BURGLARS PUNISHED.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20386, 15 October 1929, Page 15

BURGLARS PUNISHED.

NUMEROUS OFFENCES. JUDGE'S SERIOUS VIEW. ' TERMS OF IMPRISONMENT. Tho view that offences of breaking and filtering must bo put flown was expressed J,v Mr. Justice Smith in tho Supremo Court yesterday, in sentencing Charles Ciboin, aged 24, seaman, and Leslie [Hubert Ashfield, aped 25, seaman and ] ihoiirer (Mr. Noble). Tho two had jdeaded guilty to charges of breaking and entering, during August and September, feven different premises, with intent to commit crime, and with attempting to l.ioak and- enter; and there wero three furl her similar charges against Ashfield ii lone. Goods to the value of £44 wero alleged to have been stolen by tho accused together, and tho charges against Ashfield :ilone involved a further £lB. In a butcher's shop entered by tho pair thero was found the joker from a pack of play-ing-cards, stabbed on to the meat-block by ii knife; and the owner of a music shop found the ace of spades with "Ku Klux ]\lan" written on it left after their visit. Mr. Noble described Ashfield as a young man from London, well-connected, and h very sick man. He suffered from jisthma, anrP found himself utterly desti-

1 ute, a stranger in a strange country. The economic conditions of the country made it very difficult for such men to uet. tleir living. Ho understood that (iiboin had never been convicted before. He ha I been out of employment for a considerable time, and found his condition desperate.

His Honor said it appeared that the prisoners had engaged upon systematic theft. There were joint offences against tiiem on August 23, 30, and 31, on September 11, 14, 17 and 18, offences against 'Ashfield on September 18, 19 and 20, and Another joint offence on September 21. ]n the circumstances it was quite impossible to consider such a thing as probation. As far as Ashfield's health was concerned, his previous convictions showed that he had no excuse for what he did. The economic conditions of the country did not justify theft, still less systematic theft of this kind. His Honor added that the view he took vas that these offences of breaking and entering must be stopped, and an adequate sentence must be passed. Ashfield had two previous convictions, and had been given two years' reformative detention. He would now be sentenced to three years' imprisonment with hard labour. Although Giboin had no previous convictions shown to the Court, he had been guilty of nine offences, and must be taught that theft of this sort would not pay. He would be sentenced to two years' imprisonment with hard labour.