The Boreham Brothers

War does many things to many pople.  

The off-duty drinking and carousing of soldiers coming out of the line served many functions. It was a celebration of survival and a way to blot out the visions of what machine guns and high explosive can do to the human body.  A soldier could forget what he had seen, stave off the realisation that it was mere luck that chose another and not him, push away the feeling that the next visit to the Front Line could be the last.

For many soldiers, coming home did not remove the memories, the visions of their mates, the fear of the metal storm and the exultation of surviving it.  The celebration of survival and blotting out of the memories through drinking continued after the was was over.  For many men, the war never ended.

The Boreham brotherss grew up in Clark St, Dunedin - not a luxurious area of town.  Stephen was born in 1890, Harold in 1895.  Their father was the champion draughts player for Australasia.

OFF TO THE FRONT. 

The friends and relations of Mr Harold Boreham entertained him at a social held at his sister's residence, Richardson street, St. Kilda, last evening. During an interval in the programme Trooper Richardson took the opportunity of presenting trooper Boreham on behalf of his friends and relatives with a wristlet watch and patent shaving outfit. Trooper Richardson said it afforded him great pleasure to present Trooper Boreham with this small token of the esteem of his friends, who trusted he would return safely after the enemies of civilisation had been as soundly whipped on the battlefield as Trooper Boreham's father had whipped the Australian draughts players. Some recitations, and the usual indoor games made an enjoyable social evening.  -Evening Star, 24/2/1916.

Harold turned out not to be a "soldier's soldier."  His conduct sheet had a number of entries which would indicate that he was a little careless - losing a mess tin, not carrying enough ammunition in the field, overstaying leave, absent from billets.  But, when the time came, he was to show that he had the right stuff:

Private Harold Boreham, who has been awarded the D.C.M., is the youngest son of Mr J. A. Boreham, champion draughts player of Australasia. Private Boreham was born in Oamaru, and educated at the Kaikorai School and the Otago Boys' High School. He was under 20 when he enlisted and left with the 10th Reinforcement. He was very popular in sporting circles, representing Otago in the Southland Boxing Championships, where he won a gold medal.  -Sun, 18/2/1918.

Harold's DCM was won on January 25th, 1918, during a quiet period of the War with both sides waiting for Spring and the coming German offensive.  They sent periodic patrols out to keep the other side on their toes and also to take prisoners in order to ascertain who they were facing - and any other information they could extract.  The following is the official citation for Harold's award:

Awarded Distinguished Conduct Medal

For acts of gallantry in the field.

For conspicuous gallantry and devotion to duty. When a number of the enemy were seen on the opposite parapet he went out with a patrol and engaged the enemy with bombs and dispersed them. He pursued them as they returned and captured a prisoner. By his initiative, pluck and gallant conduct he obtained valuable information and set a splendid example to his comrades.

On March 23rd, the German offensive opened, and the weight of it was felt by the Otago Regiment.  Harold Boreham felt the weight personally, being wounded five days later.  Multiple gunshot wounds to the left shoulder and arm are noted in his service records.  In July of 1918 he was marked as unfit for further service and sent home.

PRESENTATION OF MEDALS

BY MINISTER OF DEFENCE 

TO-MORROW AFTERNOON. 

To-morrow afternoon, at 2.30, the Minister of Defence (Sir James Allen) will present medals to a number of soldiers and next of kin at the Drill Hall, Kensington. The general public are invited to be present, and returned soldiers are given permission to wear uniform. Local Territorials will also be present. Following is a list of the soldiers or next of kin to receive decorations 

——D.C.M.— Lance-corporal Harold Boreham, 44 Richardson street, St. Kilda;  -Evening Star, 2/5/1919.

BRAVE DEEDS

PRESENTATION OF DECORATIONS WON IN THE FIELD. 

"For bravery," "Gallant conduct," "Coolness and courage" were a few of the phrases describing the deeds of the men who were presented with decorations by the Minister of Defence at the Drill Hall on Saturday afternoon. And after "Killed in action" followed the reading of a brave man's action, and the next of kin stepped up to receive the medal. One D.C.M. was given to Lance-corporal Harold Boreham, of Dunedin, who was often associated in action with Richard Travis, V.C. 

There was a large muster of Territorials and Cadets, and the band of the 4th (Otago) Regiment was present. Several hundred of the public, including some returned soldiers, lined the balcony that extends round the hall. On arrival Sir James Allen inspected the parade. 

Each man, as his name was called, stepped up on the platform, and had his medal pinned on by Sir James. The decorations of those killed were handed to the next of kin. 

The Minister said he had little to say. There were a large number of decorations to be presented that afternoon, and these had been won for bravery and distinguished service in the field. Some of the men were present to receive their own decorations, but others would never come back. He admired the courage of the next of kin of those men to come there. To the Territorials and Senior Cadets he would say that they should mark an occasion like that in their memory. He hoped they would never have to go through the trials and difficulties and perils other men had to face during the last four or five years. Had they to do so, he knew they would uphold the honor of the country and uphold the traditions which New Zealanders had made during the war. 

Sir James called for three cheers for the men who had been decorated, and those who had received medals won by their kinsmen, and these were given heartily. A cup won by Private J. Tunnage, of the Coast Defence Regiment, was also presented by Sir James. 

The parade state was as follows: Headquarters Staff: Two colonels, one lieutenant-colonel, three majors, two captains; total, 8. New Zealand Permanent Staff: Two majors, one lieutenant, one warrant officer, seven sergeant-majors; total. 11. B Battery N.Z.P.A.: One lieutenant, one sergeant-major, one corporal, 11 rank and file; total, 14. No. 2 Field Engineers: One sergeant-major, one sergeant, one bugler, 14 rank and file; total, 17. Divisional Signal Company: One sergeant, two corporals, six rank and file; total, 9. P. and T. Corps: One captain, two sergeants, two corporals, 12 rank and file; total, 17. Fourth Otago Regiment: One lieutenant, two sergeants, two corporals, 17 rank and file: total, 22. Coast Defence Detachment: Two captains, four sergeants, three corporals, 29 rank and file; total, 58. Army Service Corps: One captain, one sergeant-major, one sergeant, two corporals, two buglers, 16 rank and file: total, 23. No. 2 Field Ambulance: One major, two rank and file: total, 3. Senior Cadets: One captain, six lieutenants, 25 sergeants, 25 corporals, 543 rank and file; total, 598. Returned Soldiers: One lieutenant-colonel, two majors, one captain, one sergeant-major, two sergeants. 20 rank and file; total, 27. Grand total, 765.   -Evening Star, 5/5/1919.

Harold Boreham was indeed associated with Dick Travis, VC, DCM, MM, Croix de Guerre (Belg.) - "King of No-man's-land."  The Official History of the Otago Regiment includes him in its chapter on Travis:

"When the Regiment headed north again and settled down in Flanders for the winter he was promoted Sergeant, and given command of the sniping and observing organisation of the 2nd Battalion, and in that capacity gathered round him a small band of men whose special function was night patrolling of No Man's Land and of enemy territory generally. These men were carefully chosen, and being closely associated with Sergt. Travis in many of his exploits, it is fitting that the names of the original members should be recorded. They were Ptes. T. Barber, H. Boreham, A. Campbell, J. McGregor, J. Nicholson, T. Powelly, and R. Fitzgerald. Mainly by reason of casualties the personnel of the party changed from time to time; but so long as the organisation continued Travis remained the master-hand and the directing mind. Of PAGE 319this party Nicholson, a very worthy fellow, was killed prior to the Messines Battle when on the point of leading out a raiding party; Barber was killed at Passchendaele; and Clydesdale, who joined later, was also killed. Other men were Miller, Macdonald, and G. Fitzgerald; all of the right mettle and always ready for any adventure."

After action with Dick Travis and the "Travis Gang," in the Great War trenches, an arm full of metal and survival of same, civilian life could be nothing but an anticlimax for Harold.  It did, however, occasionally have its distractions for a man of action.

Police Court

A CHARGE DISMISSED. 

The case against Harold Boreham of wilfully breaking a pane of glass valued at £7 17s 6d, the property of the Dunedin Drapery Supply Company, was continued, defendant having previously pleaded not guilty. Sub-inspector Murray prosecuted, and Mr B. S. Irwin defended. 

Constable O’Connor said that a fire occurred in the shop at about 8.20 on March 10, and when he arrived on the scene ho saw Boreham break the window. Boreham told witness he broke the window, but could not get in on account of the smoke. 

Mr Irwin said Boreham was walking along the street with a girl cousin in the direction of the Grand Pictures, when he noticed the fire in the shop. Two men were trying to open the iron gate. Boreham opened the gate at once, and, stepping in, broke the window with the idea of getting in to put out the fire. On several previous occasions accused had put out fires, and when quite young had saved a horse from a burning stable. He also won the D.C.M. at the front. Counsel submitted that, even if accused had committed an error of judgment, he should be discharged. Harold Boreham, in evidence, said his intention in breaking the window was to get in to put out the fire. Evidence was also given by Adelaide Boreham and Jas. Alfred Boreham. His Worship said the question was whether it was a malicious act on the part of the accused or whether, on the outbreak of fire, he did something to combat the flames. The question whether it was a judicious act did not need to enter into the case. It seemed that the defendant committed an act which he thought was a proper one. The information would be dismissed. 

MISTAKEN IDENTITY. 

Harold Boreham, defendant in the previous case, was further charged with being on the premises of the Metropolitan Hotel after closing hours. Defendant pleaded not guilty. Constable O’Connell said that at about ten past 8 on March 10 he saw accused come out of the side door of the Metropolitan Hotel. Accused pulled his cap over his forehead and ran up Maclaggan street. Witness said; “It’s all right, Boreham; I’ll see you later.’’ Witness knew Boreham well, and could not possibly make a mistake. Later he saw accused at the fire at the Drapery Supply Co., at the Empire Buildings, where, upon being charged with being in the hotel, Boreham said the constable had made a mistake. The suit Borcham was wearing was of a brown color, and he had a grey cap. Mr Irwin said the defence was that a genuine mistake had been made. It was not suggested that the constable had a grudge against Boreham, or that the constable was telling anything but what he believed to be the truth. Boreham said he went from home with his father and a girl cousin. The girl and he walked as far as the European Hotel and then back towards the Grand Pictures. He was not in Maclaggan street at all that night, and had not been in the Metropolitan Hotel for four or five months. From the fire he went and got his father, and went to the police station. He was wearing the dark suit he had on at present. Adelaide Boreham said that between 7.25 and 7.50 she left home in company with Harold Boreham and his father. At the foot of Rattray street Mr Boreham left them, and they went as far as the European Hotel, where she went in for five minutes to see a relative. Then they came along Princes street to the fire. Harold was with her all the evening. James Alfred Boreham said they left home about half-past 7. He left his son and his niece at the corner of Rattray street, and saw them later at the Athenaeum. From there they went to the police station. His son was wearing the same clothes he had on to-day. His Worship said the constable was confident that Boreham was the man he saw corning out of the hotel, and circumstances were such that there should not have been much room for mistake. The question had been raised as to the color of the suit accused was wearing, and this threw some doubt on the constable's infallibility on the question of identification. On the other hand, there was the evidence of accused himself and his girl cousin. The girl had given her evidence in a very fair manner, and he was not prepared to say that both she and Boreham were lying. Accused was entitled to have the information dismissed.   -Evening Star, 8/4/1921.

Police Court

AFTER HOURS. 

For being found on the of the Gladstone Hotel after hours, John Taylor, who did not appear, was fined 40s, with costs. Harold Boreham, charged with a similar offence, pleaded not guilty, and said he went to the hotel to see if he had left his football “togs” there. —After hearing Constable O’Connell, His Worship said there was no evidence in this case of liquor having been asked for, but in these cases a great many curious excuses were given. Defendant would be fined 20s, with costs.  -Evening Star, 1/8/1921.

Harold appeared a number of times in the 1920s for drunkenness, each appearance much the same, but this is a notable one.

POLICE COURT

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 21. (Before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M.) 

THE FORGOTTEN SONG. 

Harold Boreham pleaded not guilty to a charge of drunkenness, but his explanation of his conduct on Saturday evening was not accepted by the magistrate, who inflicted a 20s fine. 

Constable Jenney’s story was to the effect that, he had come upon Boreham about 7.15 p.m. outside the Grand Hotel. He was sitting on the footpath singing. Witness told him to go away, hut he refused, and was arrested for drunkenness. 

Defendant: What was I singing?.—I couldn’t say what the song was. 

You ought to know; it’s your business to remember. What tune was it? 

His Worship: It is not always possible to recognise a song, you know. 

The constable added that he heard a noise coming from defendant, also a lot of words, but he could not remember what was sung or said. Defendant was certainly drunk. 

Senior-sergeant Quartermain, who saw defendant half an hour after he was brought in, said Boreham was silly drunk then. 

Defendant, sworn, said he had been to a picnic, at which he had played football. When the policeman came along witness was showing a friend named Paterson how he had been collared during the game. The explanation involved sitting down for a moment and getting up again. He did not sing, and all the drink he had that day was three whiskies and two long beers at the picnic. 

The Magistrate said there was no doubt defendant bad been drunk. He had been before the court several times before, “Why don’t you lake out a prohibition order, Boreham?” he asked. 

Defendant said he did not think it necessary. 

His Worship; Very well. Fined 20s, in default twenty-four hours’ imprisonment.  -Evening Star, 21/2/1927.

The case of Harold's brother, Stephen, is not one of being affected by the war.  Stephen stayed at home yet joined his brother's peacetime exploits with gusto.  Perhaps he felt that his brother deserved his company, perhaps it was just a good excuse to drink.  With only the newspapers to go on,  it is impossible to say.

UNSATISFACTORY EVIDENCE

MAGISTRATE DISMISSES CASE 

CHARGE OF DISORDERLY BEHAVIOUR 

Trouble in the Princess Theatre on July 12 led to the appearance of Harold Boreham and Stephen Boreham at the City Police Court to-day charged with behaving in a disorderly manner. Both pleaded not guilty, and were represented by Mr C. J. L. White. 

Sub-inspector Fahey said that the facts were that about 10 p.m. on the date in question Constable Feeley was called to the Princess Theatre, where one of the attendants asked to have the defendants removed, as they had been smoking and creating a disturbance. The defendant Stephen Boreham said: “Mind you own .... business," and they would not move themselves. However, with a little tact the constable got both men away from tho theatre. Then by the Arcade they commenced to call out: “The police are a lot of .... ....” Later both men were told to move on by a constable, whom they told to “go to ...."

Charles William Chapman said that on July 12 last he was doorkeeper at the Princess Theatre. He knew both defendants by sight. He went to the accused Harold Boreham and asked him to put his cigarette out. Accused used threatening language, and both of them threatened to throw him downstairs. Constable Feeley had considerable trouble in getting the accused out. 

Mr White: Didn’t the accused ask you to feel the cigarette to make sure that it was out? 

Witness: The cigarette was alight. 

Mr White: And yet he asked you to feel the cigarette to see that it was cold?

Roy McGregor Walker, employed in the theatre, said he remembered the two accused coining in shortly after the interval. The previous witness complained about the conduct of the two accused, and witness went to Stephen and told him to get out. The constable arrived on the scene, and one of the accused — witness thought it was Stephen — threatened to put the constable over the gallery. Eventually, however, they went out, though they argued on the way down the stairs that they had done nothing for which they should be put out. When the accused said they would throw the constable over the gallery it could be heard in the back row.

Mr White: “It’s quite a frequent occurrence to have a disturbance at the theatre — catcalls and so forth?” 

—“ It is sometimes the case on a Saturday night.”

To Mr White: Both men gave witness the impression that they were laboring under an injustice. Stephen did not have a cigarette when seen by witness.

Constable Feeley said that on July 12 last he was called to the Princess Theatre at 10 o’clock on account of complaints regarding Harold Boreham’s conduct. Harold Boreham had a cigarette in his mouth, and the constable told him he had been asked to get him to leave the theatre. Harold seemed hostile, as also did Stephen when he joined his brother. Harold threatened to throw witness over the gallery, but after great persuasion he managed to get the accused to leave the theatre. When witness was passing by the theatre Harold threw his hat in the air and said: “They’re all a lot of ....” Then later, at Jacobs’s corner, witness ordered them to clear the footpath. Stephen went into the road and wanted to fight witness, but after some time he cooled down. Both were under the influence of liquor, but not drunk enough to be arrested. 

To Mr White; A gentleman would leave the theatre if he were requested to do so.

Mr White: I doubt if I would, constable.

The Magistrate: Well, Mr White! 

To Mr White: The witness Chapman was a policeman’s son.

Mr White submitted that the case should be dismissed. The witness Chapman was a policeman’s son, and apparently he was anxious to enforce law and order, and when he had an argument with the accused he foolishly ran down and got the police. He submitted that if Walker had been there himself there would have been no prosecution. It seemed an extraordinary thing that the police had not taken proceedings earlier, and counsel submitted that under the circumstances the case should be dismissed as trivial under the J.P.s Act.

The Magistrate said that the evidence of the main witness was so extremely unsatisfactory that he found it difficult to deal with the matter. The evidence showed that both defendants had been a nuisance and should have got out when requested. However, the witness Chapman’s evidence was unsatisfactory, and though it was honestly given it had been, very muddled, and he did not wish to enter a conviction against the accused. The charges were dismissed, subject to the payment of 23s each. Addressing the accused, the Magistrate said that if they again came before the court on a similar charge they would receive little consideration.  -Evening Star, 26/7/1928.

REFUSAL TO MOVE ON

DISTURBANCE AT THE FOUNTAIN

"WHO DREW THE CROWD?" 

“Surely a man under the British flag is allowed a bit of freedom in life without being bounced off the street like that,” declared Stephen William Lancelot Boreham in the Police Court this morning, when he and Harold Boreham were each charged with behaving in a disorderly manner in Princes street on the evening of August 25.

Each defendant pleaded not guilty. Constable Smyth stated that at about 8.55 on the evening of August 25 he saw the two defendants standing between the Fountain and the Bank of New Zealand corner, in Princes street. Between twenty and thirty men were standing around at the time, and the defendants were calling out to the crowd in a loud voice. They were both under the influence of liquor. Witness went up to them and asked them to stop their noise, but they refused to do so. He then asked them to move on, and this time they shouted at the top of their voices that they would not move on. The crowd was gathering all the time, and they still refused to move on; in fact, pedestrians travelling between the bank and the Wentworth were forced to walk out into tho lino of motor cars.

Each of the defendants took advantage of the opportunity to question the constable, Stephen Boreham stating that the sergeant at the watchhouse did not seem to think they were drunk and disorderly, and so let them go home. The incidents at the Fountain were again threshed out, Stephen Boreham maintaining that when the constable put him into the taxi he slammed the door on his foot.

“Surely a man under the British Flag is allowed is allowed a bit of freedom in life without being bounced off the street like that,” continued defendant.

Harold Boreham asked the constable why he had pushed another chap into him. Also, there was a little discussion as to who spoke in answer to the constable.

"It was a jumble-up. You could not tell who was talking." declared Constable Smyth. The Magistrate: “Who drew the crowd there?”

Constable Smyth; “These two men, your Worship. Stephen Boreham had a paper in his hand, and he was shouting as if he were reading from it.” Stephen Boreham maintained that it was the Salvation Army that had drawn the crowd, which had not had time to disperse. “I generally go to listen to the Army there on a Saturday night,” he continued. “We were standing there when the constable came along in an officious manner, bumped a chap into Harold, and said to me: "You had better go home, too." The constable dragged me about and tried to make out I was drunk. There was no resistance, or he wouldn’t have got one of us away, let alone two.” Senior-sergeant Quartermain: “Were you haranguing the crowd?” Stephen Boreham: “No. The constable was rather officious; that’s all,” Harold Boreham: “If our name hadn’t been Boreham we wouldn’t have been arrested.”

Stephen Boreham: “That’s a moral.”

The Magistrate said he saw no reason to question the constable’s evidence. If the defendants had been wise men they would have gone home when it was suggested that they should. Each defendant would be convicted and fined 20s and costs.  -Evening Star, 10/9/1928.

Into the 30s, the arrests continued.  The Borehams claimed a degree of persecution from the police - this author's opinion is that the police were indeed familiar with them and had a degree of sympathy for a man who was permanently affected by his war experiences.

Police Court

CONVICTED AND DISCHARGED. 

“If he is prohibited we are prepared to let it go at that,” said Senior-sergeant Quartermain, when Harold Boreham appeared on charges of being found drunk, and of being found unlawfully on licensed premises. “I think the time has come tor a prohibition order to be taken out,” remarked the magistrate, as he convicted and discharged the defendant on each charge,  conditional on an order being taken out.  -Evening Star, 26/4/1930.

Harold Boreham pleaded guilty to a charge of behaving in a disorderly manner. Senior-sergeant Quartermam said that Boreham was under the influence of liquor on Saturday evening. He was whistling and shouting, and as he would not desist when remonstrated with was arrested. He had been in the country for twelve months. The senior sergeant considered that he had done his best to run straight and that he had been adequately punished. Boreham was convicted and discharged.   -Evening Star, 25/5/1931.

POLICE COURT

FRIDAY, MARCH 2. (Before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M.) 

DRUNKENNESS. A statutory first offender, James Thomas Shields, was convicted and discharged. 

MACLAGGAN STREET DISTURBANCE. To a charge of behaving in a disorderly manner in Maclaggan street last evening, Stephen William Lancelot Boreham pleaded. “guilty under provocation,” Thomas William Hall pleaded guilty, and Harold Boreham denied the charge. Evidence was given that a fight started in an hotel, and was carried on in the street. When Sergeant O’Shea and Constable Stillings came out of Broadway. Stephen Boreham and Hall were fighting each other, and Harold Boreham was fighting another man, who ran away and escaped arrest. 

Giving evidence, Harold Boreham denied that he was fighting the other man. He endeavoured to avoid trouble when he was struck over the mouth in the hotel. Hall followed him up the road, and caught him by the coat. Hall ‘‘lashed out” at him, and he “lashed back.” 

To Senior-sergeant MacLean Defendant denied that he knew the other man. He had not been drinking heavily. 

Hall, who was called by the defendant, said Harold Boreham had struck a blow at him, and ho had retaliated. Witness lost his head coming out of the hotel, as he was under the influence of liquor, and when he was pushed he struck out. 

Defendant attempted to cross-ex-amine his witness, but the Magistrate pointed out that he could not crossexamine his own witness. 

To Senior-sergeant MacLean, Hall said that there was not much disorderly behaviour on the street. 

Stephen Boreham gave evidence that as they were leaving the hotel Hall struck Harold, who retaliated, and Hall fought back. Witness became involved, although he was trying to be a peacemaker. His brother did not strike a blow inside the hotel. 

The Magistrate said it did not appear to matter who was fighting the other. 

“Is not a man allowed to stick up for himself in self-defence when he gets a crack?” asked Harold Boreham. 

Senior-sergeant MacLean said the Borehams were decent men, but fond of drink. They would be conferring a blessing on themselves and the community if they took out prohibition orders. 

The Magistrate: Will you take out a prohibition order? 

Stephen Boreham: Never at any price. 

Stephen Boreham and Hall were each fined 21s 3d, and Harold Boreham was fined 10s. A fortnight was allowed in which to pay.  -Evening Star, 2/3/1934.

CITY POLICE COURT

Tuesday, April 17. (Before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M.) 

DRUNKENNESS. 

Adrian Cyrus Somerset was fined 10s, in default 24 hours' imprisonment, on a charge of drunkenness. Harold Boreham pleaded not guilty to a similar charge. —After Constable Cochrane had given evidence with reference to the defendant's condition when he was arrested, Boreham said he had had a few drinks, but was not drunk. The constable had pushed him, and he had fallen, cutting his eye. —The magistrate said that the defendant would not have been arrested if he had not been under the influence of liquor. He warned Boreham that, as this would be the third time he had been convicted on charges of drunkenness during the past six months, another conviction would mean imprisonment. He was fined 20s, in default three days' imprisonment.  -Otago Daily Times, 18/4/1934.

CITY POLICE COURT

Saturday, February 2. (Before Mr J. P. Bartholomew, S.M.) 

DRUNKENNESS. 

Harold Boreham pleaded guilty to a charge of drunkenness. —Senior Sergeant Packer stated that Boreham had been released from prison on Friday, and in the evening he was found drunk. This was the second offence within six months. The magistrate imposed a fine of 20s, in default three days' imprisonment. One week was allowed in which to pay the fine.   -Otago Daily Times, 4/2/1935.

POLICE COURT

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 18. (Before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M.) 

SENT TO GAOL.

“I warned you that if you came before the court again you would be sent to gaol,” said the magistrate, when Harold Boreham admitted a charge of drunkenness. This was his fourth conviction within six months. Boreham was sentenced to a week’s imprisonment without the option.  -Evening Star, 18/2/1935.

The "Papers Past" record of Harold and Stephen Boreham continues with drunkenness, public fighting, diesorder and so on, until it ends in 1950.  Harold died aged 73 in 1969 at Monticello veterans' home and hospital.  Stephen's death, also at 73, preceded Harold's by six years - his occupation is listed as "Watersider."

Andersons Bay Cemetery, Dunedin.  DCC photo.