COURT OF APPEAL.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1499, 23 July 1912, Page 4

COURT OF APPEAL.

SOMERVILLE CASE IN PROGRESS. Further argument was heard in the Court of Appeal yesterday in the case, in which William George Somerville was called on to show cause why he should not be struck off tho roll of the barristers and solicitors of the Supreme Court of New Zealand. Somerville was formerly in practice in Wellington, and is now practising in Dannovirke. On tho Bench yesterday were the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stent), Mr. Justice Williams, Mr. Justice Denniston, Mr. Justice Cooper, and Mr. Justico Chapman. Mr. A.- Gray appeared for tho Law Society of the district of Wellington in support of tho proposal to have Someryillo's name struck off. Mr. Somerville appeared in person. Tho allegations were that Somerville, while acting as solicitor to Mrs. C. Butler, a widow, of Wellington, received from her a sum of .£I7OO for the purpose of investing it for lier upon a first mortgage to be procured by Somerville for her from T. and If. Field as mortgagors of certain lands at Island Bay, Wellington, and of paying and applying the money to or for the use of tho mortgagors upon their completing the mortgage. It was said to have been the duty of Somerville to have applied the .£I7OO in paying off prior mortgages, and to have obtained a first mortgage of the land to Mrs. Butler, securing to her the payment of the .£I7OO, together with interest thereon. Somerville falsely represented to Mrs. Butler (so it was alleged) that he had discharged all outstanding claims upon the land, and had procured the Messrs. Field to be registered proprietors of the land free from all encumbrances, and had obtained from them, and had in his possession for Mrs. Butler, a valid mortjra.ee, whereas, in fact. Somervillo had fraudulently converted tho =£1700 to his own use, or had otherwise fraudulently applied the same to some other purpose. It was further alletred acrainst Somerville that on May IG, 1008, he received £118 12s. lOd. from Percy Hudson, on terms requiring him to account for or pav the money to an association or syndicate comprising John Hall Flockton and others, nnd that he wrongfully appropriated «ClO2 15s. id. of the money to his own use. Edgar M. Wylie, maniwin* clerk for Morison and .M'lean, was called to give evidence ill reirard to a statement for the defence to the effect that Ihfre was an agreement between Mrs. Butler and Somerville not to complete the mortgage, but personal security for the money invested to be given by Somerville instead. Witness said there win no such agreement among the nupors which his firm haiulbd in connection with an action taken bv Mrs. Butler against Messrs. Field. It was nearly 1 p.m. yesterday before Mr. Someiville concluded his argument in defence of the Butler cliargv. He then referred . lo tho allegations pf misappropriation of moneys entrusted (u him by « syndicate, iucludii:;: J. 11. l-'lorktou. He claimed that he had a right to this money on three grounds: (1) on account of money advanced for road formation; 12) on account of n share in the profits of t)i« syndicate; and (3) on account of solicitor.-!* costs. The Court pointed out' that, if.. Mrr goserallft JBftfiS JHli a 2rjJM.i&ie, cUinj

for costs, that portion of the ca<* woulA then be reduced to a question of law. In the course of argument, it appeared that a detailed bill of costs had not been prepared. After conferrals: with tho other members of the Bench, the Uiiet Justice nnnouiireil that the Court would postpone hearing of tho Flockton, charges until Mr. Somerville mado out a. bill of costs and had it taxed, if Mr. Gray desired that it should.be taxed. : Mr. Grav then briefly replied to the arguments' that had been raised in defence of the Butler charts, after which the Court adjourned until 10.30 a.m. today. •