SUSTENANCE FRAUD

Wairarapa Times-Age, 11 February 1939, Page 11

SUSTENANCE FRAUD

WHARF LABOURER SENT TO GAOL WORST CASE MAGISTRATE HEARD OF. (By Te’egraph—Press Association.) A.UCKLAND, February 10. “This is the worst case o£ deliberate misrepresentation to obtain sustenance that I have heard of,” said Mr F. H. Levien, S.M., in the Magistrate’s Court in sentencing a wharf labourer, Joseph Farrell, widower, aged 58, on eight charges involving excess sustenance amounting to £268 4s sd, received over

a period of seven years. Accused admitted six charges of making false statements to obtain sustenance and denied two of false pretences. Prosecuting on behalf of the Labour Department, Mr W. A. Black said accused registered for relief when the unemployment scheme began in 1931. He declared he was married and maintaining a wife and two children, and he had been in receipt of relief ever since. In October, 1936, an inquiry

officer interviewed accused about the employment of his son, and when he asked to see the boy accused made excuses. Later, he called at the Labour Bureau, saying his son had left home. Unsuccessful attempts were then made to interview accused’s wife, Mr Black continued. Accused had made statements that she and one child were still living with him, but in November, 1937, accused applied to have his classification reduced to that of a single man, explaining that his wife had left him. Supporting statements regarding the wife and children were occasionally made to the inquiry officers by the proprietress of the boardinghouse where accused lived. The matter of locating accused’? wife was subsequently handed to the police for investigation. Accused could not produce his marriage certificate, and said he was married in Napier be-

tween 1912 and 1914. He was unable tc give the whereabouts of his wife or sons or any relative who might have supplied information. As a result ol inquiries made in Napier and Auckland it was established that accused's wife died in 1918 and there were no children. In August, 1938, accused made a statement to the police that since he first registered as unemployed he had deliberately misled officers of the Labour Bureau as to his true position. "My wife died in 1918 without having children, and I did not remarry,” accused continued. “I now frankly admit that I have repeatedly supplied wrong information and told numerous lies over a period of years in trying to justify the existence of an alleged wife and child. My sole reason for doing so was to get increased benefits from the department.” Sentencing accused to a month’s imprisonment, the magistrate said he did not consider that a fine in addition to imprisonment would serve any good purpose.