A PITIFUL CASE.

Evening Star, Issue 9125, 4 May 1893, Page 4

A PITIFUL CASE.

A scene of a distressing nature took place in the Melbourne City Court last week, when Helen Wood, a young married woman of genteel appearance, and Kate Wood, her daughter, under nine years of age, were charged with shoplifting on an extensive scale. No fewer than twelve separate cases against them were entered on the chargesheet, and the articles comprised drapery goods of various descriptions, fancy articles, books, etc. The articles had been stolen at various times, but on the 17th inst., when in the Mutual Store, the child’s movements in the show room attracted the attention of an assistant. The girl then produced a Zouave jacket, and begged of the shopwoman not to tell her mother. The assistant, however, had no alternative but to inform ony of the managers, and the accused then made a confession that she had taken other articles. The mother made an open confession of many delinquencies, and gave up the key of her house, 232 Albert street, East Melbourne, so that it might be searched for other stolen property. A good deal of it was concealed in a tin box, packed ready for taking to Adelaide, where she intended to set up in business. A constable narrated the circumstances of the arrest of the accused and of the admissions the mother willingly made to him with regard to having taken other property, and where it all could bo found. She took all the blame on herself, and was anxious to exonerate the child. Mr Kano, speaking for the accused, stated that the mother had been well brought Up, but in consequence of her husband’s drinking habits she had to separate from him and earn her living in New Zealand as a dressmaker. Thence she came to Melbourne, and got into her present trouble. The little girl, while out shopping one day with her mother, took some small article, but did not disclose the theft until she got home. The mother then, instead of taking the child back to the shop and making her ashamed of the action of which she had been guilty, foolishly overlooked it, and thus laid the foundation of the pile of thefts which followed. Mr Panton, P. M., took a serious view of the case, and expressed a doubt as to whether the accused could really be the mother of the child, encouraging her to steal as she did. The Bench sentenced her to a month’s imprisonment on each count. Mr Kane pleaded for the sentence to bo concurrent, ami the Bench consented. The city missionary arranged to take charge of the child during the mother’s imprisonment.