BREACH OF TRUST.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume V, Issue 1427, 9 September 1918, Page 8 (Supplement)

BREACH OF TRUST.

NIGHTWATCHMAN'S LAPSE. FINE OF £ls IMPOSED. Breaches of his trust whilst engaged as a nightwatchman in the Government buildings were responsible for the appearance for sentence of George .lames Pinch at the Supreme Court to-day. His Honour Mr Justice Herdman was on the bench. Finch, in the Magistrate's Court, had pleaded guilty to the theft of a clothes brush, brooch and hand-mirror, the property ofi Miss (ioudie. and also of a razor, the property of Charles Berridge. Mr W. •). Hunter, who represented the prisoner, said that Finch came before the Supreme Court only because the thefts had occurred over a year ago. This fact removed jurisdiction from the lower Court. The accused had served in the Royal Navy from IS9B to 1907, and his conduct up to discharge had been described as "excellent" on his papers. On discharge he had acted as a warder for two or three years at the Seacliff Mental Hospital, had been employed as a light-house keeper, ami Lad also been nightwatchman of the Government buildings in Auckland for two years. He had been employed in the Government buildings in Christchurch for live years, lie was a married man with three children. Counsel pleaded that the sentence of the Court should not involve the sending of the accused to gaol. For the Crown, Mr S. G. Raymond, K.C., said that he had received a report from Auckland that whilst Finch was employed as a nightwatchman in the Government buildings there, there had been a series of small thefts. It was in consequence of the fact that the prisoner had been suspected of these that he had been transferred to Christchurch. His Honour staled that whilst there was a very strong suspicion of previous thefts, he could not accept this as proof. The conduct of the prisoner in the Navy hail been excellent. He Would hesitate to send to gaol a man who had not before been convicted, when there was a possibility that tli? man might become'a respectable member of the community. Under the circumstances a fine would be imposed. Later his Honour said that under Section 28 of the Crimes Act it would be necessary to impose a term of two years' imprisonment until tlie fine of £ls was paid. This was oil the first count only; on the second Finch would be convicted and discharged.

Mi- Hunter intimated that the fin Would be immediately paid.