TELLING FORTUNES

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 22142, 22 June 1935, Page 15

TELLING FORTUNES

PRACTICE IN TEAROOMS f TWO WOMEN CONVICTED f COMMENT BY MAGISTRATE " The practice of telling fortunes in this way has been made an offence because it was found that it affected the lives and happiness of people who believed in it," said Mr. W. R. McKean, S.M., in delivering a reserved judgment in the Police Court yesterday in the cases in which Marion Page was charged on summons with undertaking to tell fortunes at the Cottage Tearooms, and Margaret Wyatt was charged with a similar offence in respect of the Duck-In Cafeteria. Both women had pleaded not guilty, Mr. Richmond appearing for the former defendant and Dr. McElroy for the latter. Charges of aiding and abetting in the commission of the offences had been laid against the proprietresses of the two restaurants but had been dismissed by the magistrate.

In his judgment the magistrate said he could not find anything in the cases quoted by counsel to justify dismissal of the informations. It was an offence to undertake to tell fortunes and he was of the opinion that the person who had in fact told fortunes must be deemed to have undertaken to do so. " The defendant Marion Pago was employed apparently for the purpose of ' character reading,' but what she did," said the magistrate, " was to read teacups nnd tell the witnesses for the prosecution that they would take long journeys, that the death would occur of an old lady but would not cause much sorrow, as it was expected, and so on. Whether the defendant did or did not believe that she had the power to tell of future events is immaterial. Although it is nonsense, it is mischievous nonsense, and therefore prohibited." In tho case of the defendant Margaret Wyatt, added the magistrate, she denied being at the Duck-In Cafeteria on the day in question, but the production of a diary kept by the police witnesses removed any possibility of doubt as to the date of the visit. In this case the witnesses wrote, at defendant's request, their birthdays on slips of paper. Little attention was paid to the slips by defendant, who went on to indicate future events. She also must be convicted. Fines of £l, with 10s costs, were imposed in both instances. The magistrate pointed out that although in these cases the charges against the proprietresses had failed owing to lack of evidence as to complicity, nevertheless it should be quite easy in the future to secure such evidence and therefore convictions.