SOLICITOR’S ATTACK

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 465, 21 September 1928, Page 13

SOLICITOR’S ATTACK

“CONVICTED MEN BEING HOUNDED” CRITICISM OF POLICE (Special to THE SUNJ NEW PLYMOUTH, To-day. When three men were charged at the Magistrate’s Court to-day with consorting with thieves, counsel for accused, Mr. A. A. Bennett, attacked the police methods, asserting that convicted men were being hounded down. Mr. R. W. Tate, S.M„ was on the Bench, and the accused were William Sydney Stroud, Leonard Edward Smith and James Patrick Osgood Carroll, charged with being idle and disorderly persons within the meaning of the Police Offences Act, 1927, in that they habitually consorted with reiJuted thieves. Constable Butler said the three accused had been under his observation for some time. They were always about tho streets together. All three were convicted thieves. Two months ago the three men were seen in company with a convicted thief. Detective Meiklejohn said that he had seen Smith and Stroud in the company of convicted theives on several occasions. They had been frequenting a billiards saloon owned by a man who had been convicted at Auckland on a charge of false pretences. Both Smith and Stroud had served two years’ reformative detention. Carroll's last charge, involving dishonesty, had been in 1925, when he served three months’ imprisonment. Mr. Bennett said that to charge any man with consorting when he had visited a billiard saloon w’hose proprietor had since been convicted was straining the law. The object of prison detention was ro encourage reformation, but it was clear from the charge that the three accused were being discouraged from reformation. He was prepared to bring forward evidence that both Smith and Stroud had made repeated efforts to obtain work under the unemployment relief scheme. The magistrate said he was satisfied in the case of Carroll that the charge had not been proved against him. In regard to the other two men he would like to hear evidence of their «attempts to obtain employment. Detective Meiklejohn said he would withdraw the charge against Carroll and submif one of having no sufficient or lawful means of gupport. The magistrate said the only thing to save the accused from prison was for them to separate, and to get work at such distances apart that their association would cease. In his opinion Smith and Stroud should be -convicted on their charges, and Carroll for having no visible lawful means of support. He wished to give them a chance to become decent citizens. The case would be adjourned until October 3, to give them the opportunity of deciding for themselves. They must obtain work at different places as far from New Plymouth as possible.