MYSTERY DEEPENS.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 935, 30 September 1910, Page 5

MYSTERY DEEPENS.

TUCKWELL CASE. FRESH EVIDENCE TO-MORROW. THE 1 FAMILY'S VIEWPOINT. The' Tuckwell will case, was further investigated before Mr. Justice Cooper, sitting in Banco yesterday. The' ultimate object;at the proceedings, which' have •again and' again been renewed during several- -years past, is 'to . decide whether; George Tuckwell, son of the late' Richard Tuckwell,. .of. Wellington, should or should not bo presumed to be dead. If the Court answers that Question in' the affirmative a sum of money held for him by the Public Trustee under the will of his late father will' bo divided among other members of the family. The money .now amounts to' about .£BOO. The Court last February made a provisional order presuming that George Tuckwell died within seven years alter 1884. This order •was subsequently cancelled on' account of the coming forward of Robert; Morton Gillespie with evidence of having - met George Tuckwell at Cobar, New: South Wales, in 1900 and 1901. An Affidavit giving; details in this conneotion was sworn by Gillespie, and he: appeared in court for examination last Wednesday. The examination lasted all day, andi.was not; : then concluded, but before the Court rose, counsellor the relatives of George Tuckwell absolutely withdrew; accusations' contained 1 in- certain affidavits to the effect that. Gillespie-had .tried to person-.: ato George'Tuckwell; and had; forged his 'signature, .with',-a view to obtaining the., money due to. tho latter. ' . When the case was resumed yesterday morning,; Mr. F. E.' Petherick, who appeared for ;the-.Tuckwell family,' 7 continued his cross-examination of - Gillespie. The-Public Trustee was again represented by Mr. E. Stafford, and Robert Morton' Gillespie by Mr. A. Blair. /

Another, Imputation Withdrawn. . | During the morning reference was made to, an . affidavit of. Archer' Tuckwell, stat- . ing'" that the members, of the' Gillespie, family had-'had' many; opportunities v of : ; familiarising .themselves;,with, the hand,writing of .George Tuckwill,;.and that de-. ponent believed a conveyance of property at Kaiwarra- ' dated;' .1893, and* signet! ''George Tuckwell" was a forgery. ; - His Honour pointed out that these two . statements, coming closj together and also near to a mention .of , George 1 Gillespie, were naturally read,; and indeed had. been read by himself, as an imputation that George Gillespie''had committed'- for--- ■ gery. The inference:was that-■ fraud had' been committed, and that as part of thai; fraud Mr.; Quick, solicitor, of Wellington, . - had-been persuaded to send ,£SO to someone iri-Australia pretending : to. be/George Tuckwell,'.and that -a-.fo'rged - conveyance : ,had.-.be«n sent,;back.- "His Honour would, ■'not say . that that' inference was intended, but if not, the affidavit was unfortunately worded. i Mr.' Petherick said.' the; only object -in preparing the; affidavits was to place-be-, fore; the. Court-, all the information possible. Ho. withdrew /any imputation "of; forgery 'or any impropriety of conduct "in regard io.;George; Gillespie.,;: He had seen George . Gillespie,'-and; did not'think '. he Jivoiild be capable of such conduct.' He had'on tho previous''day. withdrawn'similiir inferences--,against ;• R. M."'Gillespie. . His Honour: -If George Tuckwell;was' aliv© in .1893, -as Mr. Petherick seemed to; think yesterday,, must' have .been 'the case, 'it was probacy '; George Tuckwell ' who signed that-conveyance. The Insurance Policy.

At the request, of Mr. Petherick, Mr. A;: de B. Brandon, solicitor, handed up to his Honour' an insurance policy in the' .name 'of George Tuckwell. : Mr. Brandon -said - the 'policy;' h'ad been 1 in'. his possession . ever since 1893 on behalf of a client.- It formed part of the :title-deeds: .of property at ICaiwarra and was attached :td- a: conveyance, of,'the. i. v'tContinning-- his,: e3camiiiatiotf v 6f ; Gilles-. pie,'Mr;-Petherick asked" if/ the' 1 witness 1 knew, what' would have, becoiiie : of..the money :due;to. George Tuckwell under the •will'vif .Tuckwell 'had': ; got'-it."'': : ' Witness: I believe Mrs. Auty (Tuckwell's sister) would have 'got it. , Mr. .Petherick:;Then did he : not'show some'interest ; in' it ?-rI, 'don't' think'-so.' Mrs. Auty' was-the i only member of the ' family ho seemed to take . any interest

m. v, Concluding his examination, Mr.-Peth-:erick,asked whether- the T witness -did -not' even now;.think- that the matt he met at Cobar was an imposter. ' ; V; ■ Witness: I would bo quite prepared to admit that he was an; imposter,. if. you : can explain; hpw. he . tallied with'-the. deascription', sent by his brother, i . " Mr. Stafford asked the witness whether tho. description referred- to was sufficient," ,in face of other evidenco, to ' assure him: 'tbit : the man he met-was the real .George . Tuckwell. Counsel' urged the' iiriprobability/of Tuckwell leaving the .money' unclaimed. - ■ •-; : Witness still held to his view that : in face ,of the' description;;of~ George: Tuckwell.he could not suppose ith'e man; he'met to bo anyone ' : - A Telegram to the Judge. His Honour stated that a telegram had just been handed to'him. It was as follows:— •'• _Am forwardjng statement- regarding • . .George Tuckwell in New South Wales, ' 1901.—M. Walker. .; ■; "That shows," said he Honour, "that the 1 more publicity is given to this base, -the' more light we get upon it. I do not know who.is the Bender.of; the,telegram.", .: ■ Gillespie's Costs. ¥ r ;i said he wbuld. like to pointout that all. that Gillespie had had to do with the Tuckwell family was that he .save some information , personally to . the ruokwell s. in .Wellington, after he came pack from Australia.- .Counsel also wished to inquire., as to Gillespie's costs. said-he had already ordered tnat wliespie s. expenses in coming down from; the Auckland, district to give evidence should bo paid out of the estate by the Public, Trustee. He did. not see how he could certify expenses of counsel 1 for Gillespie. ■' • Asked .by his Honour whether he now went.-so.;lar^'as'-.to; admit; the truth of , Gillespio s-affidavit. . Mr. Peth'erick: I admit that he thought , a true affidavit, but . not true statements in it'were really 'His Honour said ho would reserve the question of costs of',counsel.for Gillespie tit. was, of course, not usual to allow costs for a counsel for a witness. That Policy Again. \ -wlfcJPeaerick.'said he wished to ball Mr. W. H. Quick, solicitor, as to the insurance policy, but his Honour said he was quite satisfied' with Mr.. Brandon's statement, that the policy had been in his possession ever since 1893.

. Arthur, H. Hamilton, clerk in the' Government Life Insurance Office, Wellington, said there was not, in the office; any record of any other polioy'in the name of George Tuckwell, exoept that in the Court, which was issued in 1879, and numbered. 11,986. There was no record of any duplicate. - The policy lapsed on May 15, 1881, for want of payment of premiums. The Tuckwells and tho Gillespies. Mr. Pethorick: I 'would' like to say that T withdraw any charges against Robert Morton Gillespie, but in view of the discrepancy in his evidence in regard to the insurance polioy, this ia not an absolute withdrawal. I withdraw any suggestion, if there was any, of complicity on his part in forgery in 1893. I also withdraw any_ suggestion,' if there was any, of conspiracy on his ,part; in 1901, merely : adding that I consider that he wasdeceivcd by an impostor. So far as we may have hurt the feelings of George Gillespie, or Robert Morton Gillespie, I desire, on behalf of the Tuckwell family, to express regret. They had no alternative by. which they could have avoided the course taken. They, had no desire.to injure either . Robert ; Gillespie , or his brother, but only to put before the Court ail the information .they could get, and let the Court draw its own infer* ences. Information has tome to hand from time to time that has thrown a vivid light on the case.; Had we had the information sooner, the affidavits, would have taken a different shape. . Costs to the Estate. His Honour said hie would adjourn the further hearing until-Saturday morning. The information' mentioned "in the

telegram from Auckland . should arrive on the morrow. "It may be," continued his Honour, "that sufficient information may come to hand to show that George Tuckwell really was the man in Wrightville in 1901. There is a good deal of evidence that supports that, and a good deal that may be argued against it. 16 is clear that the publicity, the case is' receiving 'has produced Gillespie, and . is the: cause of producing someone else.' Mr. Stafford: It may produce another olaimant. It is certainly producing one thing, your Honour, and that is costs! (Laughter.) . . ' His Honour (to Air. Petherick): You have got to establish a right to this money. '• _ '•• ■ Mr. .Petherick: Our whole object is not to . establish a claim to the money, but to get George Tuckwell, if we can. The family is only too anxious to' get him. Counsel also pointed out that the interest on the money had been accumulating since the order of the Court in 1905. : His Honour: Yes, and the interest will probably amount to enough to pay the costs. . . ' The case, was adjourned until 10.30 a.m. , to-morrow; ' - ,