GUILTY OF STORE THEFTS

Taranaki Daily News, 29 November 1926, Page 11

GUILTY OF STORE THEFTS

FOWLER BROS. AND GRAHAM PRISON FOR THE RINGLEADERS. ONE MAN GRANTED PROBATION. Found guilty of participation in a series of thefts from various Taranaki stores, of receiving goods stolen from these stores, or of participation in thefts from a garage at Te Puke, Bay of Plenty, Ambrose Fowler, Albert Fowler, William Fowler and Albert Graham were sentenced in the Supreme Court at New Plymouth on Saturday morning by the Chief Justice (Hon. C. P. Skerrett). The punishments meted out by the judge were: Ambrose Fowler: Two years’ imprisonment with hard labour on each charge, the sentences to be concurrent. Albert Graham: Two years’ imprisonment with hard labour on each charge, the sentences to be concurrent. Albert Fowler: One year’s imprisonment with hard labour. William Fowler: Admitted to probation for two years on the statutory conditions, with such additional terms as the probation officer thinks fit. CAREERS OF THE ACCUSED. In asking the court for such clemency as it saw fit to extend, Mr. C. H. Croker, who appeared for the accused, dealt, with each of them in turn. William Fowler, he said, was a single man aged 27 years and the remarks regarding him might be applied with equal force to the other Fowlers. They were children of a very large family and were very unfortunate in their upbringing. Their father did not understand the provisions of the child labour legislation, and expected liis children to go to work at the earliest age possible. Albert passed the first standard at school and William the fourth standard, while Ambrose passed no standard at all, receiving only intermittent cduca. tion. The boys had no home life in the true sense of the word, but in spite of that up till lately they had lived honourable and respectable lives. William was a total abstainer, did not bet or gamble, and did not indulge in billiards. His offence in receiving stolen goods was not very serious, and he had partly paid for the goods he received. He certainly realised he had done wrong, hut he did Dot have the thinking capacity of the usual man. It was a case in which he thought he might justifiably ask for probation. POSITION OF ALBERT FOWLER. Touching on the offences committed by Albert Fowler, Mr. Croker said that in the Te Puke theft he actually assisted in taking the tyres and battery, but did not know until later that the clock and spotlight had been taken. He maintained that he did not break into the garage, but walked in through the door. Certainly he had one previous conviction against him, hut it was not of a serious nature. It related to the theft of a motor tyre by taking the spare of another taxi when he was engaged as a taxi-driver at Te Puke. In his case, too. counsel would ask for probation. The lapses of Albert Graham and Ambrose Fowler had been committed more in a spirit of bravado than because they were confirmed criminals, said Mr. Croker. In their own opinion they became highway robbers, and carried round with them a revolver which was found to be defective. There was more of the bravado aspect about their actions than a serious attempt to steal for booty. Graham, who was 28 years of age, was one of a family of five. He was educated in England, where he obtained the equivalent of proficiency in New Zealand. He went to the war when 16 years of age, and after serving finally in Afghanistan as a scout he was discharged from the army in 1919. He had been presented with several war medals, and had a good certificate of discharge. Mr. Dan Sullivan bad stated that he would take back into his employ such of the accused as were granted probation, said counsel in conclusion. OBSERVATIONS BY JUDGE. Ambrose Fowler and Albert Graham had pleaded guilty to eight charges of theft, said His Honour, in addressing the prisoners. It was quite clear that for six months they had systematically stolen from a number of stores. It may be that they committed the thefts in a spirit of bravado, but he saw nothing more in their actions than cold, naked theft. The breaking and entering which wire associated with the theft had come to be considered by judges as serious because they might lead to all sorts of trouble and violence, even perhaps to murder. The prisoners appeared to have taken advantage of the honesty of the people of the district and of their isolated position to adopt the role of professional burglars and embark on a career of crime. Albert Fowler was not in the same position as his brother, but there was no doubt that he was aware of the other’s misdeeds. He was mixed up in the Te Puke affair. His Honour was not prepared to admit that the accused went to the garage for any other purpose than for theft, and he saw no moral difference between going in through the door to thieve and going in by any other way.

William Fowler stood in a different position. He proposed to give him probation in order that he might be under disciplinary control, but might have an opportunity of making good. After imposing penalties as stated, the judge made an order for the return of the stolen goods to the respective owners.