LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1493, 16 July 1912, Page 2

LAW REPORTS.

APPEAL COURT.

SOLICITOR TO SHOW CAUSE MAORI WOMAN'S LOANAND HOW IT WAS DISBURSED.

The Court of Appeal was occupied yesterday with a motion to make absolute a rule nisi calling upon John Gwyncth O'C'onor Stevens, of Otnki, to show chum why his name should not be removed from the roll of solicitors for alleged professional misconduct. On the Bench were the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout), Mr. Justice Williams, Mr. Justice Edwards, Mr. Justice Cooper, aud Mr. Justice Chapman.

The Allegations. Mr. A. Gray appeared for the Law Society of the district ofWellington, and Mr. 0. X. Bcero for J. G. 0. Stevens. The allegations' of professional misconduct were in respect'of the following matters:

That on October 21, 1910, while acting ostensibly as solicitor for a Native woman, named Rangiapoa Waikari, but really in the interests of ono Sydney Robjolms East,' he (Stevens) applied to the' Public Trustee for a loan to Eangiapoa AVaikari of .£IOOO, on the security of certain land, and that he falsely-represented that the loan was required, for the. purpose of improving certain other lands, whereas the money was (as Stevens well knew) required for 'the purchase from East of a share in the patent rights of an invention." This invention was for indicating the position of sunken vessels, and was called "The Patent Automatic Wreck Recorder." Stevens, East, and one John Den tick Blaine were the patentees. Both, prior to making the application fop- the loan aud afterwards, Stevens persuaded the wopian Rang.ia.poa AVaikari to purchase the sharein the patent from East, and to mortpago her land for that purpose, well knowing that, she had, no independent advice, and tvns not competent to act for herself in the matter. By reason of this persuasion, East obtained .£BOO from her out of the procosds of the loon. It appeared from the affidavit * filed tint the Public Trusted would not have granted the loan if the purpose for which the money was to he used had been correctly stated in the application.

The Patent In opening the case, Mr. Gray explained that East, who was a .clerk in the "Native"-Lund Court office, wished to obtain money to make a trip to England to push "The Patent Automatic Wreck Recorder" and another - patent. Ho approached the woman Rangiapoa, who did not thoroughly' understand English, and told her that the patent would prove ■valuable.- Believing (hat there was a fortuno in it, she arranged to meet East ami Stevens at the Native Land Court office in-Wellington. She- wiis accompanied by a relative, Richmond Davies, a half-caste licensed interpreter. Her version •of the mce-ttn. 1 * was that it was for the' purpose of discussing ways ami means by which she could raise money to buy a. share in tho patent. Stevens, on the'other Jmnd, declared that he knew nothing of this proposal, and that ho was •asked to bo present as the. woman wished him to act for her in securing a loan for improvements for other lands. Continuing, Mr. Gray referred to affidavits as to what took place at the meeting, and the transactions that followed ill regard to the obtaining of ihofJean -and the payment of this/cslteqnti—J-jtist receiving iSSOO and ;the woman.- .Rangiapoa having about £% left after payment of costs, etc. Subsequently she asked for a receipt, and then an assignment tras pre■pa'red M,Mr. A. A. Bennett. ' Stevens said that the woman Rangiapoa refused to tell him how much sho had invested in the patent, and he judged from her manner that she had not. given more than .£2O. On tlio other hand, the woman declared that she was unable to obtain an interview with Stevens regarding tho .patent, and so she consulted Messrs." Bell. Gully,* Dell, and' Myers.

The "Jollification." .. At.the suggestion rf the Court, Mr. :A. A. 'Bennett was called to give evidence ns to the deed of assignment. A. A, Bennett, solicitor, of (.lie firm of A. R. Atkinson and Bennett, who drew up the deed of assignment of the share, stated that he had received instructions irom East in the street. Later in the day he proceeded to the Arcadia Hotel, with the form tilled in except for tlio name ,of tho purchaser-and the amount of consideration. The deed was executed at Ihe Hotel Arcadia, the name of the pnrcharer and the amount of consideration being filled in at the time of execution. On the following day ho (witness) was in.vited by. telephone to a "jollification" at tho Arcadia, and wlici'i he got there he found Blaine, Bast, Rangiapoa Broughton, and Mrs. Rosenberg. Stevens may have been there also, but witness was not certain. The jollification was in tho nature of a "send-off" (o East, who was going to England. Mr. Justice Kdwards asked whom the witness understood he was acting for. AVitness replied that ho understood that he was acting for the purchaser-at the expense of the vendor. .

Mr. "Justice Edwards: Did you toko duo steps to protect tins' Native woman's interest?

Witness replied that he asked her if she was satisfied, ami she said "Yes," and witness told her that it. was her own risk, and that he was taking no responsibility. Mr. Justice Edwards: And you thought that was sufficient? AVitness: Yes. Mr. Justice Edwards: Well, as far as I am concerned, I think it was whollv insufficient. In answer to Mr. Justice Cooper, witnoss stated Ihpt no lnonevl passed in his presence. He understood that it had oreviously been paid over. Mr. Gray then proceeded with his Argument and concluded by a reference to East's accounts of the expenditure of the XSno which he had received. Mr. Justice Cooper: Do you suggest that, we are entitled to draw any inference that Stevens got any of the. inonev? Counsel replied that ho did suggest that. In, any case Stevens ■ was indirectly interested as the money was obtained to exploit the patent in which he (Stevens) had a, share.

"Highly Improper fop an Officer of the Native Land Court." , Mr. Boere remarked that grave suspicion necessarily rested on Stevens. Apart altogether from the evidence of Ms accusers, the fact that lie was part owner with East in the patent, combined with the fact that ho was the instrument in'securing the loan, from which KmA. drew ,£BOO, must make him the object of suspicion. In spite of all this, however, Stevens might ho innocent. Counsel contended that if the evidence of the woman TCangiapoa and her relative, Havios, were set aside, thorn was really no case against Slovens, whose explanation was quite feasible. The Chief Justice pointed out thai Stevens applied for the loan "for improvements,'" whereas Ranginpoo, Davios, and East all said that improvements were uot mentioned at the meeting. Mr. Bjere stated that ho intended to reply to all th? points raised bv the other side.' Referring to East's cross-examina-tion in" the Court below, counsel said flint lie hud been disconcerted bv a suggeMiori that he (V.n,4) Kent away with n'wornnii. Mr. Justice Cooper said there'wits ii.it only the suggestion. |, u | ~ man j o ,i man, admitted that he had gone away with a married woman not his wile. Mr. Justice Kdwards later remarked that although East's dealing .in taking .(.'SOO from a Xntivc woman, might, not have amounted to a criminal'offence, it was a highly improper act for an officer of the Xativp Land Court. Argument, hnd not concluded .it 4.30 P; 1 ?;' when , ".'" Court idjournsil until 3,0.30 a.a. to-day,.