FALSE PRETENCES

Evening Star, Issue 22515, 7 December 1936, Page 1

FALSE PRETENCES

THIRTEEN CHARGES ADMITTED “DESPICABLE FORM OF THEFT” Thirteen charges of false pretences — described by the magistrate as a particularly despicable form of theft—were admitted by William Joseph Shallish (26) in the Police Court this morning. By falsely representing that he was acting on behalf of the Waikawa and Graham Coal Companies, Shallish collected £7 2s 6d from the following persons:—£l 2s 6d from Ellen Brown, £1 from Margaret Stewart Anderson, 10s from May Vaughan, Frederick Robert Hugh Sutherland, Agnes Ann Beveridge, David John Mason, Dora May Kinmont, Flora Campbell, Kathleen Moodie, Susan Christina Justin, and Agnes Lilian White, and 5s from Christina Elizabeth Malcolm Clayton, and Jessie Thomson. Chief-detective Young told the court that in August the accused apparently devised a scheme under which he called on people at their homes, and, by falsely representing that he was the agent of reputable coal companies and was taking orders on their behalf, collected various sums of money. He also represented that a cash payment would ensure a liberal discount. There were 13 charges against Shallish, covering a period between August 28 and November 13. The matter was reported to the police, but the accused Was not traced until November 22. when _ one of the complainants identified him in the street and handed him over to a constable. When he was subsequently charged at the police station he was identified by seven other complainants. The worst feature of the case, said the chief-detective, was that Shallish obtained money from people who could ill afford to lose it, and, in at least two cases, from widows. He was a single man, and was before the court on a theft charge in 1930, when he was placed on probation. Mr E. J. Anderson, for the accused, said that he was one of a family of nine. He completed his time as an electrician about 1930, but slackness of work and the general depression caused him to be out of work. For six years he had been doing odd jobs and had been on relief. During the last three years he had been assisting his father by obtaining orders for him, and it was then that this improper scheme entered his mind. Shallish was a young man who obviously required some control. His conduct was fairly satisfactory while he was on probation, but he did not seem to appreciate the necessity of work. If he had been m steady work he might not have been in this trouble. Counsel suggested that he should be given a further and final chance,_ and placed on probation under the strictest possible terms. Mr Garbutt (probation officer) : The reports I had of Shallish were not satisfactory. 41 A particularly despicable form of theft,” commented Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M., in remamliim Shallish in custody until Friday. His Worship directed the | probation officer to submit a report.