SUPREME COURT.

Hokitika Guardian, 23 September 1922, Page 1

SUPREME COURT.

GREYMOUTH, Sept. 23

At the Supreme Court yesterday before Mr Justice Adams, on a charge of contracting a bigamous marriage and making a false declaration to the Registrar of Marriages at Hokitika, Arthur Ernest Taylor came up for sentence.

Mr Joyce, on behalf of the prisoner, said that he was a man who had worked hard since his arrival in the Dominion and had a good war record. Apart from the present trouble there unis nothing known against him. When still in England Taylor ' had married the daughter of a Woolwich hotel keeper. He came out to New Zealand and afterwards enlisted. Ho went hack to England and met his wife. There were two children of tho marriage, one 13 years of age and another two years old. When lie returned to New Zealand lie went to Otira and mot Mi ss Wylie, with whom he went through tho form of marriage. The circumstances were most unfortunate, and when the police made their investigations the accused gave them every assistance. It would have been quite easy for him to have got away, but lie prepared to stand his trial and had helped in every way to have the matter cleared up. Accused was a sober hard working man and he had with him a recommendation from the- manager of the Westport Coal Company, who gave the accused a very good character. Tie was now paying 12s 6d a week for the support of his second wife and her child.

Mr Kitchinghnm said that although tho accused was a good worker, he was of a low moral character. In leaving England in 1910 lie did not provide for the maintenance of his wife and children. In 1912 he was living with another woman at Otira until lie enlisted. Ho then went to'the Old Country and while there visited the home of his wife where he lived for some time before returning to New Zealand. It was ill consequence of his failure to provide maintenance for his wife and children in England that the discovery was made that he had contracted a bigamous marriage and made a false declaration. Apart from his morals, the accused seemed to be all right.

TLis Honour: Rather an unfortunate exception! His Honour said that the police report did not recommend probation, mid the case was not one for a fine. The accused might he an industrious worker, hut the offence with which he was charged was bigamy. He thought the case was one which merited punishment. A sentence of six months’ imprisonment would he imposed.

THEFT CASK Henry Newton, engine driver, was charged" that on or about April 29, 1922, he stole from the Dominion Hotel, Blackball, 25 single blankets, 4 bed qilts, and 5 single sheets of the total value of £3O, the property of Hannah Josephine Campbell; 2, that between April 29 and July 28 lie received 6 white blankets, 1 grey single blanket and 1 bed quilt, knowing them to have been stolen.

After a- lengthy hearing the jury found the accused guilty of theft of two blankets and oho counterpane. Accused was remanded in custody till IVcdncsdav for sentence.