DAMAGING PROPERTY.

Timaru Herald, Volume XIIC, Issue 13598, 19 May 1908, Page 7

DAMAGING PROPERTY.

THE WAMTI ROAD CASES. On Saturday evening, May 9tb, several residents of W"ai-iti Road suffered damage to their gates and fences, at the hands of some young men the repairing of which cost- H'd lAs 6d The repairs had been paid lor by the mischief cloeis, but Ui2 offence against the law remained to be dealt witu, and for this George Cowan, Alex Craigie, William and Robert Aitkon and Geoffrey Durtsford were summoned to appear befor* Mr. C. A. Wray, S.M., yesterday. None of the defendants appeared, but were represented by Mr. Emsiie, wlio on their behalf pleaded guilty. His Worship wanted to know why the defendants hau kept away, from the Court, and Mr. Emsiie replied that they understood that as they were being represented by counsel it would not be necessary for them to appear.

Suu-Jiispvctor Green stated iL.u about 11 p.m., on the night in question the defendants committed various acts of mischief to ill-." property of eight or nine peo2»ie. They gates and broke them, tore oh' pickets and broke fence's and posts, the whole damage amounting to £B 13s 6d. This had since been made good by the defendants, after they had been interviewed by Detective Fitzgerald and Constable Osborne, to whom they admitted the offences and offered to make good the damage. Ihis was the only good feature in the matter. They had no excuse fr,r their conduct—it was just a senseless act of mischief. The defendants werj all utile, soils of respectable people, i here had • bs:en other complaints of mischief from residents of Wai-iti Road, but he would not say that this had b-.eu committed by defendants, though they lived in that locality. They could offer'no excise whatever tor wliat they had done—not even the excuse of drunkenness, which was one very often given. Mr. Emsiie said it was hard for defendants to make any excuse, and thev really had none to offer. They had been well advised to make good the damage and to plead guilty. The whole question was one of vindicating the law, it. rested with His Worship what punishment to inflict. In this case the defendants had already suffered by making good tb« damage done, and by having to bear the reproaches of their friends. He did not wish to suggest that the police should not have prosecuted, becalm a breach of the law had been committed ; but if the owners of the damaged j property had looked at the matter leniently and had been content with the repairing of the damages, probably the ca6es pould not have l>een reported to the police, and under the circumstances he thought His Worship might dismiss the case with a caution. The defendants had thrown themselves upon the mercy of the Court and asked to be dealt with leniently and to be spared the disgrace of a conviction, because their parents were all in good social positions. His Worship objected to the nonappearance at Court of the defendants; this was not like a case of riding bicycles on the footpath* or similar cases. It" was a criminal offence and \he perpetrators were liable to be fined £5 each for such a. ssrious matter. The defendants had not shown proper respect for the Court and should have come and explained themselves. He would cither have to imptwe the full penalty or have the defendants apprehended, and he did not feel inclined to dispose of the matter until thev all appeared in person. He asked Mr." Emsiie to see that they presented themselves. Mr. Emsiie .-said" he would do his best ! to get defendants to appear. He had ad-yi-ed them to do so. but apparently they had accepted the advice of someone else". His Worship ordered the case to be adjourned until 10.50 a.m. to-morrow when, if defendants did not then appear/ they would b? apprehended.