THEFTS FROM SHOPS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20022, 12 February 1927, Page 9

THEFTS FROM SHOPS.

A WOMAN CONVICTED, magistrate imposes fine. (Special to Dailt Times.) AUCKLAND, February 11. In the Police Court, Elizabeth May Stewart, aged 33, sat and wept as she was charged with stealing a pair of shoes, valued at ss, the property of the K.K. Footwear Company, a lady’s skirt, valued at 19s lid, from Milne and Choyce, and a woollen costume and a pair of child’s rompers from the shop of Rendell’a (Limited). Accused, for whom Mr Singer appeared, pleaded guilty to all the_ charges. It was stated by Chief Detective Cummings that yesterday Mrs Stewart went into three shops and stole the articles mentioned. At Milne and Choyce’s her child removed the skirt from the counter, accused placing it in her bag. Accused was the wife of a farm labourer, and had throe young children. She came to the city recently from the Bay of Plenty witii a relative who was ill. Accused, who had never previously been in anv trouble, was not arrested, as she had a young child with her. Mr Singer, in asking that Mrs Stewart should be leniently dealt with, said that she was in ill-health. That probably might account for the offences being committed. The Magistrate said that he did not wish to send the woman to prison in view of her condition. She would be fined £3, and coats on one of the charges. Mr Smith, continuing his opening address to-day, contended that the Crown broke three provisions of the Treaty of Waitangi, a,nd he submitted that the Government was at fault, and the confiscations were unjust. Mr Justice Sim asked if counsel would go so far as to say there ought not to nave been any confiscations. Mr Smith submitted that the Taranaki confiscations from Waitara to Waitotara, which came in under the petitions, were all unjust, and, apart from inquiry No. 1 before the commission, which dealt only with the aspect whether the quantity of all the confiscations exceeded what was just and fair in the Taranaki claims, counsel said he was entitled to rely on the Treaty of Waitangi, and, with the whole of the circumstances taken into account, was entitled to reparation. Counsel dealt with the clauses leading up to the Waikato and the second Taranaki wars, the responsibility of which he endeavoured to prove rested entirely with tlie Government and its Ministers. Failure to give effect to .Sir George Grey’s decision that Waitara should bo abandoned after the Natives quietly allowed the military to take possesion of the Tataraimaka block, was the primary cause of the Oakura insurrection. This was not murder in the Native sense, but the assertion of their claims to the Oakura lands, while the Government’s subsequent threats resulted in a general war, this being the outcome of the inadequacy of the Native policy of the European Government. Wnitara - was ultimately given back to the Natives on May 13, 1863, but talk of confiscation in the proclamation, ■which appeared in July, 1863, was the fulfilment of the Native fears. Counsel’s address is still proceeding. Great interest is being displayed by the Natives in the district.