased to think ho had misunderstood the remark. He would urge consideration of the fact that a wife and young children were to suffer in this matter, as well as Oswin. He was deserving of clemency, for bis acts were not those of the constitutional criminal, of whom Havelock Ellis, Lombroso, and ether eminent criminologists had written. He had simply gone downhill — it was so easy to go downhill. As the Portuguese proverb had it, "the road to hell is puved with, good intentions." He had gone on in the foolish, insane, mad belief that in entering on a venture that had nothing good to recommend it he would eventually be in a position to make good his defalcations, and save bis family and himself. This man was not a criminal the State had to fear; but he was a criminal it had to be protected against so for as its coffers were concerned. He was sot a criminal by inclination, though counsel could not excuse his lapses. Counsel asked his Honour to distinguish, in dealing with the case, between the criminal tbe State had to fear and the law to protect every one from — and counsel's client. If his Honour would temper justice with mercy that was all Oswifi could ask. Mr. Myers informed the court, in justice to prisoner, that ninety per cent, of the defalcations had been made recently. ' His Honour said it was a painful thing for any judge to have to deal ■with a case like this. Prisoner was only 33 years of age, and he had 22 years of Government service. His Honour had no doubt whatever that prisoner for the greater part of that term carried out his duties satisfactorily and committed no breach of trust. Nor nsed his Honour doubt the explanation given by Mr. Wilford as to the way in which his client arrived at his present position. But where there had been a series of embezzlements extending over a considerable period of time and committed > — as in this case — by a person in a position of trust, the provisions of the First Offenders Probation Act could not safely be applied, though his Honour had no reason to doubt that Oswin's first lapse from the path of honesty was caused by stress of circumstances. Unfortunately, when he found himself in financial trouble, he resorted to moneylenders instead of facing his trouble. No doubt the big interest charged expedited his financial downfall, and finally he did what, alas, ,too many men bad done, and the result was quite as one might have anticiEatcd. His position became worse and, is moral fibre became weakened. His Honour would have to pass a schtence of imprisonment, but he would temper justice v.ith mercy. Ho would take into consideration that prisoner's * character up to two years ago was good ; also that he had forfeited his position under Government and the allowance of £400 for which he had qualified. On the other hand, however, he had taken a larger sum from tho Government coffers. Also his Honour would take into consideration that Oswin was a young married man, and though it ■was no logical ground for remitting any period of imprisonment, one conra not help considering that — a direct result of Oswin's crime — would be a very severe punishment to him in itself, and that ho would suffer greatly, for no doubt he had tho ordinary feelings of a man for his family as well as for himself. Although £o had admitted;

taking £450, his Honour would not pass 'a 'heavier sentence than twelve months ; one must recognise that an offenco was not to. bo measurbcT by the amount of the defalcation alone, but by the, whole of the surrounding circumstances. A sentence of twelve months' imprisonment would be really a- collateral punishment. His Honour hoped that when Oswin came out of gaol he would endeavour to rehabilitate himself, though no doubt it would be difficult for him to regain a position of trust. It was to bo hoped that his friends would do all they could for him — his later friends, that was ; not those who loaned him money at 60 per cent. — and would endeavour to assist him when he came out of gaol. Every right-minded citizen should endeavour to give a chance to a man so situated. ' Sentence of twelve months' imprisonment was then passed.