A BOGUS COLLECTOR.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXI, Issue 57, 21 October 1911, Page 8

A BOGUS COLLECTOR.

SENT TO GAOL FOR TWO MONTHS. At the Magistrate’s Court yesterday morning James Allison Mclntosh was charged with having on June 22nd at Huiakama obtained from Michael O’Neill the sum of £1 by falsely representing that he was authorised to collect moneys owing to the “Dairyman and Farmers’ Union Journal” Co. Accused was further-charged with having on May 3rd obtained 6s 6d from William Harold Cochrane, of Riverlea, by a similar pretence. He pleaded guilty to both charges. _ Sergeant’ McNeeley said accused had gone to various parts of Taranaki representing that ho was .authorised to collect for the company. Some six or seven years ago accused was employed by the company, but for some reason they had dispensed with his services. He was somewhat addicted to drink. > On July 19th, 1909, ho had been granted twelve months’ probation on a charge of theft and in tho following December ho had been sentenced to three months’ imprisonment on a similar charge. Tne S.M. said that people had to place a groat deal of trust in men who came forward and represented themselves as authorised collectors, and in the case of dishonest collectors great annoyance was caused. Accused said all his trouble was the result of over-indulgence in drink. He had a good job in Auckland and his employers had agreed to take him back. lie had made no attempt to c over up his offence, having signed his own name to the receipts. He asked that he be ordered to come up for sentence on condition that ho refunded the money obtained and paid expenses, and that a prohibition order should be taken out against him. During the three months lie had been iu work in Auckland lie had not been drinking. The S.M. said it was a bit too late to ask for a chance. The probation granted in 1909 should have been a sufficient lesson. The sums obtained were very small, but an important principle was involved. He was afraid ho could not do as accused desired—if his previous Court proceedings had not‘taught him a - further chance could hardly do much good. In view of tho fact that accused had -pleaded guilty and that he had already been ton days in gaol the sentence of the Court would lie two months’ imprisonment with hard labour on the first charge and one month’s imprisonment on tjie second charge, tho sentences to be concurrent.