Rabaul Solicitor

Convicted.

Caught After “Going Bush” for Week.

(From a Special Correspondent.)

Rabaul, July 23.

THE Rabaul solicitor, F. L. Flannery, who appeared before the District Court on June 26 charged with stealing £800, the property of the Guinea Airways, Ltd., was committed to stand his trial at the Central Court, Rabaul, on July 10. Bail was allowed in two sureties: himself in £100 and Charles Booth also in £100.

When the case was called on the date set down at the Central Court, the accused did not appear, and the police immediately commenced a systematic search.

It was known that Flannery had left his home, some six miles from Rabaul along the Kokopo Road, in a car on the morning for which the trial was set down, for the Central Court; also that he had returned along the road and pro ceeded towards Kokopo. It was, how ever, not until Friday that the police discovered his car on a native road be yond the Toma country, and some thirty miles from Rabaul. The fuel had become exhausted and the car aban doned. From information received the police located Flannery the next morning, as he was about to leave a native house, and there arrested him.

On July 17, he appeared before His Honour the Chief Judge, seemingly little the worse for his week’s sojourn amongst the natives. He was, however, not equal to conducting his own case, as he had done in the lower court, and Mr. Florance appeared on his behalf, while Mr. Gerald Hogan, Crown law officer, prosecuted for the Crown.

The charge in the Central Court was one of receiving the sum of £929/15/8 on behalf of tne Guinea Airways, Ltd. on April 15, 1932, for which company at that time he was solicitor, and that he converted this money to his own use.

Evidence was given by the prosecu tion regarding the receipt of the money by the accused, and also that after a considerable time had elapsed requests were made by the company’s agent in Rabaul and his solicitor, for the pay ment of this money which had been collected by the accused. Evidence was also brought forward to prove that the accused had written out, signed and tendered a cheque for £929 which was afterwards returned from the bank marked “No Account.” The date of this last action was on March 22, 1933, and was the day previous to his being adjudicated an insolvent.

The defence brought out no evidence to mitigate the crime and His Honour, in summing up, mentioned how regret table it was to see a man of good educa tion lapsing into crime. Mention had been made by counsel for the defence of the accused’s good war record and the possibility of post-war conditions affecting highly-strung individuals. His Honour admitted that possibly the war had had a bad effect upon the accused’s

character. His conduct had been, con tinued His Honour, such as to alienate all feelings of sympathy for him, and he had, apparently, let himself go with out any regard to decency.

The accused was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment, with hard labour.

At the conclusion of the case an application was made for an order to rescind the estreating of the bail on the grounds that Mr. Charles Booth, who had entered into recognizance for the accused, had given the police every assistance in their search for the accused man at the time of his dis appearance.

After hearing evidence His Honour pointed out that only in the most exceptional cases should any regard be paid to a request for a surety to be let off the consequences of his act. In this case, Booth and the accused had been soldiers together in France, and had known each other over a period of many years.

The amount of the bail estreated was reduced from £100 to £50.