MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LX, Issue 218, 13 August 1940, Page 3

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

MISCELLANEOUS CASES. Mr H. P. Lawry, S.M., presided at a sitting of the Magistrate’s Court yesterday. For allowing a chimney to catch fire A. A. Francis was fined ss, with 13s costs. N. S. Holden was fined £l, with 12s costs, for cycling at night without a light. D. N. Davis, charged with driving a car without a warrant of fitness, was fined 10s, with 10s costs. S. E. Johnson, for driving in :t man ner which might have been dangerous to the public, was fined £l, with 10s costs. Senior-Sergeant Mclntyre said a car driven by defendant mounted a footpath in Coleman Place. Defendant said the accelerator jambed. On a charge of driving without a license he was lined 10s, with 10s costs. For driving across a railway line at a speed of more than 15 miles an hour, R. S. Knight was fined £2, with 12s eosft. B. Nausbauru was fined £2, with 10s costs, on a similar charge. W. J. Moore was fined £l. wit'll 10s costs, for riding an unlighted cycle at night. I Reifer, on a similar charge, was fined £l, with 11s costs. L. TMcLean (Mr- A. M. Ongley) pleaded not guilty to a charge of failing to give way to traffic on the right at an intersection. A fine of £2. with 18s costs, was imposed alter evidence ha“ been heard.

A charge was preferred against a man, whose name was ordered to be suppressed, of transferring an order for a concession ticket oil the railway to a person other than that to whom the order was made out. The Magis trate imposed a fine of £3 5s and ordered a refund of £3 os to be made to the Railway Department. Appearing on a charge of stealing a bicycle valued at £3, the property of P/M. O’Donnell, at Levin, on July 25, Leslie Weatherley, aged 18, was admitted to probation for two years. He was ordered to make restitution of the property. J. Steeduian pleaded not - guilty to a charge of using obscene language. He was convicted, however, and fined £3, with 11s costs. THEFTS ADMITTED.

Picas of guilty were entered by James Carnegie, alias Carnegie Latham, architect, aged 28, when he appeared before Mr H. P. Lawry, S.M., faced with five charges: (1) That, on or about May 7, at Palmerston North, he stole £6 6s, the property of A. L. Woodd; (2) that, on or about May 8, at Palmerston North, he stole £6 6s, the property of R. W. Guy; (3) that, on or about May 14, at Palmerston North, he stole £6 6s, the property of W. Wilkinson, junr.; (4) that, on May 11, at Palmerston North, ho stole drawing instruments, etc., the property of R. E. Small, Ltd., of a value of £7 4s; and (5) that he did publicly use in connection with his business the letters R.1.8.A., likely to cause a person to believe, contrary to fact, that he was a Fellow of the Royal Institute of British Architects. Detective-Sergeant A. B. Meiklejohn explained that accused took deposits from the first three complainants for plans to be delivered of buildings for the construction of which, at Tokoinarn,. tenders had been called. Later, accused disappeared. In March accused came to Palmerston North and took an office in Broadway. The office, and a fiat, were furnished by a large Palmerston North firm and neither set of furniture had yet been paid for. Similarly, office supplies had not been paid for, some of these being found in accused’s possession when he was arrested in Wellington. Accused said lie had worked as an architect in Durban and Johannesburg, and before that at Edinburgh. Witness called on accused and the latter said the letters be used (which were painted on an office window. and the signwriter had not been paid) might mean “Fellow of the Royal Irish Bachelors’ Association.” Later witness called on accused again and lie said he was enlisting in tlio Air Force. Accused then closed his account at the bank and left Palmerston North. Accused’s only statement to the Court was that he was “hard up at the time.”

Sentence was deferred until the afternoon so that a report could be obtained from the probation officer. When the Court resumed accused was sentenced to two months’ imprisonment with hard labour on the first charge of theft, and on the other three theft charges lie was convicted and ordered to come up for sentence if called upon within two years, a condition being that he made restitution for the amounts lie obtained. On the charge of the use of the letters R.1.8.A. lie Was convicted and discharged. ’