POLICE COURT

Southland Times, Issue 22734, 9 November 1935, Page 10

POLICE COURT

YESTERDAY’S SITTING A SHORT LIST Four cases were dealt with by Mr W. H. Freeman, S.M., in the Police Court yesterday. David R. Davis appeared voluntarily and pleaded guilty to charges of operating a motor-cycle without a warning device and without an efficient silencer. Inspector E. Stopford, who prosecuted, said that the Traffic Department was receiving a number of complaints, especially from the hospitals, regarding that class of offence. “It is our intention to clean this matter up; we shall not only bring the offenders before the court, but seize the registration plates of the offending machines until they comply with the legulations,” he added. “I suppose a motor-cycle without a silencer would, in itself, amount to a warning device,” remarked his Worship, smilingly as he imposed a fine of 10/— on each charge. Charge of Theft. A man, whose name was suppressed, pleaded guilty to a charge of stealing the sum of £7 0/3, the property of the New Zealand Railways. Detective R. Thompson, who prosecuted, said that the accused had taken the money away from his cashbox over a week-end and an inspector, visiting the office, had found the sum missing. As a result the man had lost his employment and that, in itself, was a very serious punishment. “This is a very sad case,” said Mr Eustace Russell, in pleading for leniency for the accused. The man, stated counsel, had plenty of money and actually repaid the sum in question from £lOO he received on the Monday morning. He had had 29 years’ honourable service with the Railway Department and had lost his superannuation moneys. “It is not an ordinary case of theft with intent to deprive the department, but nevertheless he took the money away when he should not have done so,” continued Mr Russell. “In short, he held it for the weekend. It is a rather tragic case and I suggest he should be discharged. I would also ask that publication of his name be suppressed.” His Worship: This does not appear to be an ordinary case of theft. It is rather a pity the matter reached the Court. Theft is the taking away with the intention of permanently depriving the owner. Remarking that it was a pity the accused had not borrowed the money from a friend for the week-end, the Magistrate adopted counsel’s suggestion and convicted and discharged him. Publication of the accused’s name was suppressed. Conducting a Lottery. A plea of guilty was entered by a man to a charge of establishing and conducting a lottery. Detective-Sergeant R. Thompson, who prosecuted, said that on September 6 last the defendant had been a passenger on the Bluff-Invercargill train. When he alighted he left behind him a parcel of pictures belonging to his wife. She duly reported the loss and, upon inquiries being instituted, it was found that he had taken one of the pictures away. This he had raffled at sixpence a ticket. He had himself to blame for not having frankly told his wife, and but for the matter having been reported, the loss would not have been discovered. There was nothing known against the defendant personally and the offence was not regarded as a very serious one. The defendant, in extenuation, pleaded that he and his wife had really made the pictures and, as they were not finding a ready sale, he thought it would be better to try to raffle one of them. The proceeds had been replaced. Defendant was fined £2, to be paid within 14 days. Serious Charges. James Patrick Reid, a labourer aged 38, was charged with indecently assaulting two girls, each aged seven years. After evidence had been given by the girls concerned, their mothers and by Detective T. Smith, the accused pleaded not guilty to both charges and was committed to the Supreme Court for trial. Bail was allowed on his own recognizance of £5O and one surety of £5O or two of £25 each.