ELECTRICITY STOLEN

Greymouth Evening Star, 14 July 1941, Page 6

ELECTRICITY STOLEN

CHINESE LAUNDRYMEN FINED. For the time in many years an interpreter was utilised in the Magistrate’s Court at Greymouth, tq-day, and the oath was administered in the Chinese manner of blowing out a match, when two Chinese, Willie Long and Wong Kew, faced a series of charges arising out of the electric wiring at their laundry in Albert Street, Greymouth. Mr. G. G. Chisholm ,S.M., presided. The informations were laid by William McGilehrist, inspector for the Grey Electric Power Board, for whom Mr. J. W. Hannan appeared. Mr. A. M. Jamieson appeared for the two accused, who pleaded guilty to a charge of using flexible cord as a substitute for fixing wiring and not guilty to a charge of stealing electricity valu.ed al’ £l, the property of the Grey Electric Power Board. Three other charges relating to the wiring not being in accordance with the regulations were withdrawn. Mr. Hannan said defendants were the occupiers of a laundry in Albert Street. Owing to the suspicions of a meter reader, who noticed a lot of loose wiring in the premises, an inspector of the Power Board made an inspection of the premises on February 7, and prepared a plan of the wiring (produced). In the main working room there were three 100 watt lights attacked to the' power points. Loose . flex led through an open door to another 100 watt light and further on through holes in a wall to another 100 watt light. In all these rooms there were lighting points, but instead of using them, defendants plugged into heating points. Wherever there were strong lights, power points were used, and in the bedrooms, where the lights were smaller, the light points were used, which, it was submitted, was evidence of a guilty mind. The lighting charge was sixpence a unit and the power charge only twopence, and probably 1/6 to 2/- a day was involved, although defendants were charged in regard to only a nominal amount. The wiring was of a most extraordinary nature and the flex was in a very poor condition. There was not only the danger of shock, but a serious danger of fire. William McGilchrist, Inspector for the Power Board, gave details of the wiring found in defendants’ premises when he made an inspection on February 7. Two power points were in use for lighting and actually defendants 1 account for the two months ended February 7 showed seven units for lights and 389, for power. The next month, there were

32 light units and 152 power units. The temporary wiring found was definitely in a dangerous condition. To Mr. Jamieson: The man who did the wiring must have known what he was doing and would have to have some knowledge of electricity. There had been ■no inspection of the premises over the 17 'months .that defendants had been in occupation.- Long had stated that the wiring had been done by two men who had returned to China. Mr. Hannan quoted authorities, to show that electricity was capable of being stolen. Mr. Jamieson said it was admitted that lights were switched on to the power meter, but the evidence of defendants would be that neither knew anything of electricity and that the wiring was done when they took possession of the premises 17 months ago. At Mr. Jamieson’s request, George Stanley Long was sworn in as interpreter for defendants. The defendant Long, speaking through the interpreter, said he had never altered the wiring in the building. All he knew of meters was that there were separate charges on the forms, but he did not know how the charges differed. He had never received a complaint about the wiring until the inspector called. To Mr. Hannan: He was born at Ahaura,. but* went to China when ne was six, returning to New Zealand about six years ago. He had never fixed the lights himself. The other defendant, also gave his evidence through the interpreter. He also denied he had altered the wiring, or that he knew of different rates for power and light. To Mr. Hannan: He had been in New Zealand about 16 years, but until taking the laundry 16 months ago was a gardener and had never lived in a house with electric light. The S.M. said the position was very unsatisfactory. Defendants had pleaded guilty to using wiring that did not comply with the regulations but pleaded ignorance of taking light from the heating plugs. Both were delightfully innocent of everything connected with electricity, which he found hard to believe. There was no explanation for the extraordinary drop in the lighting average. He could only assume that in December, January and February someone took it off the power plugs. He could not accept the view that defendants were absolutely ignorant of the position and ihev must be convicted.

On the charge of theft, each would be fined £2, and on the wiring charge each would be fined £l, with 6/6 costs. Each defendant would also be ordered to pay £l/1/- solicitor’s fee.