MISUSE OF THE RADIO

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23954, 1 November 1939, Page 4

MISUSE OF THE RADIO

APPEALS FOR PUBLIC MONEY A CAREER OF FRAUD OFFENDER SENT TO PRISON (Per United Press Association) , AUCKLAND, Oct. 31. ' Comment, on the fact that a man who, his Honor said, had had a record for dishonesty, was allowed': to appeal to the public from each of three wireless stations in Auckland was made by Mr Justice Fair when sentencing a prisoner in the Supreme Court, to-day. The case was that of Albert Edward Arthur Hamilton, a motor mechanic, who had been found guilty of false pretences and of obtaining credit by fraud. The accused’s counsel (Mr Lockhart) said the prisoner had had an indifferent education. There was no doubt he had done some charitable and benevolent work, for orphans- and cripples. , - . His Honor said that people had been led to suppose that the prisoner was a generous man, giving freely of his lime and taking nothing at all. but he was misappropriating money subscribed by the public. It was impossible to grant probation in a case of that kind where a man had a bad record of dishonesty extending over the past 14 years. “In considering that record and the prisoner’s history,” his Honor continued, “it is surprising to find that in spite of it he has been allowed to appeal to the public from each of the three wireless stations in Auckland in support of an organisation known as the Auckland Bird Lovers’ Club. In consequence of these appeals he obtained large sums from the public, most of which he appears to have misappropriated for his own "purposes. “ It would seem desirable.” his Honor said, “ that in future those who control these stations should satisfy themselves of the character of speakers who are given the privilege of speaking to a large number of the public before allowing them to make appeals. In this case the facilities afforded have been used to defraud, the public, and only a small proportion of the money subscribed was spent, as was supposed, on outings for children.” His Honor said he would take into consideration the jury’s recommendation to mercy, although he doubted whether they would have made ,it if they had known the prisoner’s record. In view of the fact that these offences followed upon a course of misappropriation of moneys subscribed by the public, the least sentence he could impose would be 18 months’ reformative treatment.