FISH'S CASE

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVI, Issue 75, 25 September 1912, Page 8

FISH'S CASE

BAIL NOT ESTREATED. Charles Clement Fish, awaiting sentence on a charge of purloining a number of sets of Statutes when a Government servant, and his son Frederick William Fish, wero called upon at' the Magistrate's Court, before Mr. \V. G. Riddell, S.M., this morning, to show why their recognisances should not be estreated. Charles Fish, while out on bail, was arrested on board the Atua at Auckland, prior to that vessel's departure for Suva, Mr. T. M. Wilford appeared for Fish and his son, « Frederick William Fish said, when called to give evidence, that he was unaware that^ his father intended to abscond. Witness had noticed a great change in his father of late, and since an accident that he had about two years ago his conduct had always been different. On the Friday before he left for Auckland he came into the shop where witness worked, and at the time seemed to be suffering considerable mei\tal stress. He was afraid even that his father might have suicidal intentions. Ho did not think that his father fully appreciated what he was doing when ho set out for Auckland. "Although defendant made the attempt to abscond, he has since- been rearrested," said Mr. Riddell. "At tho same time some expenses have been in* curred, and I think those expenses should be paid by the surety. 1 see no reason why bail should be estreated." . After consulting the elder Pish, Mr. Wilford said that his client had no objection to paying the expenses .of his journey from Auckland out of the money held by the police.