BOYS' ESCAPADE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 60, 5 September 1907, Page 2

BOYS' ESCAPADE.

EMULATING NED KELLY. The lads implicated recently in what was considered to be the nucleus of a miniature "Ned Kelly" escapade figured in the Police Court yesterday morning. It will be remembered that on the miserably wet afternoon of .Sunday, August 18th, Mr Win. llealy missed his horse and trap from the hospital gate, and found that some boys had "taken French leave" of his property. ifc took the driver along to the police station. There were in the vehicle at the time a gun and some provisions. The lad was examined by the police, and told the story that he didn't know his companion's names, neither did he know where the gun came from, though he understood the other boys owned it. This was the boy, Albert Wooller, . just under fourteen years of age, who was charged yesterday with breaking and entering the premises of H. C. Evans in Devon street on August 18th last, and committing a theft. Sergeant Haddrell prosecuted, and Mr Quilliaiu appeared for the accused. The Magistrate suggested that as breaking and entering was an indictable offence, it might answer the purpose to reduce the charge to one of theft. Sergeant Haddrell said that though the lad was charged with only one particular offence a scries might have been brought. Mr Quilliam: Charges of dishonesty? Sergeant Haddrell: Well, he cleared off with a man's horse and trap The S.M.: That's trespass, not theft. Mr Quilliam: A boy's escapade. The Sergeant consented to amend the charge, at the same time remarking on the ingenuity displayed in committing the theft and that the lad had at the police station given an account of himself that was quite at variance with the truth. Henry C. Evans, bootmaker, identified the gun produced as his property, and stated that he missed it on Saturady morning, August 17th. It had evidently been stolen by someone entering the shop by the back window, as the window was open, and there were footmarks there He saw the accused during that day, and asked him if he knew anything about the theft. The question was evaded somewhat, but the boy informed hi in that he thought he could get the gun and return it by Monday. The witness told him that if he would do that he would not go to the police about it. In answer to Mr Quilliam, the witness said he had had the accused in his emplay. He was very honest and obliging. He knew that the gun was often used by young men during his business hours, but didn't know that it had been customary for all the errand-boys in the neighborhood to congregate at the back of his shop for rifle-practice during , witness' lunch hour, when Wooller was left at the shop. The next witness was a little chap named Henrichs, twelve years old, and his story was that he had met the ae- ; cused"and another boy, Bell, outside Callaghan's office. Wooller said, "I've got a surprise for you," and took them up the Criterion Hotel right-of-way, which gave access to the back of Mr Evans' shop. Wooller said lie was going to get a gun, and went off, instructing the ■ witness to watch, and to whistle if anyone approached. He heard a window [ rattle, the accused shortly afterwards, appeared with the gun, and they all left, going up through the coal yard at the rear to Wooller's home, where they : "planted" the gun in the hedge. Bell carried the gun for part of the distance. On the Sunday afternoon he saw | Wooller near the Hospital, shooting at 1 birds with the same gun. He went for a drive with the accused, and they were all brought back to town by a man who followed them. To Mr Quilliam: The policeman who ■ examined him on the Monday told him I he need not fear if he told everything about Wooller. There was a boy Kirby with them for a while on the Sunday. He was supposed to take the trap back to town when they got some distance along the road. Wooller was driving. Mr Quilliam: How many suits did you have on? Witness: One. Hadn't you been home for more . clothes?— No. Weren't you going to the ranges to shoot wild pigs?— Yes. How many suits did Bell have on?— One.

Clifford Bell, thirteen years of age, toltl a ready story that he had gone to Henrichs' place on the Friday night, and with young Henrichs met Wooller outside Sykes's. He corroborated the evidence regarding the manner of the theft, saying that he saw Wooller enter by the window, and he, with Henrichs, kept watch, On the Sunday afternoon lie and the previous witness went to Woollcr's house for him, and the lad's mother said they would find him up the Franldey road. They found him at the tannery, in a shed, witli the gun. Coining hack Wooller found a trap near the Hospital, and they went for a drive.

To Mr Quilliam: He had never seen the gun before, and never handled it before Friday. He carried it then. Wooller mentioned that they must get back before Monday, as he had to return the gun. To the S.M.: They had previously arranged amongst themselves .to take the gun, and he knew quite well that they were doing wrong. Moreover, as far as he was concerned, he had had no intention of returning the gun, and didn't believe Wooller intended to return it, either. Mr FiUherbert said he didn't want to hear about Wooller. He considered they were all implicated, one as much as the other. Bell repeated that he had fully intended to steal the gun. Mr Quilliam: You've got the -wrong boy, Sergeant. The witness continued his story, in answer to the Magistrate, and said their intention was to keep the gun amongst themselves, and had on more than one occasion discussed the theft of it before they actually got it. Mr Healy gave evidence of the boya alcing the trap, and of his handing the lad Wooller over to the police. The gun was in the trap. The Magistrate remarked that Mr Healy had no right to do that, and was laying himself open to prosecution for vrongful arrest.

Constable O'Halloran stated that when brought to the police station Wooller had given his name as James Thomas Dixon, the son of James, Dixon, a farner on the l*Yankley road. Mr Quilliam submitted that there had been no evidence that the boy had intended to permanently deprive the wner of the gun of it's use. The evidence, in fact, was to the contrary. This was a boyish freak. Three boys decided to shoot birds, and set out" to get a gun. On the day after removing it the accused had promised to return the gun on Monday, and evidently took that jas permission to retain it till then. The ! Bench could not convict upon the evi- I deuce of the two lads who were admit-

tedly accomplices, for their story'was not supported by other evidence. It

was quite clear that when the police picked on one boy, the others knew on which side their bread was buttered; hence their desire to incriminate the accused.

In answer to the Magistrate, the accused said he had intended to return lie gun to its owner. His Worship, in giving judgment, said

here was no evidence that the boy intended to permanently deprive the owir of the use of the gun, which was not ery carefully kept, and seemed to have

known it was wrong to take the gun without permission He was not pleased with the altitude of the other boys. Brfl had admitted a criminal

intention, and had he been charged the I result might have been different. He didn't like to see boys who were mates or accomplices acting in a sneaky way like this and trying to make a scapegoat of Wooller, and he did not think

they had told the truth. At the same time he did not believe Bell really knew what stealing was. The case* would be dismissed.