DESERTED FORCE

Evening Post, Volume CXL, Issue 152, 26 December 1945, Page 7

DESERTED FORCE

CONSTABLE FINED

P-.A. HAMILTON, Dec. 24. A conviction was entered and a fine of £ll) was imposed upon David Arthur Stuart, a iormer constable now employed as a sharemilker at Rotorua (Mr. Cooney), in a reserved judgment given by Mr. S. L. Paterson, S.M., in Hamilton. The charge against Stuart was that he deserted from the Police Force and refused to obey the lawful command of a superior officer. Mr. Paterson said the evidence revealed that defendant joined the force in 1936, and was then subject to the Police Force Act, 1913, which stated that a constable could not leave the force without the permission of the Minister in Chui'ge, or without giving ope month's notice in writing to the Minister. In Juiie, 1943, the Police Force Emergency Regulations were gazetted, and th.se provided that a constable could only leave the force with the Ministiii's permission. On October 11 Constable Stuart lodged an application to resign as from November 22. His reason was that he could not adequately support his family of four children, one of whom was an invalid, on his police salai-y. He wished to tukc up fanning. The commissioner's reply stated that Stuart's resignation could not be accepted at present, due to the staff shortage. It added that Stuart had been treated very liberally as the department had recently spent £220 on his behalf in : transferring him ■at his own request from Hokilika to Rotorua.

Stuart then lodged another application to resign on November 22. He was ill and produced a medical certificate showing that he was unfit for work till November 30. On November 30 Stuart's uniform was left at the Rotorua police station with a report stating that he would not return to duty. As he had received no further reply to his second application, he concluded that permission would be granted. He then .commenced farming. The defendant had committed a breach of the Emergency Regulations in leaving the employment without the permission of the Minister. Defendant's counsel had suggested that the regulations were ultra vires because they contravened the Statute made in 1913. This submission was not tenable, said the Magistrate, as the regulations were validated. Stuart was guilty of desertion and must be convicted. The Magistrate *;aid he considered Stuart's salary of £457 per annum sufficient to keep him and his family at a good standard of living. He also stated that the defendant might find cause to regret leaving a steady job. In later years jobs might be harder to find. The maximum penalty was a fine of £20 and the forfeiture of all wages owing to the defendant. Defendant in this case was owed £55. but the Court could do nothing but order its forfeiture. The (defendant, if he desired, could apply to the Gov-ernor-General to have the order altered. The fine should be substantial in order to be a deterrent to others.