SUSTENANCE FRAUD

Evening Post, Volume CXXV, Issue 27, 2 February 1938, Page 5

SUSTENANCE FRAUD

SIX MONTHS' GAOL

COMMENT BY JUDGE

(By Telegraph—Press Association.) AUCKLAND, February 1. Six months' imprisonment was the sentence passed by Mr. Justice Callan on Glennard Ashley Parker, painter and paperhanger, aged 42, for whom Mr. Slipper appeared, when he came up for sentence in the Supreme Court on a charge of obtaining £86 from the Employment Promotion Fund by false pretences by making false statements of his income. It was the first case of its kind dealt with by the Supreme Court in Auckland. Counsel said the accused received a war pension of £2 3s 4d a month, which he might lose, and was formerly employed at his trade for £5 2s 4d a week. When he lost his work he was unable to obtain another position at his trade and v/as engaged as a casual labourer on the wharves, obtaining £136, including £14 as compensation for an injury. During the same period he defrauded the Govern, ment of £86, .including £15 as milk ration for his young family. "Once confronted with his' misdeeds, the accused made a clean breast of everything," said Mr. Slipper. "He was then back in work and offered to pay 10s a week to clear his debt to the State, but this was not accepted.", When counsel' began to argue on the section of the Employment Promotion Act covering the penalty, his Honour pointed out that when the Act was framed Parliament took the merciful and hopeful view that the penalty of a fine would be sufficient to deter any dishonesty. Events had shown, however, that frauds had become very prevalent throughout New Zealand, so much so that, in spite of heavy fines, another form of punishment became necessary to protect the public's interHis Honour said the issuing of false statements was a false pretence and that he had the support of the Court of Appeal on thiS point, as a sentence passed in Christchurch in a similar case had been upheld. "This case was deliberate, fraud, and unfortunately the accused has committed a form of offence that we regret to know is unhealthily prevalent throughout the Dominion," the Judge added. "It is the duty of every Court to bear this in mind in dealing with such cases It is important ,that the accused should be dealt with in accordance with 'the indictment ' of those whose duty it was. to institute prosecution in this form." Sentence of six months' imprisonment was then passed.