“BASEST INGRATITUDE”

Evening Star, Issue 22247, 27 January 1936, Page 8

“BASEST INGRATITUDE”

BEFRIENDED AND THEN STOLE I YOUNG WOMAN'S DESPICABLE THEFT j Befriended by a woman who replied to her advertisement asking for leftj off clothing, an unemployed girl showe<| “ the basest ingratitude,” as the magis* trate remarked, in stealing two pairs ofl stockings valued at 15s and 4s 2d irf money while the charitable woman-hadj left the house to try to find a pair off shoes for the girl. The case came be* fore the Police Court to-day, when thef girl pleaded guilty to the theft. Chief-detective Young said that on January 16 the accused inserted tha following advertisement in the ‘ Even* ing Star’:—“ Would a kind person; give an unemployed girl left-off cloth* ing? Any kind would be The complainant answered the adver* tisement, and two days later the ac* cused called on her and was given four) frocks, two skirts, a hat, a scarf, a pain of mocassins, a handbag, and a pair ol} gloves. In addition, the complainant* without accused’s knowledge, placed la in the handbag to pay her ear fare. Ac* cused then asked to be supplied with at pair of shoes. Not having a pair tot spare, complainant went to a neigh* hour. After accused had left the housa it was discovered that two pairs ol stockings had been stolen and 3s fid anc? 8d in money had been taken from al dressing table and a handbag. When) seen by Detective Brown, the girl adf mitted the thefts. She was 20 yeard of age and was unemployed. She had given no previous concern to her-pan ents. As His Worship would realise! this was a very despicable class o| offence. '

“ I do not think I can offer any exi cuse for the theft,” said Mr B. S, Ir» win, who appeared for the girl. For 14 months, accused was unemployed and kept house for her parents, he* mother being an invalid. She felt he! lack of clothing keenly and had advert tised so that she could be dressed likq other girls l of her own age. The conn plainant. had been very bind to thq girl. Inquiries by the acting probation officer showed that, accused had bel haved in an exemplary manner up t<) the present. . With some reluctance) said Mr Irwin, he asked that publicaj tion of accused’s name should be supr pressed. The Magistrate: It is a despicably form of theft.

“ That I must admit,” replied Ml Irwin.

“ I cannot understand the mental! ity of a girl or anybody who is so wel| treated and then steals from the peri son,” remarked the magistrate. “ Puti ting it as mildly as possible, it is basest ingratitude. I cannot under! stand why she did it.” Accused; I do not know myself why I did it. I acted on the impulse. In admitting accused to probatioij for one year and ordering restitution, the Magistrate said the din ftculty was the question oj the prohibition of publication of ad cused’s name. The girl had . borne fl good character, and the object of sucq a prohibition was in accused’s own ini terest to give the accused person an opi portunity of rehabilitating herself ol hirhself. Considering the girl’s history and notwithstanding the despicable nature of the theft, he would, with som« hesitation, make an order suppressing the publication of the name.