Lively Pink Parrot Visits Police Court

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 739, 12 August 1929, Page 1

Lively Pink Parrot Visits Police Court

BIKD IS EXHIBIT "A” THEFT CHARGE FAILS Muttering incoherently to itself and evidently feeling its position keenly, a pink parrot stared shrewdly at Mr. F. K. Hunt, S.M., as it perched in its cage at the Police Court this morning. No charge, even of obscene language, was preferred against the bird, however, and It was not a witness in the proceedings. It made its first appearance in the court as an exhibit in a theft charge. Douglas Henry Chalmers and Allan Gordon Wright, both young men, were charged with stealing the bird from George William Marten on Friday. They pleaded not guilty and Mr. Terry, for Wright, entered a plea of not guilty on a charge of stealing clothing and silverware valued at £2 10s, the property of Valeria Vovaird. George William Marten, the owner of the parrot, said that he had a flat in the Great North Road. He identified the parrot. "Don’t speak to it.” exclaimed the magistrate apprehensively as witness turned to look at the bird, which he sai dhad been kept in the wash-house. On Friday evening witness had covered up the, bird. It was missing on Saturday morning. "When I came home about 9.30 on Friday evening,” continued witness, "there was a taxi standing outside. Not understanding why it should be there, I took the number. When I entered the house I saw the two accused and a woman in the landlady’s bedroom looking at some clothing. Later from my window I saw the three people carrving some clothing to the taxi. I reported the loss of the parrot to the police immediately. He is suite one of the family and I value him at £25. I would not sell him for £25 If any of these gentlemen offered It to me.” Mr. Hunt: They are not likely to but you are quite entitled to place what value you like upon it. " BIT OF A PARTY" Grace Marten, wife of the previous witness, gave the time of the arrival of the two accused and the woman as 7.30 in the evening. "They had a bit of a party with drink." said witness. “Wright answered the door to a visitor and they were loading up the taxi with parcels. I don’t know who was carrying the goods to the car.” Witness said that Wright had boarded at the house. '“■*, bout o’clock somebody entered the house through a bedroom window ” said witness. “I heard something heavy being taken out and the two doors of the taxi were slammed. In the morning my hat and coat were gone from the hall. I asked Wright for my hat and coat next morning. 1 said. ‘Perhaps you can bring back the parrot as well.’ ” SETTING UP A HOME According to Valeria Vovaird, owner of the house, beer bottles were strewn all over the floor and several things were missing. Some of the missing articles had been given witness by the accused Wright and members of his family. Others were her own. Witness admitted that, following a quarrel, she had told Wright to get out and take his things with him. Many of the articles were for the time when she and Wright would be able to set up a home together. The police produced a statement made by Chalmers. The man stated that Wright had told him that he had decided to clear out from his lodgings in Great North Road. Chalmers had then driven him round to the house where they had collected his luggage. Chalmers said that he had been given the parrot by Wright. Wright had been slightly under the influence of liquor. A statement was also produced by Wright, who denied that he had any knowledge of the hat and coat, or the parrot. Warning Chalmers to be more careful in the future, the magistrate dismissed the charges against both men. An order was made restoring the parrot to its owners.