THE WHITE TOHUNGA.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 9113, 19 December 1907, Page 2

THE WHITE TOHUNGA.

PALMISTRY NO OFFENCE. pP-EB Press Association.] WELLINGTON, December 19. At the Magistrate's Court yesterday, Mr Riddell, S.M., delivered judgment ia the case of the police v. Lily ' Krause. Defendant was charged on two counts — (1) that on December 4, 1907, she did undertake to tell fortunes ; (2) that she did use a subtle craft by palmistry to deceive and impose on certain of his Majesty's subjects, to wit, Charles Dunnet, William Pender and others. His Worship considered that the first charge had been proved. An offence was created by Section 240 of the Criminal Code, and Section 49 of the Criminal Offences Act gave a Magistrate or Justices power to treat the matter summarily, and tor inflict a lighter penalty than that /set out in the oode. Counsel for the defence had contended that there was no distinction between the present case and fortune-telling at private '_ parties. The case of Regina v. Entwhistle cited by both sides t however, drew a distinction, j and practically decided that there was no deception in fortune-telling at private parties. Defendant would he convicted on the first charge, and fined 40s and costs 7s, in_defau.lt seven days'* imprisonment. With regard to the second information, his Worship said the facts were the same, but Section 50 of the Indictable Offences Act, under which tlie information wae laid, assumed an offence, but did not create one. Counsel had argued that there was no creation of such an offence in any New Zea? land statute. By the Imperial Vagrancy Act 5, George IV., every person using any subtle craft, me^us or device, by palmistry or otherwise, to deceive find impose on any of his Majesty's subjects was deemed a rogue and vagar bond, and was liable to a penalty. That Act, by virtue of tbe English Laws Act, 1858, was ,in foroe in New goaUad nntil 1866. In that year the 2-few ?eal.an4 Legislature passed a Vagrants Act containing a number odr clauses appearing in the Imperial Act, but omitting the one creating tbe offenoe alleged in the present information. The Vagrants Act of 1866 w§9 in turn repealed by the Police Offences Act, 1884, but again no provision was made for any' clause creating an offence where a person used any subtle craft tp deceive and impose on others. The implication, therefore, w**3 that itb.e clause m Section 4* pf 5, George "W., had beep repealed by the Vagrants Act of 18£6, and was never, re-enacted- Thorp being thus in flic. Worship'!? opinion no offence, the information would be dismissed. • ." mmimm*mmmmmmmmmmmmk r-jf'jit-r . - v — xr.....i\ Jf