UNPAID REWARD

Hokitika Guardian, 27 June 1930, Page 5

UNPAID REWARD

£250 INVOLVED,

CONVICTION OF THE CRAY BROTHERS.

CHRISTCHURCH, June 26. When the Gray brothers were convicted some months ago on a long list of arson charges, the question was asked, “Who will get the ‘Fire-bug reward?” This question is still being asked, but the general opinion, shared by a prominent member of the Underwriters’ Association, is that no one will get it. "I ..y.

This reward of £250 was offered by tbe Fire Underwriters’ Association “to anyone giving information to the police | leading to the arrest and conviction, pf the criminals responsible for certain incendiary fires.” The Gray brothers, who were afterwards convicted of the crimes, were caught red-handed by Constable Albert Gillum. ( Public opinion said that he was entitled to ; t. Tbe matter was left in the hands of the Commissioner of Police (Mr W. B. Al’llveneyU ’So faV ftothingHias beetfdone.

The official police opinion is stated to be that th» reward can be paid to no one. The Gray brothers were the only persons who gave information to, the police leading to their own conviction. They, theoretically, are entitled to the reward ;but to give it to them would be ridiculous.

Tt is thought generally in police circles that the reward should he divided among Constable Gillum and tbe detectives who bandied tlie investigation following the arrest. “I think tbe detectives in charge of the case should get some if it,” said one police officer, discussing the matter “When they took the matter up they had only the actual charge, on which the boys were arrested, to work on. On some of the charges they had had not a title of evidence. Yet, by fair methods (there was no complaint afterwards) they so worked up their case that they were able to bring against the boys a lengthy list of charges. So strong, were the cases that the hoys pleaded guilty, even to the charge of attempted murder.” Y

The detectives referred to particular ly were Acting-Detectives J. Halcro'W® and J. Findlay. “It seems to me that tlie reward will not be paid,” said a prominent member of the Canterbury Underwiters’ Association, when asked about the matter. “The matter is out of our hands altogether,and I do not see what can We done. It cannot be paid to any member of the Police Force without the Commissioner’s consent, and the matter is only in his hands. So far Air A. .T. Scrivener is the only claimant, and the police say his claim * is not valid. B r e still have the money, and there the matter rests.”