"SOMEONE BLUNDERED"

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1746, 10 May 1913, Page 2

"SOMEONE BLUNDERED"

4 MAGISTRATE ON DEFENCE CASE. ' Soma comment in regard to the actiou of the Defence authorities in connection with three prosecutions were made by Mr. W. 6. Riddell in the Magistrate's Court yesterday. Some little time ago the Defence authorities prosecuted Arthur Hooke, Alfred Arthur Howard, and Oliver 13. Mercer, on charges to the effect that they had failed to attend camp on February 11 of this year. Yesterday Mr. P. S. K. Macassey, of the Crown Law Office, appeared in Court to support an application for the rehearing of the cases. Mr. Macassey stated that if the application was granted ho would then ask for the dismissal of tho cases. Tho proceedings, ho added, had been taken m mistake by tho Defence Department. His Worship: Well, do yon propose to offer any evidence? Mr. Macassey: It is not necessary; it is the prosecution which asks for tho rehewing. Captain Richardson (of the Defcnce Department): 1 can give evidence. _ Mr. Macassey: Very well, go into the bra. Jii the witness-box Captain Richardson said that in two of the cases the young men were out of town at the time they were supposed to be in camp, and tho other had chanced his address without notifying the Department, and therefore did not receive a notico to attend tho camp. . . . His Worship: \ erv well, tho informations will be dismissed. ... If the Territorials choose to leave this part of tho Dominion without notifying the Defence authorities' then that is their look out. In future, no rehearing will be granted unless tho provisions of the .Ttis. tico of the Peaco Act aro carried out. Every precaution must be taken before the original hearing to sep that tho prosecution was warranted. Otherwise 1 consider the Court's time would be wasted. Mr Riddell further said (hat this affair revealed neglect of some sort. Such rehearings should not bp. necessary. At the same silting of the Court the Defence 'authorities withdrew a prosecution against a lad who had previously been fined for the charge then standing against him. Mr. P. <T. O'Rpgaii (ivho appeared for the defendant) characterised this as a niece of official blundering, so he asked for costs. His Worship allowed co»ls .CI Is. Captain Richardson: Costs against whom—l lie Defence Department? Air. O'l'egau: Yes. Cuplain Richardson: Tt was not I lie Defence .Department, which blundered. His Worship: There is no use discussing the matter any further. Costs aro allowed. . . . Someono ho? blundered jvjiq should hue taken, a, little piov? cure,