SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1647, 14 January 1913, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

(Before his Honour Sir Robert Stout, C.J.) . OFFICIAL CAUGHT BY AUDITOR. HIS DEFALCATIONS. , TRIED TO RECOVER ON RACING. Four prisoners, who had pleaded' guilty to different offences, came up for sentence before the Chief Justice (Sir Robert' Stout) in the Supreme Court yesterday morning. Mr. H. H. Ostler represented the. Crown. ... '.'.■'. ' ■ /Five charges of forgery and uttering stood against a young man named jWilliam Copeman Willson, who was fir6t placed in the dock. Mr. T. Young, who appeared for the prisoner, stated that the case was one of those wherein a young man succumbs to temptation after having borne an excellent character over a lengthy period. Willson had served in the Boer War, and, for several. years, had been in tho, Government service. Some time ago he was appointed paymaster on the StratfordOngaruo section at a salary of ,£2OO per annum, and in tho course of his duty had to handle over £1600 a month.. He was a married man with four children, and, finding it hard to live on his salary, ha forged !a . voucher for a sum of money. This'was passed, and'-.Willson, finding it easy to commit crime, forged several others. His living became more extravagant, and,, to recover his-position, he "took to horse-racing," with the ' usual result that -he sank deeper, and was finally discovered. ■ Counsel remarked that ho was aware that, in o recent similar case, a man had beon sent to gaol for a year, but, in that, case, the defalcations were greater, and.the offender had attempted to leave the country. His Honour might'feel disposed to treat the present case more leniently. His honour pointed out that-the five, charges, involving about .£295, extended over a neriod of nearly twelve months. Mr. Ostler l here stated that he thought it only : right to mention' that the actual discovered by the auditor amounted to ,£1309 12s. lOd. His Honour supposed that the accounts could not have been passed unless the head engineer had relied on the prisoner's honesty, and tho latter was therefore in a position of trust, which ho had betrayed. His Honour therefore could not see his way; clear to sentence prisoner to any lighter term,than one year's imprison-' ment with hard labour. If he came before tho Court again, he would probably be declared a 1 habitual criminal. Even now,'on a strict reading of tho law, ho might bo 'so declared, but, on account of •his previous good character and the fact that he had a wife and family, his Honour would not make • tho declaration. '■:>■■■■ NOTHING TO SAY. /' ' SENTENCE OF TWELVE'MONTHS. John Sweeney, alias George M'Leod, alias John Hartnett, had nothing to say as to why.sentence of tho Court should' not be passed on him in connection with a charge of forgery at.Wanganui.- There'were four previous convictions against the prisoner, whose offences included fatso pretences, forgery, and theft. A sentence of twolvo months' hard' labour was imposed, his Honour warning' the prisoner that a further . convictionwould probably result in his 'being declared a habitual criminal. / '. ;." OLD OFFENDER. , . ■ ,' j NINE MONTHS' IMPRISONMENT. '. ' An old man, named Thomas O'Brien, who had'pleaded guilty at Wanganui to a charge of theft from a dwelling, handed a written statement up to the Bench. ' His Honour, aftfir perusing the statement, remarked that if this: were prisoner's first > offence, one might havp dealtjeniently' with him, but: there were no fewer than eleven previous convictions, dating from tho year 1901. Prisoner's present position was -no doubt due to drink, and ho was old enough to see that drink could, only lead to one end;,:.-A-sentenco of nine months', imprisonment, with hard.labour was imposed* , CASE OF ALLISON M'INTOSH.; A'■ written statement was also handed up by !James Allison M'lntosh, who was set forward for sentence on a charge of theft from a dwelling—an' offence;'to which' ho had pleaded guilty'at Stratford. » His-Honour, after glancing at the prisoner's /record, observed that the ■ previous convictions in 1 this ' case included five- charges of theft, three charges of false pretences, and a charge of. breach of probation. As in other ceases, ; drink was no doubt the cause of the prisoner's lapse. His Honour therefore proposed to keep the. prisoner from drink by declaring him a habitual criminal. The head sentence'would be a light one—nine .months' imprisonment with hard labour.