DEFENCE METHODS.

Waipa Post, Volume XXI, Issue 1210, 25 February 1922, Page 5

DEFENCE METHODS.

FAILURE TO RETURN EQUIPMENT.

A GILBERTIAN SITUATION.

The case of Robert Baird, who was recently 'before the court on a icharge of failing to return an overcoat to the Defence Department, was re-heard at the Te Awamutu Magistrate's Court on Thursday morning. Sergeant-i Major F. J. Petchell gave evidence that accused had returned all articles except the greatcoat, which he had endeavoured to induce him to return without avail. The coat was valued at £2 18s 4d. Baird stated that he had handed the coat to an officer, hut a letter from the latter denied receipt of it.

ißaird was ordered to ipay the cost of the coat and 'costs of 7s. Victor Pollard was charged with failure to hand in when required a quantity of equipment. Accused pleaed not guilty. All he had in his possession was three articles. These articles had been obtained in order to pass a military examination. The hulk of his equipment was handed in when he went into camp some years ago. Sergeant-Major Petchell having given evidence that there was no record of the return of the articles, was questioned at some length by accused (formerly sergeant of territorials here) as to whether it would not be possible for the articles ;to he returned without any record of their return being kept. For two years, said Ser-geant-Major Petchell, receipts had been given for all equipment returned. Pollard made a statement that he had returned the articles to himself as sergeant, hut had not given himself a receipt for them. He had seen fifty men throw their equipment down and get no receipt for it. "They took a risk," remarked the magistrate, and pointed out that witness had signed a receipt on issue, and should have insisted on its cancellation on returning them. Pollard asked, in view of the trust reposed in him for several years in charge of equipment, why they had refused to accept his assurance now that he had returned the articles. The magistrate said that the only course for him was to make an order for £6 6s lOd, the value of the equipment.

ipollard asked what about wear and tear.

•Sergeant-Major Petchell said that a greatcoat was supposed to wear for ten years, and a uniform for four years. Pol'lard: Will you certify that I had the uniform four years? The sergeant-major: Yes. Pollard: Well, then, the uniform's worn out.

Some discussion ensued on the wearing qualities of chevrons, 'buttons, etc., and Sergeant-Major Petchell hazarded that as an overcoat did not wear out under ten years, and Pollard had had the overcoat only four years, it must he refunded as new. The worn-out value of a tunic was lid. The order for £6 6s lOd was made. Percival Barton ,also charged with failing to return equipment, pleaded guilty, and was ordered to pay £5 16s Id; costs, 7b.