SERIES OF THEFTS

Evening Star, Issue 20314, 24 October 1929, Page 15

SERIES OF THEFTS

SHOES AND DRESSES GO MUSSING YOUNG WOMAN IN COURT Succumbing to a sudden temptation to help herself to articles of apparel the use of which, presumably, would enable her to dreffs as well as her colleagues. a young woman stole two pairs of shoes and two dresses on various dates between August 17 and October 11Of course, it was only a matter of lime before she was found out, and as a consequence she appeared in the Jiolice Court this morning before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M. She was charged with stealing a pair of shoes valued at £1 10s, another pair valued at £1 4s, a dress valued at 3 os, and a second dress valued at £l. Represented by Mr R. S. Anderson, the accused pleaded guilty. Ciiicl-dctectivo Cameron said that tho young woman had been employed as a waitress in a restaurant, and from the employees’ dressing room she had stolen the articles for her own use in response to complaints Detective Russell and the matron had interviewed her, and she had been very frank. Her relatives were in jioor circumstances. Mr Anderson said that one pair jl shoes had been worn only twice, and one frock had not been worn at all Tho other had been on her only once The remaining pair of shoes were the only goods that had been used to any extent. The family history revealed straitened circumstances, for the father was out of work and the mother had to shoulder the cares of the home. It seemed to counsel that a girl of this age was usually covetous of articles of apparel. Tho accused had been working among girls better off than herself, and being desirous probably of dressing as well as them she had been overcome for tho time being by sudden temptation. He suggested that in the case of the first theft it was a spontaneous impulse, and the act seemed so easy that she was tempted to repeat it. In wages she received 355, and 30s of this went to her mother. It was her first lapse. The principle of the thing was serious, but the amount involved was small, and counsel suggested that sho should be admitted to probation. She was quite prepared to make restitution when she was in a position to do so, and she was also willing to place herself in the hands of the probation officer. More for the sake of the mother than for the girl herself counsel asked for suppression of the name.

In the report which sho submitted to the magistrate Adjutant Glover said that tho girl was not flighty. His Worship remarked that a feature of tho case was that the things stolen were articles of necessary apparel—not fancy apparel, such as silk stockings—and it seemed that the girl had succumbed to «udden temptation. How ever, had the report of Adjutant Glover not been good, the accused would not have been extended any consideration. On the first charge she would ho admitted to probation for a period of two years, miring which time she would take a position approved by the probation officer. All the articles would have to he returned, with the exception ot the shoes which had been used- In tills case £3 4s would have to be paid in instalments regulated by the probation officer. On the other charges she would be convicted. Suppression of the name was always a delicate matter, but in consideration of tho special features of the case this would be granted.