DECEIVING A MILITARY BOARD

Evening Star, Issue 16848, 25 September 1918, Page 7

DECEIVING A MILITARY BOARD

BY MISLEADING EVIDENCE.

[Special to the ' Star.']

CHJR.TSTCIIURCII, September 24. An echo of tho recent appeal case that came before tho First Canterbury Military Service Board was heard at the Rangiora Magistrate's Court this morning before Mr T. A. B. Bailey, S.M., when Ernest Frederick Ward, a fanner, of Waipara, was charged under section 5 of tho war regulations of 1914 and 1918 that ho did at Rangiora on June 6 attempt to dec&ive a military service board by concealing information from such hoard. Sergeant M'Kay prosecuted for tho police, and Mr H. D. Aach appeared for the defendant, and on hw behalf pleaded guilty. Sergeant M'Kav said that the circumstances of tho offence were that defendant had annealed against his calhng-up under the Military Service Act, and in giving evidence in his appeal on June 6 '[■■ ad said that his father was not _ assisting him on his farm, but was keeping the Captain Cook Hotel in Dunedin. As a maita? of fact, the father had sold out the previous January, and had left tho hot-el*. The father, with his family, had copo to Waltvara to live in the some month: and further, the father had accompanied defendant to Rangiora by train on the morning of defendant's appeal, and at that time was building a house at Waipara. Mr Van Asch, in pleading for leniency for defendant, said that he was a young man 23 years of age. and prior to this offence -was of unblemished character. Prior to Julv. 1915, he had worked in t-ho Mackenzie Country' f° r sheep farmers, who gave him an excellent character. In July. 1915, he, with his elder brother, took up 638 acres at Glenmark, where he had been ever since. FT ; s elder brother enlisted, and left with the 27th Reinforcements. The _ only excuse that counsel could offer in defendant's behalf was that giving evidence before the Appeal Board, in his anxiety to conserve his interests at Glenmark,' his judgment had failed him. Defendant had" two brothers—one 25 vars d: ace. who was serving, and a younger one. 20 years of age. '"who had i-TilUted. and been turned down owing to illness and heart trouble. Counsel submitted that that was a good average family record as far as military service was concerned. Defendant had gone into camp on August- 12. and had since been promoted to lance-corporal. Mr Van A'c)i further said that defendant expressed sorrow for his offence, not on account of punishment that he might receive, but because he felt his position keenly, and his offence would blemish his character for life. Mr Bailey, in giving his decision, said the case was unions, and a difficult one to deal with. Any person who gave wrong information to military service boards was ■committing a serious offence. It was not fair to the men drawn up, Uie boar-;], or to the men left behind. For such an offence defendant could he sent to gaol for a term np to 12 months. Tiie case before him was rather an exceptional one. the man having gone into camp and earned promotion. It would not be in the interests of the country to send him to gaol, and he (the Magistrate) thought that it was a case where a fine would be a warning to others. If a similar case came before him again he would inflict a term of imprisonment. Defendant would be fined £lO with costs £1 5s 3d).