SEQUEL TO A SPREE

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume 54, Issue 32528, 24 January 1945, Page 5

SEQUEL TO A SPREE

EGGS AND FOWLS TAKEN

INCIDENT IN PAEROA

SIX YOUNG MEN FINED

The sequel to a spree held in Paeroa on Saturday night was heard in the Paeroa Court on Monday afternoon when six young men were fined in the Paeroa Court a total of £65 by Messrs J. M. Craig and H. M. Shand, J’s.P. The six men were William Massey Warner aged 32, Vernon Graham O’Loughlin aged 23, George Louis Rex Nevin aged 22, Errol Gordon Nevin aged 21, Gavin Montgomerie Hudson aged 22 and Reginald George Elvidge aged 22 and they were charged that on January 21 at Paeroa they stole three fowls and 22. eggs of a total value of £1 16s Od, the property of George McKee. Warner was further charged that on December 30 he stole two turkeys and three ducks, of a total value of £2, the property of Vivian Young. Mr R. S. Carden appeared for accused who ■ all pleaded guilty. Constable J. L. Brown stated that the young men had attended several parties on Saturday night and had been drinking fairly heavily. On the way home one of the party suggested having supper and as they had nothing at home they decided to get some eggs. They drove round to Mr Mc-

Kee’s farm and took the eggs and three fowls. They then went to one of their homes and cooked the. eggs and ate them. Due To Drink

The trouble was the result of drink, continued Constable Brown, but each had .now consented to take out a prohibition order.

The further charge against Warner, said’Constable Brown, was a similar case. Warner had been celebrating New Year’s Eve and visited Mr Young’s farm with two other men and took the turkeys and ducks. Mr R. S. Carden said the actions of accused, especially those at the weekend, were really a boyish prank done under the influence of liquor. The young men would not have done it in ordinary circumstances. Actually they only went to get eggs and did not go with the intention of taking fowls. They only wanted some eggs for supper. There was no real vice in the action and all now regretted what they had done. Referring to the New Year’s incident Mr Carden said this also was done under the influence of liquor. He appealed to the bench to deal leniently with the accused.

Mr. Craig said the bench took a very serious view of the case. Drink seemed to be the cause of the trouble. The Act provided for three months’ imprisonment or a fine of £25.

Warner would be fined £lo' on one charge and £5 on the second charge and ordered to make restitution of £2 6s Od. The others would be fined £lO each and ordered to make restitution of 6s each.

Mr Carden, in asking for time for the payment of the fines, said he thought the penalties were severe for a prank. All were granted' one . month in which to pay their fines.